Article written by Ashleigh Lowry.
The unreliable narrator is a trope that has been used from the beginning of time. Cavemen lied or exaggerated about the feats of their hunting trips, now humans lie to their trainers about the amount of chocolate and ice-cream they ate the night before. Unreliable narrators are part of everyday society, as we all tell stories from our own perspectives.
When it comes to novels, we are given a chance to explore the mind of people we would normally shun away. Many have tried to categorise the different types of unreliable narrators, myself included, but there has never been a confirmed list. However, I did find one that I will be using for the sake of this article. Mandy Wallace in her blog Write or Die, created a list of 8 different types of unreliable narrators and how they are effective in both literature and other media:
· The Self-Preservationist
· The Sympathy-Seeker
· The Insomniac
· The Hallucinator
· The Embellisher
· The Memory-Repressor
· The Psycho
· The Fool
Each of these types of characters have their own way of twisting the story either intentionally or otherwise. As they do manipulate the story, a new side starts to appear that creates a train of thought with the audience. Why? Why do these narrators tell the story the way they do?
For some, it is all about telling the story in a way to gain forgiveness, and be seen as better human beings then they actually are, such as Sympathy-Seeker narrator of the novel Lolita, Humbert Humbert. He is a twisted but educated individual, who uses that education, in the way of elegant use of the English language, to justify the illegal and unthinkable things that he does in the novel. He uses his talent for manipulations on the audience to try and have them believe that he had done everything for love. When asked about the novel and Humbert’s unrealistic narration, the novel’s author Vladimir Nabokov spoke about how he wanted the audience to think about the novel even after they put the book away. Sympathy-Seekers are narrators that want to appear human, they try and convince the audience that they aren’t terrible people. Their stories are always written to be similar stories of redemption; however, they are riddled with contradiction to this redemption. Authors can explore the mindsets of characters that would normally be antagonists, trying to figure why they would do what they do.
For other narrators such as Insomniac, Hallucinator and Memory Repressor, there is more than just attitude that is causing them to be unreliable. Novels such as Fight Club and Perks of Being a Wallflower, narrators either cannot or are unable to tell the true story. The story involved with this type of narrator is sometimes hard to tell what is real and what isn’t unless there are big hints or reveal a twist. Instability in stories is something we often deal with in real life, friends forgetting details or just not remembering things clearly so filling in the blanks themselves. We live with these stories so they feel somewhat normal with the premise of the novel. In the case of Fight Club and Perks of Being a Wallflower, once the truth is revealed new problems arise and have to be dealt with. For others the truth could never be acknowledged or left to not be resolved. There is some debate within some writer’s circles about the ‘easy-out’ these types of narrators possess memory loss or ‘seeing what never was there’ but if done correctly the narrators can be a creative and thought-provoking method of telling the story.
Then there is our personality driven unreliable narrators, the Psycho and the Fool, these two are interesting because in a way you know they are unreliable from the beginning of the story, both in different ways. The Fool being categorised as an innocent unaware narrator that does not understand why or what they are doing and The Psycho because of their complete lack of humanity and emotions. For examples of novels where these narrators are present are The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (The Fool) and American Psycho (… it’s in the title). Either through their lack of understanding or not wishing to understand at all, both of these types of narrators want to show you what’s going on inside their heads, in their own way of understanding. They don’t ask the reader for sympathy or provide them with clarity they just are their own person with however they live their life. These types of narrators are a way of seeing extremes, either through the innocence of a characters eyes as a child or just plain stupidity or the complete disconnected personality (or personalities) of the Psycho. When it comes to the narrator’s voice, the Fool and the Psycho both have unique ways of talking that allows the authors to take a unique pathway through the story telling process, in the end providing a compelling and interesting read for the audience.
Lastly, we have the Self-Preservationist and the Embellisher. These guys literally lie and twist the truth and situations they find themselves in to get the upper hand. These two types of unreliable narrators use what resources they have to make themselves out as better people. They are the two most common types of unreliable narrators because they are so close to the truth about ourselves. People lie to make themselves feel better, but for the Self-Preservationist and Embellisher narrators, those lies are on a whole other level. Life of Pi and Gone Girl are two examples of these types of narrators. The Life of Pi provides a good example of a narrator that tells a ridiculous story either to make themselves or the situation they were in better, providing them with the upper hand in that certain situation or in life. Gone Girl gives us two Self-Preservationist narrators for the price of one novel! Nick and Amy Dunne twist truths and lies together to preserve themselves and their reputations, while simultaneously trying to destroy each other. These two types of unreliable narrators are the most identifiable to people who read about them, as they both exhibit traits that people do in everyday life. Lying to get out of work or rehashing a story to make you sound more heroic then clumsy, making these characters almost believable until the truth inevitability comes out and blows their story out of the water, giving a nice dose of karma coming back to bite them in the arse, most of the time.
With all these types of narrators there is a line of similarity, both truth and lie are a blurred together to form a muddled mess of grey. Having audiences be unsure of the true story makes unreliable narrators of all types effective and the types of stories that they tell so compelling. These characters sometimes make us feel better about ourselves because we can tell ourselves…
“I’m not as unreliable as that guy!” and maybe, just maybe we believe it.
References:
Komentáre