The Unreliable Narrator

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

One problem with first person narration is that it spoils any spoils any sort of cliff-hangers involving the narrator as you know the narrator has to survive otherwise, the narration would not be happening.

I agree with that..to a certain extent. At one, there was this circulating Sea Hunt joke, starring Lloyd Bridges: "Glub, glub. The giant shark approached closer and closer. Would I survive? Glub, glub." [Well, something to that extent.]

One of the benefits of first-person narration is that we are able to be closer to the protagonist - we experience her/his fears, frustrations, love, etc.



Don

[GreenMonkey]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

I didn't care for it, but Gene Wolfe's The Book of the New Sun series, starting with Shadow of the Torturer, is quite popular.

Yeah, those came to mind first for me. Weird, weird books like most of Wolfe's writing. I'm not sure if I'm a fan yet or not.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

One problem with first person narration is that it spoils any spoils any sort of cliff-hangers involving the narrator as you know the narrator has to survive otherwise, the narration would not be happening.

Well, we you assume that all cliff-hangers have to involve life or death.

Also, fantasy and science fiction stories can have dead narrators through several possible devices.

The final thought is that the first person narrative could end right before the resolution to the cliff hanger (maybe have several different people tell the first person narrative.

--
Bill

[DrNefario]

I read a book just last year where the first-person narrator died before the end. Another character took over the narration. I won't say which book it was.

[boydcarts]

I enjoyed "The Book of Lies" by Mary Horlock, though the reviews on Amazon and Goodreads are mixed.

[BenG]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

What gets even more interesting is when you have a third person POV unreliable narrator....
Bill

The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson could qualify since the story is told through Eleanor's point of view.

Spoiler:

You start to suspect she is a little mentally unstable. I found myself checking the other characters' reactions to events to confirm that things were as they seemed to Eleanor. It remained ambiguous.

[BenG]

Henry James' The Turn of the Screw possibly has an unreliable narrator, but the book ends without the reader knowing for certain.

[b0rsuk]

People make a big fuss about Book of the New Sun, but the narrator being reliable or not barely changes anything. It's overrated, and often questionable. It's the same thing as many characters in the book being named after saints. So what ? "Umm... Errr.... Nothing I guess. It just makes me feel better, a part of an erudite circle. I praise the book because it makes me feel superior to others."

A much better example is Flowers For Algernon by Keyes. In the book, you can clearly see the narrator interpreting the same events differently as his understanding changes.

Another example is Canticle for Leibowitz by Miller. It's a book about people trying to recover from a nuclear holocaust. A war that destroyed nearly all traces of civilization, reducing humanity to illiteracy, swords and bows. A monastery is scrambling to find and preserve any bits of knowledge. Their understanding of the past is very limited, and they often interpret remains incorrectly.

[cearbhallain]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

I read a book just last year where the first-person narrator died before the end. Another character took over the narration. I won't say which book it was.

Ooooh, I read that book too. It was what first came to mind when I saw the thread title. Good book, one of my three best reads last year. Have you read the sequel yet? I haven't, but I'm really looking forward to it.

[elemenoP]

Originally Posted by cearbhallain

Ooooh, I read that book too. It was what first came to mind when I saw the thread title. Good book, one of my three best reads last year. Have you read the sequel yet? I haven't, but I'm really looking forward to it.

Oh darn it, now I'm really intrigued.

and also: Flowers for Algernon is another of my faves!

eP

[b0rsuk]

The "Red Mars" trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson is another example.
WARNING: It's hard SF, and each of the 3 parts is brick-sized. Narration is dry, pacing very slow. The first book is largely about Earth-like issues and motivations in Martian setting. Expect to learn a lot about Mars, politics, geology, technology, astrophysics. Keep a sheet of paper and a pen with you, you'll be checking out many terms.

Each chapter is written from the perspective of a different scientist or other major person. They differ in their knowledge, goals, motivations, etc. They perceive the same events differently and might be even ignorant of some of them. Each chapter shows things in a different light. Events on the Earth are poorly known, they are reported by news agencies. Despite the entire world being connected, uneven flow of information is important to the events in the book.

The book reminds me of:
- Dune by Frank Herbert
- Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, fractions and major figures leading them
- hard SF classics, of course

[Poppa1956]

I started reading The Mysterious Affair at Styles by Agatha Christie with the presumption That anyone other than Hercule Poirot was wrong. I'll just say the narrator changes his opinion several times.