Would you make it; and do you want to?

So the majority of the world is wiped out one way or the other. Can you survive? Do you want to? We obviously all love reading about this stuff, but do you want to struggle to live in any of these worlds?

I really would love to hear what you think.

I am not sure how I would react if the majority of the population was wiped out by XXXXX. I like to think I have some survival skills (I was in the army after all). But then I think about not being able to take a hot shower again and I think I would probably be miserable. How would I live without cold beer? I don't know, I'd like to think I would be one of those bad asses who not only survived, but thrived, but I have worries.

Could you make it? How?

I've always said that I wanted to go in the first wave. I like reading about it but don't want to live it. The character in The Road I most admired was the wife.

I doubt I'd make it. Too fastidious about who I have to eat or fuck.

How in the world can you "thrive" post-apocalypsis?

I don't know how you "thrive". I am just going by books read. However, if I lived through the initial kill off and had one of my kids also make it, what would I do to survive? I think it would be easy to just give up if it was just me, but if I had one of my kids with me I think I would fight to the end. My wife being with me is a different story; of course I would fight to keep her alive also, but she is an adult and might take the route of the wife in The Road.

Survivability of course has a lot to do with the type of apocalypse.

I would have had a different answer to this at different times in my life. But now that I won't see 60 again, I'd have to say I'd want to be at ground zero.

I will never give up, as uncomfortable as it is. But then again, I always tell my next-of-kin that should a terrible accident befall me, I am willing to survive as a quadriplegic. I draw the line at "as long as I am able to read". I am fully aware that I might live to regret this attitude in the case of horrible tragedy or global apocalypse.

I'd like to think that I could but I have to wonder whether I would want to. I mean, when you read The Road, and the description of how bleak it is, would you bother? Would you wonder if there is any real, meaningful future left for you? Is surviving sufficient reward for being alive?

I'd like to have a hand at trying to get things going again. Count me in the keep trying camp.

See if you've got the best qualifications for post apocalypse employment:
http://www.infinite-monkeys-pub.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=articl...

>7 bernsad: Survival for its own sake is probably not worth it. I would do it for future generations and, eventually, the stars.

9- Wasn't a good chunk of human history survival for it's own sake for the majority of the population? I am not sure how many of our distant ancestors survived horrible existences, not for high ideals, but because there was survival or death. You don't have to go back too far to find that kind of existance either. Some might argue that you could still find it today in some of the more unpleasant parts of the world.

>10 tjm568: Yes, I'm sure my survival-for-ideals posture was not mainstream then or now. I'm far from certin I would maintain it in the event.

10- Yeah, I think in that position more basic concerns might take over before you knew it. Like where do I find cold beer:)

I would absolutely try to survive, and I would do so with the ideal to rebuild too - to save all the vestiges of civilisation I could.
A lot of people I've asked this question say they'd want to die rather than survive, but I really don't think many would take their life in the event - survival instinct and fear of death would take over and people would go on living as they could, regardless. It would be hell though, obviously.

regarding the cold beer....I carried my AR15 down to the local grocery in case there were hostiles about and swiped a few dozen cases which I transported back in my "garage kept" Model A (you know....that EMP wiped out my Volvo's 15 computers) ....anyway...so that beer is ice cold sitting in the spring running behind my gazebo...c'mon down and crack one open.
I had a paranoid doom-steading husband...I learned alot...about how to survive doomsday and shit-head men. :0)

Sounds like a good beginning - I want to read the rest!

Your kind! Well...awww...who am I kidding, Im a reader not a writer!

People seem to look at The Road as the end all, be all of post apocalypse writing lately. I am not sure that I get it. I understand that Cormac McCarthy is a "recognized" author, but I really didn't think the book was anything special. The only difference from many other books of similar perspective is the almost complete lack of hope. Why do critics embrace a book like that, which basically endorces that humanity is incapable of surviving cataclysm without sinking to barbarism. I know that many believe that showing a pessimistic attitude conveys some kind of wisdom, but it is cheaply bought wisdom at best. If the shit hits the fan, there will definitely be a lot of people who sink to the lowest common denominator (sorry, math teacher), but I think a lot of people will rally together to preserve society in some form and help each other and survive.

Yes. Here's the thing: It is a beautifully written book, a powerful image of hell. But as readers of genre -- call it SF, call it post-apocalyptic fiction -- there was nothing there that we hadn't seen many times before. We've seen better character development, a more sharply defined plot, perhaps; probably not better pure writing.

But because he is one of the leading lights of the literary establishment, and because the book was well-written, and because those who are in a position to publically canonize are unfamiliar with or biased against post-apocalyptic books that we might find wonderful, McCarthy's book passes into the mainstream. It's literary politics. I struggle to maintain a position on books like these that is separate from the politics (which quite irritate me), so as to make a fair appraisal of them.

18-I struggle to maintain a position on books like these that is separate from the politics (which quite irritate me), so as to make a fair appraisal of them.

Yeah, it chaps my hide too. That might not be beautifully written but I think it gets the point across. And I totally agree with you. What chaps me even more is the disregard for writers who put together beautiful writing in these "disregarded" genres who rarely get attention for the quality of their prose.

Well even if we can't get the powers-that-be aboard, at least we know what we're talking about!

Amen. And we can laugh at the fools who scoff at what we know, and pity them for their shortsightedness.

18 & 19>

So, where is your list of titles that you rate better than The Road? I'm always looking for recommendations.

>22 bernsad: Just look at the Group page. There is at least one "recommendations" thread. I don't think there is one specifically devoted to "better than The Road", which would be highly individualized and contingent upon subjective criteria.

I have to defend The Road here. As stellarexplorer says, it is a beautifully written book. Unlike many post-apocalyptic books, it is not concerned with what happened to cause the apocalypse or much in the way of plot. Rather, McCarthy is trying to visualize a literal hell on earth, and I think he succeeds. However, it is wrong to say there is no hope in the book. There is a small spark of hope, in the persona of the boy and the nature of the relationship between the father and son, and that really is the point of the story.

You can read The Road as a literal depiction of life following an apocalyptic event, but I think it works better as an allegorical depiction of the human experience. It tries to describe what keeps us going even in the face of unimaginable horrors. In that way it is similar to Jose Saramago's Blindness, which is also about an apocalyptic even but which is really an allegory.

I enjoy all manner of post-apocalyptic books. Some are fun for imagining how people would actually deal with such a situation and how they would survive: The Postman; Alas, Babylon; Lucifer's Hammer. They are meant to be read as realistic stories, and I love them. But some, like The Road and Blindness, provide great insight into what it means to be human. In that way, I think these books deserve their attention and awards, although I don't think that it takes away from the rest of the genre -- no more than when Michael Chabon or Philip Roth writes alternate history, does it take away from the entire body of alternate history work that came before.

Sorry if this seems muddled. It is hard to write about allegory and the human condition with a 3-year-old screaming "Mommy! Mommy" in your ear every 5 seconds.

LT has two lists going, by the way: one for post-apocalypse and one for apocalypse. I hope some readers of this thread vote on those lists and add additional suggestions, as I'm using them to get recommendations for future reading. The lists page is here: http://www.librarything.com/lists

Thanks for the link to the lists page, sturlington.

And for a thoughtful take on the discussion. Maybe this partly comes down to one's reactions to the book. While I respect the writing and the power of the images, The Road did not work for me as a novel. I found it lacking -- deliberately on McCarthy's part I am sure -- in many of the basic elements that might have drawn me in. Character and plot to begin with. Describing it as allegory, which it may well be, doesn't change the experience of its shortcomings for me. Feeling that way, admittedly in the minority, does leave me nonplussed in the face of the acclaim and the awards.

But when you are talking of awards and reaction you are necessarily into issues of subjectivity, politics, etc.* And genre readers are notoriously-- if not understandably -- sensitive on that point. But what is one to do? Bang your head against the wall or move on to the next book.

*We don't even have to leave the genre on that point: who hasn't seen Hugo results that shock and dismay?

Well, stellarexplorer, the wonderful thing about books -- at least in my view -- is that we can have completely different reactions to the same book and still both be completely valid in our views. It is subjective, as you say. I have even had opposite reactions to a book I've read at different points in my life. I do agree that if you are looking for strong characters and plot, you will not find them in The Road, and there is plenty of well-written apocalyptic fiction where you will find them.

~13

"I would absolutely try to survive, and I would do so with the ideal to rebuild too - to save all the vestiges of civilisation I could. "

Vestiges of civilization? Like, ah I Pencil

>26 sturlington: We may differ in our experience of the book in question, but we agree on your well-said proposition about books, sturlington!

BTW, could you explain how the LT list function works -- it's some sort of vote?

>28 stellarexplorer: Yes, you can vote for books you like, which puts them on "your list," or vote down books you don't like, which moves them down in the main list. It's still a beta feature, but fun to play with, if you like playing with lists. :-)

Oh good. Off to the ballot box! Thanks--

-25 Well put. I was trying to figure out how to respond, and you put it very well. I wouldn't put down McCarthy's writing, I just wasn't bowled over by the book. It was a little bleak for my liking. I also enjoy more character development and character driven stories. As a result there are many PA books that I enjoyed reading more than The Road. Has anyone read A Simple Plan by Scott Smith. This is another widly acclaimed book that I didn't care much for. I thought the story was good, and the premise was good, but the book depressed me. I don't really like to be depressed at the end of a book, even if that was the intent.

People will adapt. If put in unreasonable conditions, the "human animal" will eventually respond accordingly and adapt. If the only food is people, people will eventually eat people...

Yummm! I can just imagine Barbra Striesand singing "People, people who eat people, are the luckiest people in the world."

>33 bernsad:

Barbra would sing it during her last farewell performance. ;)

Gives new meaning to "I'm a leg man."