I well admire Crof at Writing Fiction, and read with much interest his list of "The Ten Most Harmful Novels." Especially since three of them have just been mentioned here recently.
By harmful, he means the effect it leaves more on writers who come after the fact. And in many of those on the list that I have read, I do agree with him. But then, "Blood Meridian"? "Catcher In The Rye"? "Wuthering Heights?"
He gives good reason for his choices, and as with "Catcher", both the popularity of it as required reading in the 60’s and the freedom it offered youth at a time when it was looking for a plot to mark its passing, it helped spawn a bit of a rebellion. And "Wuthering Heights" is noted as well written; its fault in creating illegitimate progeny that fell far short of its luster.
His problem with McCarthy’s "Blood Meridian" is, well, let me quote here:
"Blood Meridian, by Cormac McCarthy. This hand-embroidered depiction of rape and slaughter is all too typical of current “literature.” The more metaphors and similes you can throw in, the more the critics praise you. The effect is like a nice firm dog turd garnished with whipped cream and a cherry on top, and served on a fine porcelain plate with a silver spoon."
Yes, McCarthy tells his tales in imagery, weaving metaphor and simile heavily into his tapestry of story. For me, it pulls me in, beyond the marvel of the language use, deep into the sordid dirty life and time of his characters. By the same means, he lets me see horizons of such overwhelming beauty that I gasp.
But I can understand where Crof is coming from, and there are many who believe McCarthy is simply overdone and enjoyed for its abuse of traditional style of writing. I still like it though. I still am awed. I still am sometimes shattered by his words.
The Lost Children: A Charity Anthology