No Country for Vietnam Vets

0 responses to “No Country for Vietnam Vets”

1. jdallen | January 30, 2008 at 12:45 pm |

   The Moss guy, protagonist “A” in the story, is a Vietnam Vet, yeah, but he’s not mindlessly violent. He’s violent, but it is not mindless. (I figure protatonist “B” was the sheriff.)
   He saw a possibility of escaping the struggle for money that his life was and he took it. He carefully weighed all the odds and decided he might succeed, knowing that it would be close.
   It is most assuredly not as pointlessly, grossly, gory and gutly as any of the slash movies, e.g., the Halloweens, the Saws, the Friday the 13ths.

2. Dick Stanley | January 30, 2008 at 12:59 pm |

   The slasher movies don’t trick you into thinking they’re serious. You’re sort of right about Moss, so I fixed it in the post. But I read the book. He didn’t seem to me very calculating when he took the money, certainly not later when he was dumb enough to go back to the scene. At any rate, why should he be a Vietnam vet AT ALL? Because that’s Hollywood’s beloved stereotype–especially the down-on-his-luck part–and McCarthy (who hadn’t used one before in his books that I recall) knows it. @$$holes.

3. Scott | January 30, 2008 at 5:29 pm |

   Well, I’m starting to feel like the Cormac McCarthy Apology Man around here, but…
   It was 1980. What are the chances that he wouldn’t be a vet? I don’t know the numbers, and can’t be arsed to look them up, but as a small town Texas kid during the war, I had many friends with dads, brothers, uncles and cousins who served. So, it fit, at least to me.
   As far as down on his luck, well, you’ve been to border towns. What percentage of the well-off are highly competent hunters / trackers? That was a skill that Moss learned growing up, probably because it put food on the table, like it did mine. So, it fit, at least to me.
   All of McCarthy’s previous books were set prior to Vietnam. NCFOM was his first ‘modern-day’ novel, and it was a look at the border, again. I just don’t think you can take it out of the context of Blood Meridian or the Border Trilogy, though nobody but me makes that argument. Yeah, it’s violent, but the border has been violent since before CM started writing. It’s violent today. Any honest look at it is going to be violent.
   None of which is say that Hollywood isn’t formulaic & boring & relies on stereotypes, but NCFOM is not part of that boring stereoypical formula, as even a non-Hwood guy like me can tell you.
   PS I thought he was extremely calculating by taking the money. Less so, when he let his good raising override his calculating by taking water back to that poor dying gutshot Mexican, instead of heading for the swamps of Louisiana with that cute gal of his.
   PPS So you’re the guy who watches all those musical comedic romances? I wondered who to blame.

4. Dick Stanley | January 30, 2008 at 6:32 pm |

   This is no more than I deserve, I know, for leaving anti-McCarthy comments on your and JD’s blogs. But you are the CM apologist, Scott. Probably his biggest fan. Some day, when they write the history of this era, they’re going to have to conclude that it was one of the most violent ones ever, solely based on the books and movies. And that’s just crep. Not even the border deserves that slander, and not even the drug trade. Not even the school shootings, weird and worrisome as they are. Well… maybe I’m going too far. But, yes, I miss Mary Martin! Born in Weatherford, BTW. I used to complain about that stuff when it was around. Now that it’s gone, and all we have are druggies and tarts for movie stars, I really miss it.

5. Scott | January 30, 2008 at 7:09 pm |

   I doubt that seriously and with all due respect. They’re not going to conclude that it was a violent era any more than I think everybody rushed around tap-dancing and singing to beat the band like they do in Busby Berkely musicals.
   And you know as well as I do that druggies and tarts are a staple of Hollywood, and have been for freaking ever. What we have now, though, is a society that is so damn well off that they have MUCH more time to sit and ponder the druggies and tarts. Personally, I say that’s good, and all we’ve got to do is learn how to handle it. Perez Hilton is way ahead of us in monetizing it, you know — the modern-day PT Barnum. It’s hucksters and rubes, same as it ever was. The line was always long at the girly show tent.
   None of which has anything to do with CM, thankfully.

6. charles austin | January 30, 2008 at 7:15 pm |

   At any rate, why should he be a Vietnam vet AT ALL?
   For the purposes of the storyline, Moss as a Vietnam Vet and his experiences as a sniper contrasts him with Sheriff Ed Tom Bell and his experiences as an infantryman in WWII. Hunting and hiding from men is an entirely different problem than hunting for food or, for the most part, the type of warfare seen on the European front in WWII. Also, LTC Wells is offered (and Chigurh is perhaps inferred) as a Vietnam era veteran who took a different, darker, immoral path that no one is going to be sympathetic to. Moss’ comfort level with not only scoped rifles and shotguns, which he would have had from his upbringing, but handguns and automatic weapons probably could only have come from practical experience in the military, and given his mid 30s age in 1980, that means Vietnam.
   Looked at this way, Moss is actually a “good” Vietnam Vet, albeit one whose “goodness” leads to his demise. (Shades of Blood Meridian here…) As I remember, if Moss killed anyone it was during an act of self defense, including the old woman and the Mexicans at the hotel, and, frankly, we can’t be sure he killed anybody in the movie or the book. The only person he wants to kill is Chiguhr, and with good reason, though his desire to see him dead comes only after they ended up in a shootout which wounded both.

7. Dick Stanley | January 30, 2008 at 8:35 pm |

   I like your analysis, Charles. Hunting other men, as you say, is substantially different from hunting for food (which, for the most part, can’t fight back) or confronting an opposing line, which is a worthy oversimplification of WW2. I see what you’re saying about Moss being the good vet, even if he is a thief and a rather stupid one at that. Going back to the scene may have been noble, but it wasn’t at all smart. I almost quit the book at that point–right at the beginning. If you’re going to thieve, you’ve got to thieve, not try to be a saint, as well. Anyhoo… I’ve got a kid to get to bed.

8. Dick Stanley | January 30, 2008 at 9:47 pm |

   My thesis was presented in haste, Scott. That’s my best excuse. 😉 I have nothing against girly shows, per se. I like porn as well as the next fellow, as long as it’s not degrading. I realize we all have our own definitions of that. But I think the girly tent, instead of being a side show, has become the main show. I’m very tired of Hollywood and its tarts who I see every day at the H.E.B. checkout counter where they (adorn is too nice a word) the magazines sold there. I hope they all go broke, as some of their recent movies have done. That’s a trend I could get behind.

9. SnoopyTheGoon | February 3, 2008 at 6:47 am |

   Err… sorry, Dick, I will be on the side of Moss’ defenders. I don’t know what I would do finding that $2M bag and don’t even want to think about it, but his behavior wasn’t that of a murderer or in any way reflecting badly on a Vietnam vets.
   That it wasn’t Cohen’s best movie – sure, but this pair is one of the least typical for Hollywood. At least they are trying…

10. Dick Stanley | February 22, 2008 at 10:32 am |

    Maybe you’re right about Moss, Snoop. But I wonder if the Coen’s really were trying this time. Fargo, at least, had humor. The thugs were actually funny. Here the chief thug has no redeeming social value at all.