British novelist Ian McEwan’s masterpiece Atonement can be appropriately compared to American writer Cormac McCarthy’s novel No Country for Old Men with the common denominating theme of intense experience—its opportunities and its ramifications. Contrastingly, each author chooses to present the motif by utilizing an entirely opposite method in order to achieve various types of effects—both for the readership and for the development of the novel’s characters. The opposing narrational styles incorporate minimalism—in the case of McCarthy—while McEwan embraces a multi-level, textured approach. Each technique alludes to a broader perspective, drawing the readers further into the story worlds that both authors have brilliantly fabricated. The correlation between film and literature is emphasized in the comparision of these ingenious 21st-century novels as Hollywood depictions also present a degree of variance in their attempt to extend equivalents for literary diversity and intricacy.
Ian McEwan’s novel Atonement illustrates the multi-dimensional narration frames of literary technique in order to further draw the readership into the work. This kaleidoscopic structure of fiction and nonfiction, fabrication and reality, and dishonesty and authenticity is intertwined amidst the development of several key characters within the novel’s pages. The first section of the work gleams with sprinkles of fiction—from a young playwright’s work—a strong tactic that lays the foundation for a deeper metafictional representation. Atonement, thoughtfully planned out and meticulously organized, emphasizes the theme of opposites in a multi-faceted respect as it encompasses the exchange between several significant factors. Composed in a traditional third-person narrative, McEwan dances in and out of his characters’ heads—from members of the Tallis family to friends central to the developing plot along the way. This narrative style fuses a fastidious approach to character development and maturation, a tactic imperative in the specific case of Briony Tallis as the novel spans sixty years of her life. McEwan successfully accomplishes this by exploring the thoughts and desires of his central characters. Amidst the careful attention to precision, the author integrates meticulous imagery though this absorbed writing style does not distract from the primary themes of the novel. McEwan incorporates such careful prose that effectively balances a shrewd attention to detail with a meticulous approach to his characters’ developments. Additionally, it is the minuscule details, sounds, and sensations that lead to the climax of how rampantly uncontrolled the imagination truly is. Without such investigative narration, one could argue that McEwan’s conveyance of the reality of creativity power would not have been as effectively emphasized without the integration of such painstaking detail.
Likewise, the novel’s appropriate title, Atonement, is achieved through an exploration of writing itself—from the viewpoint of Briony Tallis. Through the childlike innocence of a young girl to the seasoned woman she becomes, Briony comes to the realization of what it truly means to repent and makes amends. This is a difficult process, a lifelong struggle, and one that is accomplished via the means of finding herself through the art of writing. An aspiring writing who seeks atonement for a misconstrued perception must ironically endeavor to find herself in the nature of writing itself. Throughout the novel’s pages, McEwan plays with the irony of writing as a central theme to the delivery of his plot—via his choice of narrative style. Rich, textured language decorates his chapters. A thoughtful attention to sentence structure is clearly evident with McEwan’s educated diction. Creating a stark contrast to the minimalistic style popularized by novelists, such as American writer Ernest Hemingway, McEwan tackles portraying this now national bestselling novel with verbose and bounteous language. While countless novelists attempt to execute this writing style efficiently, McEwan is immensely successful in his mission as he intertwines the relationship between writing as a prominent motif as well a means of therapeutic self-exploration.
In the film adaption of the same title, director Joe Wright utilizes various locations in order to literally depict McEwan’s description of places. Moving from seafront Redcar to the Great Scotland Yard as the backdrops of kaleidoscopic scenes, the film’s cast employs each location as the most accurate representation of the novelist’s original geographical ideology. Set on the Tallis family’s opulent country estate during the stifling summer of 1935, the first hour of Wright’s film is cinematographically dazzling. Visually tantalizing just as the novel’s diction is intellectually engaging, screenwriter Christopher Hampton and Director Joe Wright collaborate to introduce a plethora of dynamic characters. The crew’s tactic emphasizes young Robbie Turner’s status as an outsider, astutely portraying the class separation as rigid and persistent. In this way, Wright emphasizes the detailed, faceted style that the novel enfolds—on the silver screen. At the film’s conclusion, Wright shifts the attention of Atonement back to its primary focus: words—more specifically, words with an intent and force of purpose behind them. During the final scenes, the older Briony is giving a TV interview about her latest novel, whose title mirrors McEwan’s novel mentioned here. Briony’s character has limited screen time, a strategy that redirects the focus onto confabulation. The camera holds her wrinkled face in an extended shot, and while the audience is clued into realizing that this TV appearance is Briony’s final interview for her last novel, the successful novelist concisely shares key life lessons. Her words are minimal, her sentences succinct. She reflects upon life’s tendency to distress and its ramifications. Pausing, she continues by mentioning art’s proclivity to heal and alleviate. Her revelations are shocking and brutally honest. Again, the degree of complexity of multi-level frames of language is engaged as Briony refuses to alter the names of her novel’s characters.
Contrastingly, in the 2005 American crime novel No Country for Old Men, McCarthy embraces a minimalistic approach via succinct sentences, brief paragraphs, and limited narration. McCarthy’s presentation of the novel and commentary through explicit description effectively delivers his primary motif of life and its propensity for abundance. McCarthy explores several key characters’ varying perspectives of how life should be lived by means of brief dialogue and direct conversation amidst his primary cast. Foregoing the cluttering effect of excessive imagery, detailed descriptions, and a verbose vocabulary, McCarthy adapts the dialect of his characters, emphasizing his relationship with his fabricated dramatis personae. A stark contrast to McEwan’s colorful novel, McCarthy’s piece is blunt, direct, and choppy. His sterile intensity creates a minimal backdrop to the diversity of his characters. The novelist’s sentences are pithy yet punch a dramatic impact. His lack of punctuation, specifically apostrophes and commas, heighten the dialect of the time period and environment.
In the film adaptation of McCarthy’s bloody thriller, directing duo Joel and Ethan Coen embrace a mediocre approach as far as expression and emotions are concerned. The cast remains rigidly impassive and, much like the punctuation in the novel, there are no climaxes, “aha!” moments, or exclamation points. The minimalistic writing style, forthright tone, and concise diction portrayed in the novel transcend onto the silver screen. This tactic, I feel, sets the Coen brothers’ film adaptation apart from other Western thrillers. Its subtlety and dependence from “movie magic” and special effects emphasizes McCarthy’s basic methodology. McCarthy’s minimalistic approach brings about an effect of focus and direction. His exclusion of what some readers would dub “fluffiness,” such as excessive imagery, perfect grammar, and extended passages of narration, redirects the concentration on character development and progression. McCarthy’s central theme encompasses Beverly Sills’ famous mantra, “There is no shortcut to any place worth going,” and presents it in an entirely fresh, updated, relatable way. Actor Barry Corbin’s character Ellis conveys this perspective in a reanimated sense, “Whatcha [sic]got aint [sic] nothin [sic]new. This country’s hard on people, you cant stop whats [sic] coming, it aint [sic] all waiting on you. That’s vanity” (No Country for Old Men). The plethora of grammatical mistakes in the uttered lines pale in comparison to the fundamental purpose of the few words mentioned here. Concise, direct, and hopelessly relatable to any individual, these lines redirect the focus from self-absorption to living life abundantly. A similar theme echoed in McEwan’s novel, the reader appreciates how novelist McCarthy tackled a common theme with arid intensity.
The contemporary tour de forces of British novelist Ian McEwan and American author Cormac McCarthy emphasize the recurring theme of living life abundantly. In McEwan’s Atonement, the novelist embraces a kaleidoscopic, textured writing style that focuses on recounting fiction within a work of fiction. This multi-faceted degree of perspectives heightens the intensity of this passionate novel. Dissimilarly, McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men presents a stark exhibition of minimalism that draws the readership further into the brilliantly fabricated story world. The metastasis of mediums in the film adaptations conveys the opposing writing styles in the attempts to offer replications of literary elaboration and complexity.