I was recently reading Fyodor Dostoevsky's, Crime and Punishment, and after having read it began contemplating some of the events from the book. It struck me that after the tragic transition of the protagonist, Raskolnikov, his experiences and interactions were confused and unreliable due to his mental state and crazed delusions.
To me, due to the profound moral dilemmas discussed in the book, and the deep pressure and anguish of the main character, I felt that, it was only natural that there was some room for ambiguity and interpretation for some of the events happening through the course of the story. It felt, well planned and organic to me, to show the fragile nature of the protagonist's mind and the hidden madness within him as he gradually sinks into his own despair and negative feelings.
Let me know what are some of your thoughts on the use of the unreliable narrator/protagonist trope in books and how does this affect your overall experience and enjoyment of it. Do you find it a helpful tool or is it frustrating to follow and comprehend the story because of this technique?
by Raj_Valiant3011
9 Comments
My absolute favorite was Invisible Monsters by Chuck Palahniuk. It has been a while since I read it but I remember enjoying the reveals and finding out just how unreliable the narration is.
Imho, I think all first person narrators are inherently unreliable.
That being said, the first time I considered this was when I read the *The Rachel Incident* by Caroline O’Donoghue! She seems to be getting herself into situations that seem woefully naive so I really started to question how she came off to every other character in the story. Similar experience with *Conversations with Friends* by Sally Rooney!
Kazuo Ishiguro does this often, and it works really well. I feel it adds another layer to the storytelling and often questions the morality of the main characters.
My favorite example is “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. The story is told from the internal monologue of the mute “Chief” Bromden.
The story you’re reading evolves from an a horribly abusive institution and sadistic staff, to realizing you’re reading the perspective of a damaged mind and a lot of the story simply isn’t true, and the rest is ambiguous.
It’s entirely possible that Nurse Ratched was a caring professional who was perceived as cruel by a mentally ill man who is involuntarily incarcerated.
The entire unreliable narrator perspective is completely ignored in the movie production, so the book and movie are telling very different stories. It’s why I think they compliment each other far more than a simple direct adaptation
The Adventures of Gerard. These books are so great. Funny and dark at the same time.
Lolita, tragically so as people who don’t get it… Miss the whole meaning of the book.
I think Merricat Blackwood from We Have Always Lived in the Castle qualifies. Another good on would be The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie.
The Name of the Wind by Pat Rothfuss. It’s especially frustrating when you have only two books of a trilogy for the past 14 years and no real expectation of the third being finished any time soon. How unreliable is the narrator? The world may never know.
Boy Parts