2206 Prather Ln
Austin, TX 78704
Pulitzer Prize Review Board
709 Pulitzer Hall
2950 Broadway
New York, NY 10027
Dear Pulitzer Prize Board,
‘Trenchant and terrifying, written with stripped-down urgency and fuelled by the force of a universal nightmare… This is art that both frightens and inspires.’ – New York Times. During the summer I was given homework to write a letter to you about an awarded Pulitzer Prize book. After receiving many recommendations on which Pulitzer Prize book I should read I decided to read, Cormac McCarthy’s novel, ‘The Road’. After reading ‘The Road’, one can clearly see why the book was selected to receive the Pulitzer Prize. In ‘The Road’, McCarthy’s use of word really describes the development of the main characters relationship, as a father and son on a journey in a post-apocalyptic era. Who encounter many harsh things and challenges in their relationship and themselves. Although they have trouble they still continue due to their only motivation, their love.
McCarthy’s use of dialogue emphasizes the relationship and bond, the father and son have with one another. For example, “ He put his arm around him and held him…. Don’t be afraid, he said. If they find you you are going to have to do it. Do you understand? Shh. No crying. Do you hear me?… Stop crying…He looked down at him. All he saw was terror. He took the gun from him. No you don’t, he said. I don’t know what to do, Papa. I don’t know what to do. Where will you be? [son] It’s okay [Papa] I don’t know what to do. [son] Shh. I’m right here. I won’t leave you. [Papa] You promise. [son] Yes. I promise. I was going to run. To try and lead them away. But I can’t leave you.” (McCarthy 119-120). The man wants to shield his child’s innocent from the world but due to them being in a post-apocalyptic world it’s difficult for him to do so. McCarthy uses all over the interactions and dialogue between the man and the boy to create a sense of family and community between them that go far beneath what they say.
Furthermore, McCarthy choice on formatting ‘The Road’ made the book seem universal. For example, “Where’s the man you were with? [Veteran] He died. [boy] … I think you should come with me. [Veteran] Are you one of the good guys? [boy] The man pulled his hood back from his face. His hair was long and matted. He looked at the sky. As if there were anything there to be seen. He looked at the boy. Yeah, he said. I’m one of the good guys. . . Do you have any kids? [boy] We do. [Veteran]. . . And you didn’t eat them. [boy] No. [Veteran] You don’t eat people. [boy] No. We don’t eat people. [Veteran] And I can go with you? [boy] Yes. You can. [Veteran] Okay then. [boy] Okay. [Veteran]” (McCarthy 386-390). McCarthy’s decision to not give a sense cultural by not naming the father, the boy and places was to give the idea that it this could happen anywhere and at anytime to anyone.
In Conclusion, I agree with your decision on giving ‘The Road‘ by Cormac McCarthy the Pulitzer Prize in fiction. McCarthy’s writing style was different, to me because I don’t usually read post-apocalyptic genres. As I read ‘The Road‘, I couldn’t put the book down, McCarthy’s way of keeping the reader connected to the story line and relationships of the characters develops on it being universal. I found it amazing how McCarthy was able to win the Pulitzer Prize award only a year after his book was published. On this note I felt like y’all agreed with me on the decision that McCarthy’s form of writing is unique with is story line and form of creating such a strong bond between the father, son, and reader.
Sincerely,
Halie
Site Title 