wtfNeedSignUp
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
The book came up in the Wendigoon thread due to being featured in a massive 5 hour video, since I'm going to effort post and other people like to talk on the book we might as well make it its own thread. I'm going to write a lot of my ideas about the book, of course I'm not a native English speaker and not that much of an avid reader so most of it will probably be idiotic but might as well.
Who is Judge Holden?
Might as well start with the biggest question of the book, Judge Holden is the most memorable character in the book and is a beast of a man in both physical and mental attributes. Most of the people theorize about him being some sort of divine/devilish being since it's pretty much the only thing that makes sense considering his attributes, abilities and claims. I see him as either a character that was part of the gang or a gestalt of the gang members doing certain things. At the very least after the massacre of the Yuma he only exists as an allegory to the life of crime and pleasure that the remnants of the gang either cling on or move away from (which explains how the remnant of the gang that is "captured" by him isn't killed by him despite him going off to chase The Kid.
While The Judge claims he represents the concept of war, that's misleading. The Judge represents bestial violence, the primal urges of men to mutilate, kill and fuck. The gang members (save the priest) have seen him before joining since their lives before the gang involved being connected to this idea. The Judge seems to have an affinity to "pure" being, primarily children as they are more connected to the bestial violence he symbolizes (not unlike another famous literary Holden). The being the judge seems to be most connected to is the Idiot, who he doesn't kill upon violating, as the Idiot is the ultimate pure being who remains pure in his idiocy.
What happens to the protagonist in the end?
The Boy grows up to be a man, leaves the life of crime and reaches some status. However his new way of life never saved his soul and he still has a connection to the bestial violence (The Judge). A good example of it is him trying to save an already dead woman - it's too late for him to do the right thing. One thing I'm pretty sure of is that The Boy was the one responsible for the child killings featured in the book, while usually people claim it in The Judge, it's kind of pointless in a narrative sense since The Judge is a terrible person as it is who does horrid things in the open. But the boy, who is hidden away by the gang in his actions, is appropriately also hidden away with the dead children (not to mention it's a common thread of him with the Judge).
Upon reaching the town in the end he is reminded of his past with the girl and the bear, he surrenders to his needs and kidnaps and kills the girl and finally decides to "quit the dance" by committing suicide in the restroom. Edit: A different way to interpret the ending is The Man finally getting possessed by The Judge and "dying" that way, with the restroom containing some orgiastic act of violence so great it is impossible to understand, though it kinda goes against The Man quitting the dance.
Tropes subverted
I've heard people talking about the book subverting the ideas of colonialism and mighty whitey cowboy. Both I disagree on, on the former everyone is terrible and think about themselves and it is clear that the Indians are a menace, while the latter the gang is as stereotypical villains as possible in any work, with their task being inexcusably horrific and disgusting. The trope that does seemed to be subverted is the "diverse gang of do-gooders" (ie, Red Dead Redemption 2), the gang is diverse and somewhat tolerates each other but everyone there is for himself and being non-white doesn't amount to some greater morals.
Animals and moral decay
It's pretty interesting that some of the gang care more about animals than humans. Glanton adopts a dog and the gang consistently seems to care more about horses than other human beings (including a snake bitten donkey over the people in the same camp). It could be a way to humanize some of them as not complete monsters, or show how the time period in general is such that animal companionship and worth is greater than most individuals.
Who is Judge Holden?
Might as well start with the biggest question of the book, Judge Holden is the most memorable character in the book and is a beast of a man in both physical and mental attributes. Most of the people theorize about him being some sort of divine/devilish being since it's pretty much the only thing that makes sense considering his attributes, abilities and claims. I see him as either a character that was part of the gang or a gestalt of the gang members doing certain things. At the very least after the massacre of the Yuma he only exists as an allegory to the life of crime and pleasure that the remnants of the gang either cling on or move away from (which explains how the remnant of the gang that is "captured" by him isn't killed by him despite him going off to chase The Kid.
While The Judge claims he represents the concept of war, that's misleading. The Judge represents bestial violence, the primal urges of men to mutilate, kill and fuck. The gang members (save the priest) have seen him before joining since their lives before the gang involved being connected to this idea. The Judge seems to have an affinity to "pure" being, primarily children as they are more connected to the bestial violence he symbolizes (not unlike another famous literary Holden). The being the judge seems to be most connected to is the Idiot, who he doesn't kill upon violating, as the Idiot is the ultimate pure being who remains pure in his idiocy.
What happens to the protagonist in the end?
The Boy grows up to be a man, leaves the life of crime and reaches some status. However his new way of life never saved his soul and he still has a connection to the bestial violence (The Judge). A good example of it is him trying to save an already dead woman - it's too late for him to do the right thing. One thing I'm pretty sure of is that The Boy was the one responsible for the child killings featured in the book, while usually people claim it in The Judge, it's kind of pointless in a narrative sense since The Judge is a terrible person as it is who does horrid things in the open. But the boy, who is hidden away by the gang in his actions, is appropriately also hidden away with the dead children (not to mention it's a common thread of him with the Judge).
Upon reaching the town in the end he is reminded of his past with the girl and the bear, he surrenders to his needs and kidnaps and kills the girl and finally decides to "quit the dance" by committing suicide in the restroom. Edit: A different way to interpret the ending is The Man finally getting possessed by The Judge and "dying" that way, with the restroom containing some orgiastic act of violence so great it is impossible to understand, though it kinda goes against The Man quitting the dance.
Tropes subverted
I've heard people talking about the book subverting the ideas of colonialism and mighty whitey cowboy. Both I disagree on, on the former everyone is terrible and think about themselves and it is clear that the Indians are a menace, while the latter the gang is as stereotypical villains as possible in any work, with their task being inexcusably horrific and disgusting. The trope that does seemed to be subverted is the "diverse gang of do-gooders" (ie, Red Dead Redemption 2), the gang is diverse and somewhat tolerates each other but everyone there is for himself and being non-white doesn't amount to some greater morals.
Animals and moral decay
It's pretty interesting that some of the gang care more about animals than humans. Glanton adopts a dog and the gang consistently seems to care more about horses than other human beings (including a snake bitten donkey over the people in the same camp). It could be a way to humanize some of them as not complete monsters, or show how the time period in general is such that animal companionship and worth is greater than most individuals.
Last edited:
