(1968) Outer Dark

What discordant vespers do the tinker's goods chime through the long twilight and over the brindled forest road, him stooped and hounded through the windy recrements of the day like those old exiles who divorced of corporeality and enjoined ingress of heaven or hell wander forever the middle warrens spoorless increate and anathema.

Plot Summary

Outer Dark begins with a child conceived by brother and sister. Culla, the brother of Rinthy, ashamed of their sin, leaves the child in the forest to die, and tells Rinthy the child died of natural causes. When Rinthy discovers that her child is still alive, she goes on a journey to find the tinker who passed by their house near the time Culla took the child to die. Although Rinthy does not know for sure if the tinker found the child, she instinctively knows she must search for him in order to find her child. Once Culla discovers Rinthy has left in search of the child, he goes on a journey to find her. Rinthy encounters several kind people on her journey who take her in and feed her willingly. Her mind is set on getting her child back, without thinking the child may be dead: she is convinced that because her breasts are producing milk months after the child disappeared, he is alive. In contrast to the help Rinthy receives, Culla encounters suspicion wherever he goes. Three dark, mysterious men who murder everyone Culla encounters on his search for Rinthy also follow him. Eventually, Culla stumbles upon the dark trio, and they kill his son in front of him. When Rinthy discovers the bones of her baby, she seems to be at peace; however, Culla is still wandering restlessly at the end of the novel.

Critical Analysis

Much critical work addressing Outer Dark considers the text in one of three ways. The first of these approaches is a nihilistic reading. Vereen Bell discusses how Rinthy and Culla spend their time wandering aimlessly, with no purpose, even though they claim to have one. Bell supports his reading partially by a dream Culla has near the beginning of Outer Dark. In this dream, a prophet promises a great multitude that they will be healed before the end of the eclipse that is about to happen. The multitudes wait and wait, but the sun never returns. They become restless and mutinous. As their anger grows, they decide to attack Culla. The dream is a parable about a cure that never came; a pointless event that did not fulfill its promise, much like Rinthy and Culla’s journeys in the novel. The end of the novel provides final evidence for a nihilistic reading. The desolate swamp where Culla arrives at the novel’s end may represent a dead end in his life journey. (Bell)

However, Edwin Arnold rejects this interpretation and argues for a moral reading based on Christian concepts of sin. He discusses Rinthy’s representation as a good, faithful, and pure person, a person willing to admit her sin. Unlike Culla, she does not run from her child, instead she accepts him with open arms, and even tries to search him out when she realizes that he is not dead. She is rewarded for these choices when she encounters others who take her in and offer help while she is on her search. In contrast, Culla represents humanity’s sinful nature. Because he refuses to admit his sin and does not accept the child, the consequence of his sin, he is punished. Everywhere he goes, others look on him suspiciously, accusing him of several crimes he did not commit. The three men that follow him may represent justice, perhaps a dark kind of justice, but justice nonetheless. They seem to be trying to clear the world of his sin, by killing everyone in Culla’s path. Strangely enough, they do not kill Culla when they first meet him. They only leave veiled threats for him, through others’ deaths. These threats terrify him for the rest of his journey. When Culla refuses to accept his baby in the end, they kill it and eat it in front of him, leaving Culla to wander endlessly as punishment for his sin. (Arnold)  

While Arnold relies on orthodox Christian metaphysics, Christopher Metress draws on Christian mysticism in his article, “Via Negativa: The Way of Unknowing in Cormac McCarthy’s Outer Dark.” The Via Negativa accepts that God cannot be known positively, and there is nothing wrong with this. In the mystic view, rather than signifying evil, the darkness represents the condition of man in his relation to God Thus, the parable-like dream at the beginning of the novel is not about the promise unfulfilled, but instead it focuses on the fear of the people. They do not fear the darkness; they even embrace it at first, because they think they will be cured by the darkness. When the promised light does come, they are afraid that they will never be cured, since the promise was that they would be cured before the light returned. Rinthy’s good fortune in her travels comes not from her innocence or moral behavior, but from her contentment with her ignorance. She does not need to know about the world or how it works; she only takes whatever the world will give her, so she is provided for wherever she goes. However, she does need to know where her baby is, which causes her problems, such as her leaky, achy breasts. In contrast to Rinthy, Culla cannot accept the unknown; he actively searches for work and a way to survive, which sabotage his travels. The only character that finds peace is the blind man Culla encounters at the end of the story. He has accepted that the dark or the unknown in this case, will never be lifted. He is content to simply walk down the road, not knowing what’s before him, because “What needs a man to see his way when he’s sent there?” (241) (Mettress).

However, these readings by themselves do not seem to take into account certain aspects of the story. For example, in his nihilistic reading, Bell ignores Rinthy’s many benefactors; whereas Culla is conspicuously absent. Rinthy eventually finds peace. True, Culla never finds what he is looking for and is left to wander. Culla’s journey may be pointless, and it may lead to nothing, but Rinthy eventual finds peace because she reaches an answer at the end of her search, giving her journey meaning. Surprisingly, the mysterious three, important figures in the text, are unaddressed in the Bell’s essay. While their journey may seem to consist of meaningless murder, it can be argued that their function is to punish Culla for his immoral choices. In Arnold’s moral reading, he does not discuss the ending with the blind man. The blind man is morally ambiguous, as it does not seem he has merited reward or punishment. Rather, he is content with his aimless wandering, similar to Culla and yet implied to be without Culla’s moral mistakes. Without a consideration of this final significant character, it is difficult to accept Arnold’s moral interpretation. This omission puts into question Arnold’s moralizing. The reader may give many answers to important questions: Is his current state reward for past deeds? Or was he punished for past deeds, but has learned to accept his punishment and find joy in it? How does his fate relate to Culla and Rinthy’s fates? Is he maybe the happy medium between the two, a man who admitted some of his sins, but not all?

But Christopher Metress’s via negativa reading, though it may reconcile the two readings also raises important questions. Like Bell’s reading, Metress also ignores the importance of the mysterious three. As the primary representation of darkness and shadow, we must address whether their ‘dark’ deeds are part of the mystical unknown. Are they also restless wanderers that cannot accept the unknown, a way for Culla to see how his way of living life can be destructive for not only him, but also the people around him? Might they be a crucial element in Culla’s search and salvation? Each of the readings typically found in criticisms can be problematic when applied to the text: all three leave out important aspects of the novel. Of course, critics must select certain aspects of the novel in order to make a coherent argument, and it is by keeping all three readings, among others, in mind that we can begin to understand the complexity of McCarthy’s second novel.

by Caitlin Angermeyer