Hey guys,

Music to Write By: “Superman’s Dead” by Our Lady Peace.

Still in moving mode, so this will be another brief one.

Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road” has just won the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for fiction. I talked about this novel in a previous post. Basically, I said the book was really good, but I objected to McCarthy abusing the English language and grammar in general to appear more literary.

So the most prestigious award in the world (barring, perhaps the Man Booker Prize) has honoured McCarthy. Having read a few Pulitzer Award winning novels like House Made of Dawn by N. Scott Momaday and The English Patient by Michael Ondaatje, I can tell you that often books are picked, not for merit, but because they add something to the tapestry of English Literature. If you follow the link, you’ll see that House Made of Dawn was honoured because it was written by a Native American author about the plight of Native Americans. The book is experiemental, switching from 1st to 3rd to 2nd person POV. Is it well written? Well, it’s competent, but not on the order of “Regeneration” by Pat Barker or The Life of Pi by Yann Martel, both Booker Prize winners.

Is this the case with The Road? Was it honoured for successful experimentation rather than a beautiful story? I don’t think so. McCarthy has mastered the sympathetic character in his protagonist “the man” (never named). The book is stunning in the depth of emotion you feel for its characters. The guy is a talented author.

Still, the Pulitzer commitee doesn’t honour authors simply for writing a great story. They obviously thought McCarthy’s book added something to English Literature and I agree. Though I despise the grammatical trickery McCarthy chose to use, he got the literary community to notice a sci-fi novel. The book has done a lot for the genre. He should be congratulated.