Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
By Judge Marc Rothenberg
In fiction, judges typically represent justice and moral authority. From Judge Haller in “My Cousin Vinny” with his famous “What is a Yute?” line, to Judge Snyder from “The Simpsons” declaring “Boys will be boys,” fictional judges often embody civic virtue and judicial wisdom. However, one literary “judge” stands apart as the antithesis of these noble figures. Judge Holden in Cormac McCarthy’s novel “Blood Meridian” represents not justice but its complete negation, a character of insurmountable force and philosophical complexity.
As part of my continuing journey through the “Great American Novels,” I encountered McCarthy’s acclaimed 1985 western opus, “Blood Meridian, or The Evening Redness in the West.” McCarthy’s distinctive writing style, lacking quotation marks and conventional punctuation, with paragraphs that sometimes read like extended run-on sentences, often presents challenges to readers. Yet beneath his unconventional prose lies pure brilliant dread.
The novel follows “The Kid,” a young man who joins the infamous Glanton Gang, a group of mercenary scalp hunters operating along the Texas-Mexico border in the 1850s. While former soldier John Joel Glanton nominally leads this brutal group, their true guiding force is Judge Holden, often simply referred to as “The Judge.”
Standing seven feet tall, The Judge is a hulking, hairless albino figure of imposing presence. What makes him truly remarkable, however, is his intellect. He possesses seemingly boundless knowledge across countless subjects: languages, cultures, chemistry, music, and even dance. With his expertise appearing limitless, and few topics beyond his mastery, he seems near omnipotent. With such extraordinary intelligence, one might expect The Judge to serve as a force for good. Instead, McCarthy subverts this expectation, crafting one of literature’s most disturbing villains. Plainly stated, The Judge engages in multiple acts of depravity, including murder and torture, with clinical detachment. His actions display calculated cruelty without hesitation or remorse. The first time we meet Judge Holden it is a striking and ominous scene in a revival tent in Nacogdoches, Texas. The Kid enters a tent where a reverend named Green is preaching. Suddenly, The Judge appears and interrupts the sermon, accusing Reverend Green of being an impostor, a wanted criminal, and a man guilty of unspeakable acts with both children and animals. He claims to recognize Green from wanted posters and previous encounters, listing the reverend’s alleged crimes to the shocked crowd. He speaks with such conviction and authority that the congregation quickly turns hostile toward the preacher. The scene quickly escalates into chaos, as the mob becomes enraged and violent, killing Green and tearing the revival to the ground. Later, The Kid sees The Judge at a bar where The Judge cheerfully admits to The Kid and others that he had never seen Reverend Green before in his life. When asked why he would do such a thing, The Judge just smiles and proceeds to buy a round of drinks for everyone. In an even more disturbing moment, later, The Judge buys a few puppies from a wandering child, only to immediately throw them in the river and drown them. He then returns to the campfire as if nothing occurred. This substantiates The Judge’s philosophy that power gives one the right to determine not only what is right and wrong, but what lives and what dies.
What defines Judge Holden isn’t simply immorality, but complete amorality. He positions himself beyond conventional concepts of good and evil. He proclaims, “Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak.” The horror of Judge Holden lies not merely in his wickedness, but in his viewpoint that renders moral judgment irrelevant. Might makes right, or more accurately, right is whatever the mighty dictate.
Throughout the novel, Holden’s title remains unexplained. No evidence suggests he possesses any judicial authority. But the title “Judge” is as relevant as his actions, and it becomes ironic in McCarthy’s hands. Actual judges operate within frameworks of precedent, constitutional limitations, and ethics. They serve systems designed to protect society from precisely the type of unbridled power that Holden exercises. A true judge acknowledges the greater authority beyond themselves, the rule of law. The rule of law stands as a sentinel for order, containing a judge’s authority within carefully constructed checks and balances. It empowers the laws and limits the lawless. Real judges recuse themselves from cases involving personal interest; they acknowledge potential biases and conflicts. In contrast, Judge Holden inserts himself directly into every conflict, never as an impartial mediator but as an active participant and instigator. His “rulings” derive not from reasoned interpretation of shared principles but from his own desires, amusements, and twisted whims.
Holden taunts us for our precious laws and procedures. For example, our judicial system relies on documentation to preserve factual accuracy. Holden also documents the world, as he meticulously sketches objects in his sketchbook as he encounters them. Next, he destroys the objects, ensuring his version becomes the only version. For Holden, his aim isn’t preservation but control, with even nature powerless against him.
Through the rule of law, our legal system aims to constrain abusive power and provide a structure for fair and predictable resolution of disputes. It holds all accountable to a legal standard and guarantees due process in that accountability. Holden rejects this premise entirely, preferring a world where only superior force matters. His declaration that “whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent” directly opposes the judicial principle that laws exist independent of any individual’s awareness or approval. He asserts jurisdiction over reality itself, abandoning any pretense of impartiality.
This contrast reveals why Judge Holden represents such profound philosophical terror. He appropriates society’s designated arbiter title while systematically undermining everything that role represents. By calling himself “Judge” while recognizing no law but force and control, he doesn’t merely violate social and governmental contracts, he mocks the rule of law, and the very foundation of the justice we hold so dear.•
Hon. Marc Rothenberg attended Indiana University Bloomington for his undergraduate degree and then graduated with his J.D. from Valparaiso University School of Law. After practicing as a Deputy Prosecutor, he was appointed to be a Master Commissioner for the Marion Superior Court in the newly created Arrestee Processing Center, and then later in the Marion County Traffic Court. In 2008, he was elected as a judge of the Marion Superior Court where he served as a judge in Criminal Court 9. He later became a presiding judge in Criminal Court 2. Judge Rothenberg served a stint as a presiding judge in Civil Court 7 before returning to the realm of criminal court in 2023, presiding over Criminal Court 19. In addition to his service on the bench, Judge Rothenberg is currently serving his 4th term on the Marion Superior Court Executive Committee and is currently the Presiding Judge of the Marion Superior Court. He is an active member of the Indianapolis Bar Association, is a Distinguished Fellow of the IndyBar Foundation, and has previously served on both boards of directors.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.