Learning from Art: Cormac McCarthy's "Blood Meridian" as a Critique of Divine DeterminismAuthor(s): Dennis SansomSource: Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Spring, 2007), pp. 1-19Published by: University of Illinois PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4140236 .Accessed: 04/06/2014 16:13Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. .University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofAesthetic Education.http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsLearning from Art: Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian as a Critique of DivineDeterminism DENNIS SANSOM Art's Critique of Philosophy We usually thinkthecritic'srole belongs to philosophy. That is, tounder- stand art's essentialcharacteristicsand why andhowwe appreciate art, we needa philosophicalexplanation.Though ourtastesfor art are unique and personal, we typically thinkthat tounderstandart wemustfirst explain it. For example, Plato thought hecould explain art as an emotional inspiration for people, at best,or, at worse, a distortionof intelligible truths; therefore, according to Plato, art shouldbe dismissedor censoredina societyseeking social justice derivedfromthe ideaof justice. Aristotleunderstoodart to be the imitationof nature; as an imitation, it needsclarification according to the purposes of nature, and philosophy clarifiesthese purposes. In either case, art needsto be critiquedby philosophy. It is customary to hear philosophical critics lectureonart rather than artistslectureon philosophy. But canart critiquephilosophy? Isit possible forart to provide ascru- tiny of philosophy that perhaps a particularphilosophy cannot give itself? I thinkart can provide this critiquebyusing afeaturethatsome philoso- phers have thought tobeart's limitationtoclear reasoning-theimagina- tion. Thoughphilosophers like John Deweyrecognize the importance and influenceof imagination onourmoralandaestheticalorientationtothe worldof experience,typically ThomasHobbes'sviewof imaginationpre- vailsinthe empiricist-leaningphilosophers (for instance, DavidHumeand Bertrand Russell): the imagination isabout image recollectionandhence necessary for connecting our ideasto empiricalexperiences. But for thislat- ter approach, the imagination doesnotinformusaboutthe world; ratherit onlybridgesexperience to abstract ideas.What is important, then, is proper understanding. Forthis approach, themain question is, Canwe explain theworldbased upon ourclearestaccountoftheroleof understanding? Dennis Sansom is Professorand Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Samford University. His professional interestsinclude the foundation of ethics, medical ethics, and the relationship between art and philosophy. In 2004 he published "Tolstoy and the MoralInstructionsof Death"in Philosophy and Literature. Journalof Aesthetic Education, Vol. 41, No. 1, Spring 2007 @2007Boardof Trusteesof the University of Illinois This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions2Sansom Whetherthis accountrelies upon a psychological modelof the brain'swork- ings, ascientificmodelofsuccessful theory formation, ora logical model reflectiveoftruthrelation possibilities, weneed philosophy to clarify how we gainknowledge, evenin art. Yet, this approachshortchangesanalysis.Psychology,empirical science, and logic are notthe onlyways to analyze an idea.If a philosophypretends to explain our experience ofthe world, thenthe philosophyopens itselfto this question: Is theideaworth holding tobetrue according toour experi- encesof the world?A philosophical claim may be logically consistent, based upongeneralizations of experience, andbecoherentwith acceptable views of God, the self, or morality, butifweenvisiontheclaimlivedoutwithin our experience ofthe world, wouldwewantto accept it? Isitthekindof life wewouldwant?It takes imagination to answerthese questions, andthe artist through herorhis uniquetechnique and representation cantestthe existentialworthof an idea. Hobbes's description ofthe imaginationrepresentsonly one way toex- plain it. Imagination ismorethananactof memory andrecollection.It is also reconstruction. John Dewey's definition highlights this role: "An imagi- native experience iswhat happens whenvariedmaterialsofsense quality, emotion, and meaning come together inaunionthatmarksanewbirth intheworld."' Imagination is always an interpretation ofwhattheworld couldlooklike.Itnot only mirrorsbut heightensexperience tofocuson acertain viewpoint aboutthe possiblemeaning oflife. Bydoing this, the imagination enablesusto explore whethercertainideasare worth keeping. That is, if wecould pictureliving this way, wouldwewantto liveit? Because imaginationoccupies a centralroleinartistic creativity, art pro- videsausefulmeansof analyzingphilosophical claimsabouttheworld. Though a philosophermay beableto present anideathatis logically con- sistent, clearinits categories of quantity,quality,being,modality, andso on, explicit inallits assumptions, andeven"clear and distinct," whenthe ideais imagined inlife situations, itcanloseitsattractivenessfor living. It canseemabsurdtoournormalmoral experiences. Theartistic imaginative rendering of an ideacan showthat someunderstandableideasthat philoso- phers haveofferedare perhaps notworth keeping. Notallart pretends to critiquephilosophy, butseveralfamousinstances are evident.Voltaire'sCandide showsthe absurdity ofLeibniz's optimism. Leibniz's philosophical ideaofGod'sinfinitewisdomand power andofa sufficientrational explanation for allevents gave him goodlogical reasons toconcludethatofallthe possible worldsthatcouldhavebeenthisisthe best.It tookVoltaire's imagination toshowthatsuchanideacannotsatis- factorilyexplain thehuman experience of suffering and inexplicable differ- ences among the differingpeoples of the world.Professor Pangloss's refrain aftereachsenselessactand painfulexperience that"thisisthebestofall This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism3 possible worlds"showsthatLeibniz's philosophical ideaneededa critique from the imagination.Though Leibniz's optimism and theodicy havea logi- cal appeal, Voltaire'sartistic imagination showshowabsurdtheideaisin relationto real humanaffairs. Aldous Huxley's Brave NewWorld gives asimilar critique totheuto- pian ideaofaclassless society. Marx's philosophical ideaofthematerial dialectic moving human history towardatimeof justice inaclasslessso- ciety hasa systematicpersuasiveness. For instance, ifallhumanaffairsare socioeconomically conditioned, andthe capital owners exploit andalienate theworkersandeventhemselvestomakea profit,causing social injustice and suffering, thentheownerclassneedseliminationsothat justice and humanfulfillmentcanmaterializeinaclassless society. The exploitation andalienationoftheworkerscreatethe reaction oftheworkers against the capital classand propel human history towardaneliminationofsocial classesand injustices. Theideais simple anddirectbutabsurdtohuman experience.Huxley'simaginativerendering ofaclassless society inwhich everyone is happy andfulfilledbecause they are infantilein their individual responsibilities and drugged fromlife'suncertaintieswithhedonismshows that utopianism diminisheshuman dignity and individuality. The idea, which pretends tooffera way toreachhumanfulfillment byeroding the moralworthof being a unique individual, isshownto beabsurdto ourlife experiences. Theartist's imagination,especially in literature, pictures whatcan hap- pen. Aristotle may be right in saying thatart imposes anideationalform upon matter, butart canalsoindicatewhetheran ideationalformshouldbe imposedupon matter. In keeping withAristotle's terminology, the actuality oftheidea maypervert or hinderthe potentiality ofthematter. Someideas donotfulfillthe potentiality ofthehuman experience and they shouldbe rejected,thoughthey are logical,systematic, andclear.Some philosophi- calideascannotstandthetestofthe imagination. Howdoestheartistic imagination test an idea? Theartistic imagination isnot just afanciful thoughtexperiment ora mirror of experience. Inthe Critique of Judgement Kant argued thatartistic imagination hasacreative effect, not just a reproductive one.It enablesus to imagine whatthe pure reasonof scienceandthe practical reasonof moral universalizeability cannotenableustoknow.Asfruitfulfor knowledge as scienceand moralitymay be, they are limitedto whatis experienced inthe senses, synthesizedby a prioricategories, oruniversalizedtoadutifulne- cessity. Becausescienceand morality arerestrictedinwhat they canknow by theirownmodesof reasoning (thatis, pure and practical),they lacka creative ability toenvisiona differentworld.Butart canenvisionaworld in whichthefree individualcan harmonizeinwillandactionwithnature's purpose. Art's judgment,according toKant, gives usa new critique ofthe This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions4Sansom human experience: Doourideas really mixwithour experience of purpose innature?Artcan imagine a purpose to life, whichscienceand morality cannot explainby their modesof reasoning. Dewey saidart hasa "totalizing" function. Literary imagination in par- ticular pictures a wholenessof experience determined by a senseof purpose that performs the integrating effect.It isa way of experiencing a purpose withinthe exigencies anduncertaintiesoflife.Aristotle helps us again in understanding this point. InPoetics (in particular books VII-XI) hetalks about plotbeing theessentialfeatureofa tragedy becauseit gives whole- nesstothe story. Amovementofactioninthecharactersoccursfromthe beginning, whichdoesnot necessarily follow anything,through the middle, whichfollowsthe preceding actionandmovesthe story to more effects, and the end, which naturally followsthe preceding andhas nothingfollowing it. The particulargenius ofthe artist, inthiscase literary, comes throughby enabling usto identify withthismovementbecause throughpity and/or catharsiswe experience a similar story in our lives. Literary imagination offersa way totestan idea bypicturing inlifesitu- ationsthemovementofanidea (in Aristotle's sense). Oncewe artistically rendera philosophical ideaintoanarrative plot inwhichwecan imagine ourselves experiencing itsmovement guidedby its teleology, wouldwe wantit? AlbertWilliamLevi explains thatthis type of critiquerepresents oneof art's great educationalcontributionsto society: "Whenwe perceive the arts as'humanities'it is crucialthat we interpret themas a demandthat we pause, and in their light, reexamineour own realities,values, and dedica- tions, for the arts not onlypresent life concretely, stimulatethe imagination, and integrate the differentculturalelementsof a society or of an epoch,they also present modelsforourimitationor rejection, visionsand aspirations which mutely solicitour critical response."2 Ideasneedto be tested, andart provides a way to evaluatethe life valueof some philosophical claimsabout the way the worldis or shouldbe. Asusefuland needfulto our understand- ing as psychology, science, and logicmay be, a completeanalysisrequires an artistic critique as well. By using theartistic imagination inthis way, we gain anothermeansof advancing our analyticalability to evaluatean idea. I believeCormac McCarthy's 1985 novelBlood Meridian can bereadas an artistic critique ofa philosophical-theological idea.Thenovelshowswhat wecan narrativelyimagine to bethelived experienced ofan idea-ateleol- ogy ofGod's implacable willandhuman history,especially asitinvolves violenceandwar. Though thenoveldoesnotusethe phrase, wecancallit the"Theo-Determinist" philosophy ofhuman destiny. Itis simple, direct, andclear (similar to Leibniz's optimism): (1) becauseGodis absolutely sov- ereign over everything, Godistheomni-causal agent of everything; and (2)every actionthusreflectsGod's holy will.Ofcourse, religious believ- ers withinTheo-Determinism may relate affectionately and sincerely tothe This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism5 Godofthis idea, butthereisan absurdity toTheo-Determinism.If weex- amine only the idea's consistency and comprehensiveness, we may becom- pelled to assent, but whenwe try to envisiona lifedefined by it, webecome repulsed.McCarthy'sliteraryimagination reveals why weshould reject it, andaswasthecaseinCandide andBrave New World, andnowwithBlood Meridian, wehaveanartistic imaginationcritiquing a philosophical-theo- logical idea.The following examines aspects of McCarthy's noveltoshow howa literarycritique revealsthe failureof an ideain termsof howthe idea could possibly be lived. NihilismandDivineDeterminisminCormac McCarthy's BloodMeridian I believe McCarthy's Blood Meridian showsthe absurdity oftheideaofthe divinedeterminismof human history. Thenovel depicts a history inwhich thereisnomoraldifferencebetweennihilismanddivinedeterminism.In sucha history, wewouldhaveto say thatwarisas holy astheloveofthe neighbor becauseeach is equally caused by God. We canreadBlood Meridian inseveral ways: asa story oftheManifest Destiny oftheUnited States, of theconflictbetween cultures, of humanity's propensity toward violence, andof great fictional writing. Itisanartistic analysis oftheTheo-Deterministicclaimandshowsthatthe claim, though appealing to some, is repulsive inreal life.Thenovel's plotputs thereader ina quandary ofbeliefs throughoutbyforcing thereaderto accept a para- doxthatwe intuitively neverwanttoadmit-inmoral terms, thereisno differencebetweennihilismanddivine sovereign determinism, foreachis beyondgood andevil.Whetherwebelievetheworldis completely devoid of anytrans-subjective moralstandardsorwhetherGoddeterminesallac- tions by the power of the divine will, in either case, our moral judgments are without any real meaningbeyond theuseofthem.Onecanreadthenovel asan imaginative, artistic critique, whichusesataleofa roaming bandof ruthless scalp hunters fightingequally ruthlessadversariesto highlight the disturbing moral consequences oftheideaof Theo-Determinism. BloodMeridian is terrifying on twolevels. First, it may be the mostviolent noveleverwritten.The amountand intensity of crueltythroughout the book shocksthereader. The bookmakesonewince. Second, it depicts intermsof a dramatic plot just how terrifying Godis if Godis the sovereign determiner ofall events.Referencesto inevitability, absolute destiny, andGod'seternal plan interlacethenovel's story ofa group of scalpers inMexico during the 1860s, namedaftertheirleader JohnJoel Glanton (who hasactualhistori- cal roots),3 as they movefromone bloodyepisode tothenext.In themidst ofthesehorrendouseventsdances (and indeedhedances throughout) the seven-foot-tall,hairless,albino,sinister,pedophiliac"judge"(small casein the book), a memberof the mercenarygang of scalpers. Etchedon hisrifle is This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions6Sansom thenameEt In Arcadia Ego ("Even in Arcadia [that is, a rural place of peace and simplicity] thereI am, Death").4 Nooneknowshis origins, or why he speaksmanylanguages, or howheknowsto make gunpowder outof sulfur and urine, andnooneseeshim sleep. But everyone knowswhathestands for-"Waris God," he proclaims.5 Whoisthe judge? In drawingparallels withMelville's Moby Dick, Har- oldBloom says: "I thinkthat McCarthy is warning hisreaderthat the Judge [sic] is Moby DickratherthanAhab.Asanotherwhite enigma, thealbino Judge like the albino whale, cannotbe slain."6 Though carnal, primeval, and relentlesslikethe whale, McCarthy doesnot pretend that the judge isGod. The novel displays himas God's prophet. Whatever exists, hesaid.Whateverincreationexistswithout my knowledge existswithout my consent. Helookedaboutat the dark forest in which they werebivouacked. Henoddedtowardthe specimens he'dcollected.These anonymous creatures, he said, may seemlittleor nothing intheworld.Yetthe smallestcrumbcandevourus. Any smallest thing beneath yon rock outofmen's knowing.Only naturecanenslavemanand only when the existenceof each last entity is routedoutandmadeto standnaked beforehimwillhe be properly suzerainof theearth. What'sa suzerain? A keeper. A keeper or overlord. Why not saykeeper then? Becauseheis a special kindof keeper. A suzerainrulesevenwhere there are other rulers. His authority countermandslocal judgements. Toadvine spat. The judgeplaced hishandsonthe ground. Helookedathisin- quisitor. Thisis my claim, hesaid.And yeteverywhereupon itare pockets ofautonomouslife.Autonomous.Inorderforittobemine nothing mustbe permitted tooccur upon it save bymydispensation. (198-99) The judgekeeps a ledger ofhis zoological andbotanical findings. When heseesanunknownanimalor plant, herecordsandthenkillsit.Itsvalue liesnotin its autonomy and integrity butin being underthe judge's control. Killing theanimalsand plants isnot peripheral totheir place intheworld. To dieislife'sreal goal, andlife's highestexpression isthewarofhumans against humans:"War isthetruestformofdivination. It isthe testing of one's willandthewillofanotherwithinthat larger willwhichbecauseit bindsthemisthereforeforcedtoselect.War istheultimate game because warisat lasta forcing ofthe unity ofexistence.War is god" (249). Andthe judge is a ruthless, calculating, and sovereignkilling animal.He epitomizes a world's purpose that haswaras its divinewill. Wedonotfindan explicitexplanation inthebookforthenovel'stitle. Yet thetitle (Blood Meridian, orthe Evening Redness in the West) pictorially expresses the tale'sthemeof preordainedcruelty. A meridianis botha circle This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism7 through the globalpoles andthe highestpoint ofa development. From north to south, the highestexpression of humanevolutionin the novelisthe bloodshedof war-henceblood meridian. War takesall the accomplishments ofcultureandusesthemnot only toshedenormousamountsofbloodbut alsoto justify war's mayhem. A bloodmeridianiswarinallitsformsand its justifications, whether theological, national, or cultural; itisthe pinna- cleofaculture'ssuccessanddominance.War'slevelofviolencedecreases therelative importance ofall othersocietalachievementsbecauseoncehu- manconflictreachesthelevelof war, it becomestheultimate expression of human intention, successand defeat, and purpose. The metaphysicallyhighestjustification forwaristoclaimGodusesit toworkoutadivine plan. And, consequently, ifGodasthe all-powerful, perfect being can determinewarto be good, then people can also justifyany actionas good. And, ifwaris divinely ordained, thenmoral categories be- come empty. If thedestructionandterror ofwarare goodby divine decree, thenwhatcanbebadactions?Ifwarisdetermined by God, thenweare indeed beyondgood and evil.With sucha theological-metaphysicalsystem, wedonothaveto worry aboutthedifferencebetweena just warandan unjust one.In a bloodmeridianthereisa metaphysicalplan, butthereare nomoraldistinctionsbecauseif Godordainswarbased upon the authority of God's will, thenwhetherwethinkit is just or notmakesnodifferenceto its place withinthedivine plan. Thus, wecan say thenovel'sbloodmerid- ian is a world beyondgood and evil, a moral nihilism, in whichit is possible that warisboththecruelestandmostdivine activitypossible for humans. Furthermore, the judge incarnatesthe bloodmeridian. In 1878, after not seeing the"kid" for twenty-eightyears, the judgerapes andkillshiminafoulouthouseintheTexasPanhandletownofGriffin. Togethertheyfought and scalped inGlanton's gang.They meet by chance inabar.Yearsearlierthekidhad escaped the judge's murderousintent toward him; hedidnotkillthe judge whenhehadthe opportunity.Aveng- ing Yuma IndiansneartheColoradoRiverhad split Glanton'sheaddown to the thrapple, burnedhis body, paraded hisheadona paling, androasted the remaininggang. The kidandthe ex-priest Tobin, another gang member, fledthe revenging Yumas, but they alsoranfromthe judge, whohades- caped the Yumas as wellandnow sought to killthe kid. Wewould expect the judge andkid'sreunionafter twenty-eightyears tobeatleast cordial, for they didsharethesame destiny as scalpers, but from thefirst weknowthe judgeyearns tokillhim. Why? Years earlierina Mexican prison the judge toldthe kid: Dont [sic] be afraid, hesaid.I'll speaksoftly. It'snotfortheworld's ears butfor yoursonly. Let mesee you. Dont [sic] you knowthat I'd haveloved you likea son? This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions8Sansom Hereached through thebars.Come here, hesaid.Letmetouch you. The kidstoodwithhis backto the wall. Comehere if you are not afraid, whispered the judge. I aint [sic] afraid of you. The judge smiled.He spokesoftly intothedimmudcubicle.You came forward, he said, totake part inawork.But you wereawit- ness againstyourself. You satin judgement on your owndeeds.You putyour ownallowancesbeforethe judgements of history and you brokewiththe body of which you were pledged a part and poisoned it in all its enterprise. Hear me, man.I spoke inthedesertfor you and youonly and you turnedadeafeartome.If warisnot holy manis nothing butantic clay. (306-7) Andwhen they meet again, the judge in King James languagesays tothe kid:"Drink up, hesaid.Drink up. This nightthy soul may be required of thee" (327). Why isthe kid'ssoul required and why is the judge his Judge? In a world governedby the implacable willof a Godwhodetermineswar aswellas life, any formof pacifism or moral questioning ofwarhastobe eliminated.The judge knowsthat the kid, though an expert killer himself, is not totally committedto the war against the Indians.Hedoesnot praise the Manifest Destiny of AmericancultureovertheSouthwestAmerindians.He doesnotseetheresolutewillofGodinthedestructionofinnocentYumas andMexicans.The kid subconsciouslykeepspart of hissoul's passionaway fromthedestructionofwar. The judge,being the power ofnot only death butofGodinsucha violent world, cannotenduresuch heresy. Becausehe thinksheshouldresisteveninhismodest way the mayhem and slaughter ofthe blood meridian, thekidisa heretic.The book'stitle symbolically de- picts a worldordered by a Godwhouseswarto workhiswill.At the zenith of the day, humanliveshaveto be spent to workoutthe morally inscrutable mystery ofa sovereign will.It doesnotmatterwhetherit isthe raping, cas- trating,disemboweling, and scalpingby theComanchesofthekid'sfirst gang of filibusters, or thesenselessand deceptivekillings and scalpings of the Apachesby theGlanton gang, orthebutcheredsevenor eight babies hungupthrough their jaws on mesquite hooks by the Apaches, or the bust- ing oftheMexicanbabies'heads by theDelaware Indians, or themassacre ofGlanton's gangby theYuma. Everyone isviolent.TheheinousGlanton gang isnoworseorbetterthanthose theyscalp. War isthecommonde- nominator among all people. It servesGod's purpose, andsincewaristhe mostextremeform of human cruelty andit can be used by a Sovereign Lord tomove providence, thenwaristhemeridianofGod's sovereignways in the world, the activity whereheavenandearthmeet.SuchaviewofGod and providence is terrifying to our moralsensitivities. IntheworldofBlood Meridian, thekid blasphemes andthushastobe dominated,likethe bugs the judgeputs in his ledger.According to Kenneth Millard: This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism9 [The judge] toois subordinateto the larger forcesofthe text, forcesto whichheisalertandwhichhealoneseekstounderstandhimselfin the contextof: "Our animositieswereformedand waiting beforeever wetwomet" (307). The judge understandsthe largerparameters of theviolent struggles ofblood meridian andhis project of putting ev- erything in his bookis part of hiswillto power whichnecessitatesthe subordinationofthekid.This isall part oftheritualofthedancethat the judgeexpounds as helamentsthe passing oftheoldWest andthe "sanctityof blood"that it consistedof(331). In the bloodmeridianthere cannotbea place for doubtingprovidence, and the judge isthe bloodmeridian's grandinquisitor. We donotknowfromwherethe judge comesortowherehe goes. He never sleeps, andheknowsscientificandhistoricalfactsthat hisfellowrid- ers only blinkat incredulously. Heisunrealinanormal world, butinthe bloodmeridianheisthe epitome ofwhatisreal-that is, theholinessof war. Hencethe judge isan imaginativepicturing ofa worlddefined by di- vineomni-causaldeterminism.Healsoshowshowabsurdsuchanideais and why it shouldbe rejected. Afterthe judgerapes andmurdersthe kid,8 heisseen dancing naked onthebarsurrounded by drunkenadmirersandlustfulwhores.Itisnot thefirst timethe judge dances.Years earlierhe adopted ahomelessMexi- can boy and plays withhimfor several days. In the night he rapes the boy, breakshis neck, and hangs him visibly froma pole. As they ride out, the gang seesthe judgedancing, silhouettedona rock ledge, naked, as though inanecstatic frenzy. The judge's danceisnot only an expression of spon- taneous joy. Itistheembodimentofabloodmeridian.Itistheoutburst ofasoul caughtup inthedivinewillwhowieldswarand cruelty toef- fect an intransigent will. John Emil Sepichsays thesame thing: "The world McCarthy'sJudge definesisa worldofinflexibleoutcome.Theexerciseof willcannotovercome'destined ends."'9 Thusthe judge's danceis notan act of gratitude towarda benevolent deity butthebloodlustofa shamanwho worships a Godthat uses cruelty as easily and purposively as compassion. McCarthy's useofdance parallels thedanceofZarathustrainFriedrich Nietzsche'sThus Spake Zarathustra: Into youreyes Ilooked recently,O life:Isaw goldblinking in your night-eye;my heart stopped in delight: a golden boatI saw blinking onnocturnal waters, a goldenrocking-boat,sinking,drinking, and winkingagain. At my foot, frantic to dance, you cast a glance, a laugh- ing,questioning,meltingrocking-glance:...My heels twitched, then my toeshearkenedtounderstand you, androse:forthedancerhas his ears in histoes....I danceafter you, I followwherever your traces linger. Whereare you? Giveme your hand!Or only one finger.10 ZarathustrakillsGodandaffirmslife.Heownshis destiny andleaves behind good andevil.Hefacesthestillesthouroftotal despair (inwhat This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions10Sansom Nietzschecallsthe"doctrine oftheeternal recurrence") andlearnsto dance to the momentof life hehas. Though Nietzsche'sZarathustrahas many levels (pilgrim, social critic, atheist, andtesterof spirits), hisdanceishisfreedomasa fully self-con- scious person ina worldwithout providence andGodandinwhich only hecanmake meaning. Untilhe rejects God, providence,categories of good and evil, andeven reason, heisenslavedtoheteronormativeforces.To be arealadult (or asNietzschewould say, areborn "Child"), hemust pro- claimthedeathof Godandall relatedbeliefsthat rest on religious faith (for example, even concepts of grammar and truth, sothinks Nietzsche). The removalof theseshacklesunleashesinstinctive energies of human will, and thusZarathustradances.Hedancesbecauseheisa nihilist. Butthebloodmeridianisnota metaphysical nihilism, andthe judge's danceinit is notthedanceof humanfreedom opposing God's sovereignty. Certainly, the worldof the bloodmeridianis lawless, andthe distinctionbe- tween good and badis irrelevant.Kindnesshasnomoreeffectin thelivesof people than terror. The judge acts without compunction or regret. Heseems to makehisownlawsof behavior just ashedoeshisown metaphysical in- terpretations of divine purpose andhumandestinies.His freedom, though, is onlyapparent, as may be the apparentmetaphysical nihilismin the blood meridian.Divine destiny rules every human interaction, whethersmallor great, andthe greatest ofallhumanactions-that is, thatwhich possesses human destiny onceit is unleashed-iswar. There is a metaphysicalpurpose to everything. In a bloodmeridianwaristheinstrumentused by Godtoworkoutan implacable willand plan, a willthat showshuman autonomy andhencehu- manmoral responsibility are merely nominalat bestand illusory at worse. The bloodmeridianis nihilistic, butitisanihilism resulting fromthedic- tatesofa Sovereign Lord controlling humanlives. McCarthy's Blood Merid- ian showsthatintermsofmoraldistinctionsandmoral accountability, the moral differencebetweendivinedeterminismandmoral nihilismis a differ- encewithouta real distinctionbecauseintermsofhowwewouldevaluate life, metaphysical determinism requires moralnihilism. We may thinkthattheconnectionofmoralnihilismanddivinedeter- minismcontradictsitself-that is, aworldwithadivine sovereign deter- mining humanaffairs is ontologically differentthana nihilisticworld.This istrueasfar astheexistenceofa supremebeing is concerned, butitisnot true asfar as moral judgments andhumanaffairsare concerned.Thenihil- ismofthe bloodmeridianis nota metaphysical nihilismbecauseGodisthe ultimatefoundationanddeterminerof reality. Theworldhasa plan, but becauseGodordainswarwiththesame purpose asGodordains life, then the nihilismisa moralnihilism.Theworldis beyond themoraldistinction between good andevil.Ina morally nihilisticworldthehorrorsdone by the Glanton gang are nodifferentthanthehorrorsdone by theComanches This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism11 and Apaches. Ina divinely determinedworldinwhichGodistheomni- causal agent ofallactionsand things, the differing horrors play thesame important role withinthe divinewilland plan. In a morally nihilistic world, the judgemetaphysically understandstheworldbetterthanother people becauseheis his own master, recording lifein his ledger and conquering the hereticalkid.In a divinely determinedworldinwhichthereisnorealhu- man autonomy, the judge'srape, torture, slaughter, murder, anddiabolical deviousnessare nomore innately evilthat thekid'sreluctanceto rejoice in thedeathofIndiansand Mexicans, andhis rejection ofthe divinity ofwar isan indicationof a morally badconscience.Neitheris really free to dooth- erwise.Inthebloodmeridianthere may bea SupremeBeingdictating the world's events, buttheworldis voidof moral meaning. If waris God, then not only arewe beyondgood and evil, butGodisalso beyondgood and evil.Divine sovereigntyspills overintomoralnihilismandback again in a bloodmeridian.It takesa literaryimagination like McCarthy's to picture this strangelooping. Socratesonce posed a question to Euthryphro, asrecordedinPlato's Euthryphro: Ifthatwhichis holy isthesameasthatwhichisloved by the gods andthatwhichis holy islovedbecauseitis holy, thenthatwhichis loved by the gods wouldhavebeenlovedbecauseitisloved by the gods; butifwhatisloved by the gods isloved by thembecauseitis loved by them, thenthat whichis holy wouldhavebeen holy because it isloved by them.But now you seethatthereverseisthe case, and that they are quite differentfromoneanother.Theoneislovedbe- causeit is initiallyworthy of love, theotheris worthy of lovebecause it is initially loved.11 We cancallthistheSocraticdilemma.In option A, if x, y, andzare inher- entlyholy, then holinessis a moralfeature separate from God.In option B, if x, y, andz are holyonly becauseGoddeterminesthemto be holy, thenGod candeclarethem unholy aswell.With option A, byseparating the concept ofholinessfromGod's reality, weareledtoa theological incoherence.We canbe holy, thatis godlike,separate fromGod.Butifholinessis godlike, then God, who by definitionwouldbe holy, mustmake x, y, andz holy; but thisis what option A rejects. With option B, byequating holinesswithwhateverGoddictatesand determines, weare ledtoa moralincoherence.God may declare x, y, and ztobe unholyalthough hehad previously declaredthemtobe holy, but wecannotknowwhatinherentfeatures x, y, andz may havethatwould indicatetheir holiness.We cannotmakeconsistentmoralclaims.Dueto this limitation, weneverknowwhether something is trulyholy or notbecause God may havedeclareditone way oranother,andwedonotknowthe declaration. This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions12Sansom Thusthe Socratic dilemmameansthat in trying to relate holinessto God, weareleftwitheither theological incoherenceormoralincoherence.The story of McCarthy's BloodMeridian rulesout takingoption A (that is, wecan separate holinessfrom God) becauseoneofthe book'sthemesisthat all life isdetermined by God, even war, andthuswecanandshoulddeclarethat "war is holy." Inabloodmeridianweknowthe reality ofGodinthere- alitieswe experience. There is no mystery to Godbecause nothinghappens mysteriously. Allis divinely determined.God'swilliscoherentinthefated destiny of everylivingthing. There is no theological incoherence. But becausethe bloodmeridianaffirms option B, weare leftwitha pro- foundmoralincoherenceaboutthefated destiny of everylivingthing. Be- causeGoddictatesall things, eventhe savagery of war, thenwarand peace are not morally different.We maypreferpeace, butifthe holy Goddeter- mineseachto be equallypart of thedivine plan, wecannotdiscerna funda- mentalmoraldifferencebetween peace andwar. If ethicalreflectioncannot ascertainconsistentmoral principlesby whichto guide and judge our lives, thenitisincoherentto apply the concept ofholinesstohumanaffairsand alsotodivineaffairs. In the bloodmeridianwedonotknowwhatholiness means.It iswhatever happensaccording tothedivine dictates, andweare left affirmingopposites (war and peace) to be both holy. Consequently, becausewedonotunderstandthe concept of holiness, itwouldnotmake any senseto apply the concept ofholinesstoGod.It wouldbeincoherentto equate GodandGod'sdeterministic plan withholi- nessbecausewedonotunderstandthe meaning ofholiness.In fact, inthe bloodmeridianto say Godis holy is actually a simpletautology--God is God.We wouldneedtounderstandholiness separate fromGodtobeable to predicate holinessto God, butthisiswhatthebloodmeridian rejects. The bloodmeridian's major premise-divine determinismandholinessare inseparable-leads ustomoralincoherenceabout holiness, which prevents usfrom meaningfullyapplying the concept ofholinesstohumanaffairs aswellasdivineaffairs.This consequently leadsustoseethe vapidity of equating divinedeterminismwithholiness.Theconclusioncontradictsthe major premise. We donotunderstandthecontradiction's poignancybyonlyexamining the logic ofTheo-Determinismbecause according toits logic, if Godissov- ereign anddetermines everything, andGodis holy, thenallhumanaffairs reflect God's holy will.There is nocontradiction.But byimagining theidea put intoa narrativeaboutthe judge, the scalpings, the kid, andthesense- lessactsof cruelty, all supposedly determined by God, as McCarthy doesin Blood Meridian, wesee the moral absurdity of the logic of Theo-Determinism. Denis Donoghuerightly observesthatoneofthemost glaring features oftheBlood Meridianis McCarthy's refusalto pass moral judgment on anything: "But themain difficulty ofthe book..,. is McCarthy'sapparent This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism13 refusalto adjudicate; or rather, hisrefusaltoallowanimmediate judgment tobeelicited byany deed.Thenarrative style-'neuterausterity'-makes ethical judgment seemnaiveto itselfandtherefore willing tobesubsumed in ostensiblylarger considerations."12The larger considerationisthatina worldinwhichthere is noreal moraldifferencebetweenthe horrorsofhu- manaffairsandthe eternal decree, ethical judgments are outof place.They are naive, theresultofthosewhothinkthe deliberatingagent is actually freefrom anymetaphysical force dictating the grand schemeofallevents intoa plan ordainedfromthe foundationsofthe world.In the bloodmerid- ian only the inexperienced and unseasoned, likethe kid, suppose amoral conscienceshouldcauseour repulsion to the slaughter of childrenandother innocents. Only the naivethinkthere is holinessandthat wecan willit. The judge refutessuch naivete, andhis proto-Neitzschean dance, whichcomes from the energy of living in a world beyondgood and evil, is the eradication of any theodicy concern.We donothaveto ask howthere can be a holy God andevilbecausewedonothaveto believein holiness. Whenwe begin to imagine aworldas McCarthy has narrated, wefind thisconclusionto beintolerable.For Godtowill holiness, thelinkbetween divine sovereignty and moralnihilismmustbe brokenandthe bloodmerid- ian refuted.Godandthe worldcannotbe beyondgood andevilif weare to have any coherentsenseofGod willing holinessandhumans actually do- ing holiness.If thebloodmeridian's wedding ofmoralnihilismanddivine determinismis wrong, thena moraldifferenceexistsbetweenthe scalpers, Indians, innocent babies, andmurderedMexicans.If weare facedwiththe realitiesof good and evil, thenthe judge is fundamentally differentthanthe boy he rapes andkills.Thekid's guilty conscience requires thatGoddoes notdictateit.If Goddeterminesthekidtowinceatthesenseless slaugh- ter of Indians, thenmoralnihilism reigns intheworldunderthebannerof the implacable, ineluctable, irresistiblebutamoralwillofGod.If Godisthe omni-causal agency of this world, thenmoraldistinctionsare not only irrel- evantbut an obstacleto the "dance" (that is, the celebrationof livingbeyond good and evil). In the blood meridian, "We all end up likethe kid, violated andsmotheredinthe shithouse; buthowcanwedaretoattacha unique significance eventothis?Forweare granted nomarksof distinction, no specialdispensation, but only theever-renewedimmanenceofthe dance, embodiedinthe grotesquelypirouettingfigure ofthe judge,"says Steven Shaviro.13 Andifwedonotend up likethe kid, weend up inthebloodmeridian dispassionate and despaired observersofacruel world, realizing thatwe cannot change itsineluctableforcesof hostility and brutality. Thisfatalism permeates the blood meridian, andthe novel graphicallydepicts it in many ways but noneclearer than inthe following event: This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions14Sansom Ona rise at the western edge ofthe playatheypassed a crudewood- encrosswhere Maricopas hadcrucifiedan Apache. Themummied corpsehung fromthecrosstreewithitsmouth gaped inaraw hole, a thing ofleatherandbonescoured by the pumice windsoffthelake andthe pale tree oftheribs showingthrough the scraps ofhidethat hung fromthebreast. They rodeon.Thehorses trudgedsullenly the alien ground andthe roundearth rolledbeneaththem silentlymilling the greater voidwherein they werecontained.Intheneuter austerity [emphasis added] ofthatterrainall phenomena were bequeathed a strangeequality andnoone thing nor spider norstonenorbladeof grass could put forthclaimto precedence....[N]othing morelumi- nousthananother...all preference ismadewhimsicalandaman anda rock becomeendowedwith unguessedkinships. (247) If wethink that Godordains everything, even war, thena "neuter austerity" deadensour sensitivity to the suffering of the innocent, the horror of human evil, andwelosethe ability to beshocked by moralatrocities.In losing the ability to be shocked by senseless suffering, wefail to recognize the uneven- nessofmoral choices, thatthereisamoraldifferencebetweenabladeof grass anda person. But in a bloodmeridianwecannotfindethical reasons, whichwouldbeindicativeof a moral teleology, to denouncethe hanging of an Apache ona Christian symbol of redemption because, in fact, weknow thatthe unguessedkinship ofalllifeisGod's implacable andinscrutable will. However, if there are choicesfor moral realities, whichare good and evil, then all is not divinely determined.Godacts in holyways andwecan make moralchoices only if holinessand good andevildeedsare understandable to us, without relyingupon the sovereign willofGod determining thatwe makethemoralchoices.Thisconclusiondoesnot require usto postulate that moralrealitiesare unrelatedto God.It is conceivablethat Godcouldbe intimately involvedwithhumanaffairs (for example, aswith mysticism or Godasthe ground of being itself) and people stillmakereal moralchoices. Insucha case, wewouldneedtorethink sovereignty ina way thatdis- tinguishes itfromdeterminism.That may be conceivable, butwhatisnot conceivableistoclaimthatwearemoralandhence morallyresponsible becauseit wasdetermined by Godto bethat way. We couldask whatdifferenceit makestohowwelive intentionally and critically intheworldwhetherwebelieve everything isdictated by God or that people choosemoralrealitiesthemselves.In eachcasethereare the same wars, judges, and strugglesagainst deathand misery. A perplexing episode inBlood Meridian suggests ananswer.NeartheCasasGrandesRiv- er the scalpers meeta juggler whousestarot cardstoreveala certain gang member'sfate. [Thekid] tookone.He'dnotseensuchcardsbefore,yet theonehe heldseemedfamiliarto him.Heturnedit upside downand regarded it andheturnedit back. This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism15 The juggler tookthe boy's handin hisownandturnedthecard so hecouldsee.Then hetookthe card andheldit up. Cuatrode copas, hecalled out.... The judge was laughingsilently. (94) The judgelaughs, becausethe card confirmshis suspicions ofthekid.Card readers interpret theCuatro de Copas (the Fourof Cups) inseveral ways. The card depicts a man sitting underneatha tree, contemplating three cups whileoblivioustoa fourth cup offeredtohim.Is the reclining manindeci- sive,conflicted,unaware, ordoubtful?He contemplates and weighs what he sees.The picture indicatesan intenseinner struggle, for whateverreason. The kid, in turn, is internallystruggling withtheblood meridian, whileall alongparticipating initswar. Heis incongruent withthebloodmeridian's force of lifeanddeath.Like theFour of Cups, his subjectivity isoutof sync withthe objectivity ofthebloodmeridian.His internally troubledstateis the first step toward finallyrejecting the bloodmeridian.Hiseventualbreak begins in his contemplation of human cruelty. It is becausewehavethe sub- jectiveexperience of contemplating moral obligations thatweknowwedo notliveina worldcontrolled by an intractabledivinewill. Throughout the novel, wewitness mayhem anddeathbutweneverhear anyonecry or show pain. It is as though there is no subjectivity inthe blood meridian, andindeedthe inner worldof contemplation, emotional conflicts, pain, andsorrowareincoherentinaworld completely determinedtobe whatitis.If every eventand person areordainedtofollowanimmutable law, thenthere is no subjective life. We may call somethingsubjective, butit is a vapiddesignation.People are bornanddiein bloodmeridianand they mayphysically feelcutsand shots, but they cannotknow compassion, won- der,sorrow, or regret. Theseinteriorstates require anautonomous being whohasa subjective stateinwhichonecan contemplate, reflect,evaluate, and judge the moral qualities of experience.Contemplation, reflection, eval- uation, and judgment occurinthe personal realmoftheindividual. They cannotoccurinadetermined plan, whethernaturalor supernatural. The personal realm,then, mustbe separate fromthedivine plan, andforthere to bemoralrealitiesaboutwhichwe decide, this separation is required. In knowing thatmoralchoicesare livelyoptions forusbecause theypresent obligations indicativeofa teleologicalplace inthe world, weknowthat we existas individualsincontrasttoa determined plan inwhichall things are thesame by fiat.We canbeaccountableand responsible toadivine plan, butthe plan cannotbe theirresistiblecauseof our personal realm. After displaying a prehistoric femurbonetothe gang's new recruits, the judge recordsit in his "ledger of life" andthen says to them: There isno mystery to it, hesaid. The recruitsblinked dully. Your heart'sdesireistobetoldsome mystery. The mystery isthat there isno mystery.(252) This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions16Sansom Thereason why thereisno mystery isthat everything isdetermined.We may be ignorant inthebloodmeridianof why Godcausestheworldtobe the way it is, butthereis nothingultimately inscrutableaboutitbecause Godis the omni-causal reality of everything, eventhe judge andwar. A mysteryrequires morethan ignorance onour part.LudwigWittgen- stein's "Big Book" thoughtexperimenthelpsexplain thenatureof mystery: "Suppose oneof you werean omniscient person andthereforeknewallthe movementsofallthebodiesintheworlddeadoraliveandthathealso knewall the statesof mindof all human beings that ever lived, and suppose this manwroteall he knewin a big book, thenthis wouldcontainthe whole description ofthe world; andwhatI wantto say is, thatthisbookwould contain nothing that wewouldcallanethical judgment."14 Evenifwedis- coverthat all the facts in the Big Book are caused by God, westill cannotcall any ofthemmoralrealities.The compelling natureofmoralchoicesaffects our personal realm, nottherealminwhich deterministic, causal explana- tionssucceed.Withinourdeliberationsaboutwhatis good or bad, right or wrong, virtueor vice, wedonot stop our investigations at naturalor meta- physical causes, though these types of causes may be helpful in determining whereweare intheworldofnaturalforceswithourmoral judgments. In ethical reflection, we investigate ourselvesas beings whohavea personal realmandmoral agency.Morality is alwaysself-reflecting, self-conscious, and self-evaluating, andthiscannotbe put intoa deterministic plan. There is mystery in the worldbecausemoral judgments are made, butthiscannot beinbloodmeridian.Thisis why the judgerejectsanymystery. Thereis only the ineluctableand non-challengeable divinewill. Doesadeterminedworldlookdifferentthanaworldwithmoral mys- tery init? Is a worldfilledwith autonomous, moral beings, whocan recog- nizeandmakemoral choices, really differentthantheworldoftheblood meridian?War existsin both; judgesrape andkillinboth.Arethereclues thatwouldindicateaworldof good andevil?Ifitwere possible tolook attwo worlds, eachwiththesameactivitiesbutonewith autonomous, moral beings andtheother following thedictatesofan all-governingplan, beyondgood and evil, couldwedeterminethedifference?The posing of the questiongives the answer-in deliberating betweenthe two worlds, we are contemplating (like the figure intheCuatro de Copas), hence showing evidencethat wecannotevenenvisiona worldwithoutthe personal realm. Though theeventsare the same, the only worldwecan recognize isonein whichwemakemoralchoices.Wehavetoassumeamoralworldtorec- ognize it, andthatassumeswecan recognize amoralchoice.Itis impos- siblefor ustothinkourchoicefor a moralworldisdetermined by a world beyondgood andevil. Contemplationrequires a separation betweenour agency toreflectand judge fromthat upon whichwe contemplate, butthe logic ofdeterminismmakesthis separationmetaphysicallyimpossible. In This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism17 truth,however, contemplation comesfromthe capacities ofour personal realm. We can identify a worldthat hasa personal realm with wishes, inten- tions, andself-reflectionbecausewehavea personal realm ourselves, which thereby settlesthe question. Yes, wecandeterminewhichworldwelive in, and it is a worldwith good and evil, nota bloodmeridian.In fact, wecannot recognize aworldinwhichallisdeterminedbecausesuchaworldwould preclude the personal realm, whichisa cognitivenecessity to recognizing that theworldis beyondgood andevil.We havetoknow good andevilto conjecture a world beyond them.Butsuchaworldisnotourworld.Blood Meridian forcesustoadmitthattheTheo-Deteministicideacannot actually explainanyimaginable worldin whichwecouldlive. ButtheTheo-Deterministadherent may haveonelastdefense-acon- trollingsovereign Godisneededto guarantee moral meaning intheworld andavoidmoraland metaphysical nihilism.But in fact, as shown above, the opposite occursinthebloodmeridian.WhenGodcauses everything and evenwarandthe judge are instrumentsofthedivine will, thentheworld welivein is beyondgood andevil.The rejection of the bloodmeridiandoes notlessentheholinessofGod.In fact, affirming determinismmakesitim- possible toclaimGodis holy. Also, the rejection doesnotthrow humanity intoa moralvoid. Rather, to avoida morally void world, wehavetorefute determinism.If wewantto believein a holy Godandreal moral judgments andlive accordingly, thenwehavetodismissTheo-Determinism.Vereen Bell's point is similar: To enterthoseworldsandmovearoundthem effectively wearere- quired tosurrenderallCartesian predispositions andrediscover some primal stateofconsciousness prior toits becoming identified with thinkingonly. Thereisa powerfulpressure of meaning inMc- Carthy's novels, butthe experience of signification doesnottrans- lateintocommunicableabstractionsof significance. In McCarthy's world, existenceseemsbothto precede and preclude essence, andit paradoxically derivesits importance fromthisfactalone.. ..Ethi- cal categories donotruleinthis environment, or even pertain. Moral considerationsseemnottoaffect outcomes; actionsandeventsseem determined whollybycapricious and incomprehensible fates.15 If ethical categories donot rule, thenwecannotmakesenseofthisworld or ofa Godwhousesa bloodmeridianfor divine purposes. EdwinArnold says, "The worldis a wild place in McCarthy's fiction, andits Godis a wild andoften savage and mostly unknowable God, buta Godwhose presence certainly beckons."16 Yet, in bloodmeridianGoddoesnotbeckon.Godcon- trols absolutely, andfor usto postulate an all-controllingdeity, weshould stopcalling God holy andalso stopthinking wehavea personal realm.But metaphysicallydenying our personal realmisincoherent.Furthermore,if holinessmeansthemoral quality of beinggodlike, thenGodcannotnotbe This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions18Sansom holy. Andif morality entailsan obligation todo good, thenwecannotnot havea personal realm andmoral agency. Conclusion Therefore, thebloodmeridianisthemoral contradiction, and McCarthy's imaginativetelling ofthe story showsthe absurdity ofthe philosophical ideabehindthe plot. In theworldofhuman experience,people are indeed guilty, the judge is diabolical, andwarishell. Scalping is wrong andkill- ing babiesissinful.The argument that behindallhuman activity isanim- placable divinewillis actually not only incoherentbutsinisteritself.Itis incoherentbecauseit takesa personal realmtomakesucha claim, andit is sinisterbecauseit excusesthe hellof warandhuman crueltybysayingthey are necessaryparts ofanoveralldivine plan. Buttomaintainthata holy Godordainsthe brutality andviciousnessofwarandhuman cruelty isa contradiction.Godcannotbe holy andalsothe cause, inwhatever way, of every human event, especially war.Thebloodmeridianisanabsurdform of reasoning about Godand human affairs, andone way to read McCarthy's Blood Meridian isto seeit as a novelistic thoughtexperiment ona particular ideaaboutdivine sovereignty,showing the logicalabsurdity andmoralin- coherenceof the ideaof the divinedeterminismof all human events, includ- ing war. McCarthy'sliteraryimaginationcritiques the philosophical idea of Theo-Determinism, revealing itsunattractiveness.Inthiscasefor sure, wecanbecomebetter philosophers and theologiansbylearning fromthe artist. NOTES 1. John Dewey, Art as Experience (New York: Minton,Balch and Company, 1934), 267. 2.AlbertWilliamLeviand Ralph A. Smith, Art Education:A Critical Necessity: Dis- ciplines in Art Education:Contexts of Understanding(Urbana and Chicago: Univer- sity of Illinois Press,1991), 180. 3.See John Emil Sepich, "'What kindof Indianswasthem?' SomeHistoricalSourc- esin Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian," Southern Quarterly 30, no.4 (Summer 1992): 93-110. 4.Leo Daughertysays thisabouttherifle'sname:"I would argue thatthename suggests the judge's awareness of, andhisenthusiasticendorsement of, there- ality thattheworldhasbeena place ofmurdereversincethefirstvictorious taking ofa humanlife by anotherhuman.The judge's nameEt inArcadia Ego standsnotfor his gun and notfor himself, butrather for murderousmankindon this very real killingplanet"("Gravers False andTrue: Blood Meridian as Gnostic Tragedy," Southern Quarterly 30, no.4 [Summer 1992]: 127). 5.Cormac McCarthy, BloodMeridian (New York: Random House,1985), 249.Here- after, page referencesto quotes from Blood Meridian willbe givenparenthetically inthetext. 6.Harold Bloom, HowtoRead and Why (New York: Scribner,2000), 259.Bloom contendsthat McCarthy is oneofthefour bestAmericanwriters. This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBlood Meridian, a Critique of Determinism 19 7.Kenneth Millard, Contemporary AmericanFiction:AnIntroductionto American Fiction since 1970 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 86. 8. Though the rape andmurderare not explicitly detailed, they are suggestedby the text.Patrick W. Shaw agrees withthis explanation of pages 333-35.See"The Kid's Fate, the Judge's Guilt:RamificationsofClosureinCormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian," Southern LiteraryJournal 30, no.1 (Fall 1997): 116-19. 9. John Emil Sepich, "The Danceof History in Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian," Southern LiteraryJournal 24 (Fall 1991): 28. 10.Thus Spake Zarathustra, inThe Portable Nietzsche, trans.Walter Kaufmann (New York: Viking Press,1968), 337. 11. Chrisopher Biffle, A GuidedTour of Five Works by Platowith Complete Translations of Euthyphro,Apology, Crito, Phaedo(DeathScene), and Allegoryof theCave (Mountain View, CA: MayfieldPublishingCompany,1988), 17. 12.Denis Donoghue, The Practice of Reading (NewHaven, CN: Yale University Press, 1998), 267. 13.Steven Shaviro, "'The Very LifeofDarkness':A Reading ofBlood Meridian," Southern Quarterly 30, no.4 (Summer1992): 120. 14. LudwigWittgenstein, "Lecture on Ethics," in The Wittgenstein Reader, ed. Anthony Kenny(Cambridge: Blackwell,1994), 290. 15.VereenM. Bell, "The Ambiguous NihilismofCormac McCarthy," Southern LiteraryJournal 15 (Spring 1983): 31-32. 16.EdwinT. Arnold, "BloodandGrace:TheFictionofCormac McCarthy," Commonweal, November 4,1994, 15. This content downloaded from 196.21.233.64 on Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:13:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions