[thisisforyou]

It need not be stated that McCarthy's work is some of the most powerful and well crafted fiction of the twentieth century, but this article came off as a little strange and underdone. He has a few insights, but he jumps between ideas without connecting them and doesn't provide much backing for his arguments. The conclusion too is terribly weak: McCarthy presents his central idea (that the unconscious isn't used to language so it speaks in symbols), he mentioned it to someone he respects, the listener responded favorably, case closed. Really? Its a fresh viewpoint but there seems like so much more to explore here, so many more questions raised by the conclusion than those addressed. For once his art of omission has worked against him.

[nabla9]

> McCarthy came up with his idea (that the unconscious isn't used to language so it speaks in symbols)

I tought this was Carl Jung's idea.

[thisisforyou]

Good point.