[MikeBVaughn]

"I will say his metaphors can be quite beautiful hut they often make no sense grammatically."

Question 1: Example, please?

Question 1.5: In what way does the example not make sense grammatically?

Question 2.0-2.(n): To what degree does grammar 'matter'? Is conformance to some prescriptive view of grammar essential to 'good' writing? What is the function of grammar - precision and disambiguation? Are there contexts in which grammar can or should be subservient to other linguistic effects, such as prosody? Are there other phenomenological effects of reading to which grammar may or may not be relevant?

An exercise for the motivated reader: Read 'A Carafe that is a Blind Glass' by Gertrude Stein. What does it feel like? What does it evoke? What are we doing mentally when we read it? What exactly are we doing when we read?

[bamfly]

> Question 2.0-2.(n): To what degree does grammar 'matter'? Is conformance to some prescriptive view of grammar essential to 'good' writing?

To be fair—his writing's a lot more challenging than most. Even most other literary writing. Even most other literary writing that's widely regarded as challenging. Editing it to conform to language & grammatical norms would definitely make it a lot easier to read.

> What is the function of grammar - precision and disambiguation? Are there contexts in which grammar can or should be subservient to other linguistic effects, such as prosody? Are there other phenomenological effects of reading to which grammar may or may not be relevant?

And this is the "on the other hand": on the other hand—and most unusually—reigning in that deviation from norms, at all, would, nonetheless, make his writing worse. Some writing can tolerate bending even the more well-considered and empathetic of writing rules—his required breaking them. Demanded it, and demanded a whole other set of rules of his own making, exactly as a poem may break the rules of prose writing, while strictly following a whole other set of rules, all to good effect.

[DontchaKnowit]

This is so hilariously pompous. I dont need to give you an example. Im sure you can find one in the first chapter of Child of God.

And grammer matters to the extent that the sentance is able to convey its meaning clearly to the reader. In my opinion, McCarthy does not hit this mark in a lot of case. Maybe im too dense, but his mixture of invented hick language, completely fucked up punctuation, and flowery/poetic language, is often very tough to sus out. What is actually supposed to be happening is often not so clear.

[JoeAltmaier]

That's all important, if he were writing documentation or a technical manual.

That the reader is required to make some effort to un-knot the language is a legitimate tool of the poet. Some are too impatient, used to sound-bytes from a tv personality perhaps, and won't open them selves to something novel or evocative. It has to 'make sense' grammatically and semantically. Poetry is often neither of those.

[DontchaKnowit]

Okay but he is a novelist. I didnt sign up for a book full of confusing necrophelia poetry.

Ultimately this is all a matter if taste

[JoeAltmaier]

Exactly. Not a matter of an incompetent writer who just won't say things plainly and grammatically.

[DontchaKnowit]

Okay sure. I do not have a problem with his skill, but rather his style.

[JoeAltmaier]

Tortured to be sure!

Not a fan myself.