Cormac Mccarthy No Country For Old Men Analysis

Writers of great literature seek to explore the various aspects of the human condition; Cormac McCarthy is no different. McCarthy seamlessly interweaves philosophical discussion with the narrative of his novels; he addresses numerous questions that we, as thinking beings, ultimately and ceaselessly ask ourselves. He examines concepts such as morality, religion, and justice; he “appears to believe that such ultimate questions . . . haunt us for the simple reason that we cannot answer them with anything like the complete confidence necessary to set them at rest” (Robinson 87). In his 2005 novel, No Country for Old Men, McCarthy investigates the notion of determinism and the ways in which it coincides and sometimes diverges, with free will, and
His overconfidence makes him all the more susceptible to Chigurh. At the beginning of his pursuit, while investigating a crime scene, he “could not help but notice” that a shot “marked a date on a calendar . . . that was three day hence” (McCarthy 147). He recognizes it as the day of his murder and he admits, when talking to Moss, that Chigurh’s “not somebody you really want to know. The people he meets tend to have very short futures. Nonexistent, in fact” (150). Yet, he remains steadfast in his decision to go after Chigurh knowingly, possibly uncaringly, taking steps toward his death. Wells fate was sealed as soon as he accepted the job to find Chigurh. When confronted with his impending death he reveals, “I think I saw all this coming a long time ago. Almost like a dream. Déjà vu,” he dies one minute before the marked date on the calendar he saw at the crime scene he visits (178). Chigurh questions, “If the rule you followed led you to this of what use was the rule . . . I’m talking about your life. In which now everything can be seen at once” (175). I believe rule is referencing some sort of doctrine or set of laws that govern the universe. Essentially, he is asking which laws Wells followed that led him to this point. Regardless of the rule, Chigurh clearly feels that the rule he follows is better. He even suggests that Wells wants to switch places, Chigurh reasons, “I’m here and you are there. In a few minutes I will still be here” (175). Chigurh further states, “You’ve been giving up things for years to get here,” suggesting that past choices led to the present circumstances, but he continues on to ask Wells “How did you let yourself get in this situation?” (177-178). Asking this question, after implying that previous decisions have directed the trail here, indicates that free will is, to some extent, reconcilable with