Name another author who synthesizes epics like Moby Dick, The Bible, and Paradise Lost so well.
>>8449046
You mean synthesize Faulkner and Faulkner and cowboys?
>>8449056
The Faulkner similar stops at the prose. Faulkner writes character-driven narratives, McCarthy's novels are theme-driven and almost always notably distant from the characters.
There isn't a single instance of empathetic psychological insight in BM and that's what fuels Faulkner's work
>>8449067
I was memeing friend.
Infinite Jest: Hamlet and Gravity's Rainbow
>>8449067
>no psychological insight in BM
Wut? Mccarthy could tell you all you need to know about a character by the way he spits. There's a great passage that's about a paragraph long about Glanton in the 200's that has the weight of an entire novel in a few sentences. Let's not even start with the judge. Maybe he doesn't write realistic character driven books, but lets not pretend that BM isnt about Mccarthy's and humans struggle with God and how we (psychologically) reconcile this struggle by telling stories. What makes him such a great writer is his ability to do this by code.
YeCarthy fags are the worst. Grow up.
>>8449046
*spits*
*rides on*
>>8449046
>Name another author who uses a pretentious lack of punctuation as a fraudulent claim to literary genius so well.
ftfy
>>8449046
The guy who wrote the Malazan series, also Herbert.
>synthesises epics
What did he mean by this?
>>8449046
cormac's work turns into good movies, but his prose is so fucking shitty. his semi literate, boring, pretentious way of writing certainly appeals to faux intellectuals, i'll give him that
>>8449504
James Augustine Aloysius Joyce
>>8450786
found the cobber