{"id":7795,"date":"2020-03-22T10:59:24","date_gmt":"2020-03-22T14:59:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/douglasglover.net\/?p=7795"},"modified":"2020-03-22T10:59:24","modified_gmt":"2020-03-22T14:59:24","slug":"posted-on-numero-cinq-reliable-and-unreliable-narrators-in-novels-with-multiple-points-of-view-rashmi-vaish","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/?p=7795","title":{"rendered":"Posted on Num\u00e9ro Cinq: Reliable and Unreliable Narrators in Novels with Multiple Points of View \u2014 Rashmi Vaish"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\"\"Rashmi Vaish<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

Introduction<\/em><\/h3>\n

F<\/span>ictional reliability as a device of point of view is one of the most complex elements of craft. It relates to the ways in which an author causes the narrators or characters to interact with the fictional world and each other to present different perspectives or points of view to manipulate the reader\u2019s experience of and response to the story.<\/span><\/p>\n

Point of view in literature, according to David Jauss in Alone With All That Could Happen<\/em>,<\/p>\n

\u2026refers to three not necessarily related things: the narrator\u2019s person (first, second, or third), the narrative techniques he employs (omniscience, stream of consciousness, and so forth), and the locus of perception (the character whose perspective is presented, whether or not that character is narrating). Since there is no necessary connection between person, technique, and locus of perception, discussions of point of view in fiction almost inevitably read like relay races in which one definition passes off the baton to the next\u2026(25)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The last element of point of view that Jauss speaks of, the locus of perception, is where I would pass the baton to fictional reliability. For this thesis I explore three novels with multiple points of view and discuss how the point of view complexes relate to reliability within each of them: Ironweed<\/em> by William Kennedy, Dinner at the Homesick Restaurant<\/em> by Anne\u00a0Tyler, and The Sound and the Fury<\/em> by William Faulkner.<\/p>\n

First, a brief discussion of reliability. Wayne C. Booth in his book The Rhetoric of Fiction<\/em> talks of reliability as a point of view narration<\/em> concept relating to authorial distance:<\/p>\n

In any reading experience, there is an implied dialogue among author, narrator, the other characters, and the reader. Each of the four can range, in relation to each of the others, from identification to complete opposition, on any axis of value, moral, intellectual, aesthetic, and even physical. (155)<\/p>\n

For practical criticism probably the most important of these kinds of distance is that between the fallible or unreliable narrator and the implied author who carries the reader with him in judging the narrator. If the reason for discussing point of view is to find how it relates to literary effects, then surely the moral and intellectual qualities of the narrator are more important to our judgment than whether he is referred to as \u201cI\u201d or \u201che,\u201d or whether he is privileged or limited. If he is discovered to be untrustworthy, then the total effect of the work he relays to us is transformed. (158)<\/p>\n

He then goes on to define reliable and unreliable narrators:<\/p>\n

For lack of better terms, I have called a narrator reliable when he speaks or acts in accordance with the norms of the work (which is to say the implied author\u2019s norms), unreliable when he does not. (Booth 158)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Depending on the text, the narrators could be wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, or range somewhere along the spectrum\u2014parts of their experience feel true and are in keeping with the novel world; others, though told with conviction, the reader knows are false. The reader knows this because the other characters in the narrative tell us so; the author tells us by depicting the world in opposition to the character. The reader sees clearly that the character is not perceiving the novel world accurately.<\/p>\n

While the first-person mode of narration is what initially comes to mind when discussing reliability or unreliability as a device of point of view, \u201cthe most important unacknowledged narrators in modern fiction are the third-person \u2018centers of consciousness\u2019 through whom authors have filtered their narratives.\u201d (Booth 153) These narrators provide a range of depictions of characters\u2019 minds, from delving deep into the \u201ccomplex mental experience\u201d to the \u201csense-bound \u2018camera eyes\u2019\u201d experience. Any kind of narration along this spectrum when used in conjunction with other craft devices leads to reliability or unreliability.<\/p>\n

In novels with single points of view, where there is one narrating consciousness through whose eyes the reader must see the novel world, first-person or third, there is a pressure on the narrating consciousness to provide the bulk of the significant detail of the story. We get back story, history and setting through devices like memory, perception and interior monologue, and other characters\u2019 opinions of the narrator through direct dialogue in present action or memory scene. In novels with multiple points of view, however, this pressure is alleviated. We get a variety of views on the novel world, each perspective coloring the same events in different hues. One perspective is set up against the other and so we as readers discover for ourselves which narration holds the most reliability or unreliability.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Ironweed<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

First published in 1983, Ironweed<\/em> by William Kennedy won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1984. The book is the third in Kennedy\u2019s Albany series of novels, though stands alone as a single work. Francis Phelan, a former major league baseball player, is a vagrant drunk who has returned to his hometown of Albany after 22 years. He fled home after dropping his infant son Gerald and killing him. Prior to that he had run away for a while after killing a man during a transit strike and was on the road extensively during his baseball career. The novel, which takes place over two days and nights, opens with Francis in St Agnes Cemetery, where his family and relatives are buried. He and another bum friend of two weeks, Rudy, have picked up a job digging graves because Francis needs to work off some legal fees. In the cemetery, Gerald\u2019s ghost imposes a silent act of will on Francis indicating that he needs to \u201cperform his final acts of expiation for abandoning the family.\u201d (19)<\/p>\n

\"\"William Kennedy<\/span><\/p>\n

Francis isn\u2019t consciously aware of this; in the cemetery he sees no ghosts, hears no voices. It is Halloween and it is only when Francis leaves the cemetery that he begins to see ghosts of the people he has killed. During the course of the night he meets up with Helen Archer, a hobo with whom he has had a relationship for nine years. Helen, who used to be a musician from a good family and is now dying of a tumor, is the other point of view consciousness of the novel. That night Helen is robbed of her purse.<\/p>\n

The following day Francis gets a job with a man who hauls junk and while on their rounds he enters his old neighborhood, which makes him remember his own home, his neighbors, parts of his childhood and young adult years. He decides to buy a turkey with his day\u2019s earnings and visit his family, with whom he ends up spending the evening. While there, he finally faces his wife, Annie, who welcomes him into their home. She is surprised to see him but bears no acrimony towards him. He apologizes to her, telling her that he still loves them but expects nothing. He meets his grandson, his son and daughter, and Annie cooks the turkey for the evening meal, for which he stays. He bathes, wears a clean suit that used to belong to him, and hands his present rags over to be discarded. Annie acknowledges that his returning, visiting Gerald\u2019s grave, and coming to see her is significant. She asks if he wants to stay, he refuses, but she leaves the possibility open. The family has dinner together.<\/p>\n

Later, he goes to find Helen, who in the meantime has checked into a hotel and is preparing to die. He leaves some money for her at the desk and meets up with Rudy. Soon after, however, the hobo jungle is raided, and Rudy is seriously injured in the violence. Francis takes him to the hospital, where Rudy dies. He returns to the hotel and finds Helen dead. He gets back on a train out of Albany to flee the police once again, but the ghost of Strawberry Bill tells him the police are not looking for him and that the house, the attic with the cot he saw earlier, is the best place for him to be. He projects into the future, thinks about possibly even moving into his grandson\u2019s room when the time is right. In the end he finds peace in Anneie\u2019s forgiveness. His spiritual burden is lifted, his deeds over the two days a fulfilling of the expiation that Gerald\u2019s ghost imposed on him.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Author as God Voice\/Omniscient Narrator<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

While the bulk of the novel occurs in Francis Phelan\u2019s point of view, with Helen Archer a secondary point of view character, the first chapter of the novel has a distinctly different perspective. This voice, the authorial voice or reliable omniscient third person narrator, sets up Francis\u2019 world in context to the Catholic afterlife with the literal introduction of the dead speaking and interacting with the world right in the beginning of the novel\u2014his mother twitches in her grave and his father lights his pipe (1). The author gives the reader a great deal of mobility in this section in terms of distance, taking the reader close into Francis\u2019 thoughts and far out into the spirit world that Francis is not yet aware of. The modes of interiority are used not only for Francis, but for the ghosts around Francis in the cemetery as well. The ghosts in this section don\u2019t just speak amongst themselves; in a presaging of what is to come in the novel, they speak to Francis as well, like Louis (Daddy Big) Dugan, who tells Francis that his son Billy \u201csaved my life.\u201d (5) Only, at this point Francis doesn\u2019t hear or see any ghosts yet.<\/p>\n

The dramatic action begins with Francis riding in a truck through the cemetery in Albany where his family is buried. The narrator\/observer moves with Francis through the graveyard, giving us back story and character setup for Francis as well:<\/p>\n

Francis knew how to drink. He drank all the time and he did not vomit. He drank anything that contained alcohol, anything, and he could always walk, and he could talk as well as any man alive about what was on his mind\u2026He\u2019d stopped drinking because he\u2019d run out of money, and that coincided with Helen not feeling all that terrific and Francis wanting to take care of her. Also he had wanted to be sober when he went to court for registering twenty-one times to vote. (6)<\/p>\n

The most important piece of setup in this chapter, the event that sets the rest of the novel in motion, comes when Francis goes to his infant son Gerald\u2019s grave. The authorial voice indicates that this is an important moment by describing Francis\u2019 dead father Michael signaling to \u201chis neighbors that an act of regeneration seemed to be in process\u201d (16).<\/p>\n

A brief shift into Rudy\u2019s mind also occurs before Francis arrives at Gerald\u2019s grave, giving us multiple perspectives on the significance of the action unfolding:<\/p>\n

Rudy followed his pal at a respectful distance, aware that some event of moment was taking place. Hangdog, he observed. (17)<\/p>\n

At this point the narration speaks from Gerald\u2019s perspective as ghost, though Francis remains unaware:<\/p>\n

Gerald, through an act of silent will, imposed on his father the pressing obligation to perform his final acts of expiation for the family\u2026 You will not know what these acts are until you perform them\u2026 when these final acts are complete, you will stop trying to die because of me. (19)<\/p>\n

The unadorned declarative text that lays out his immediate future path grounds his character in the novel world. The authorial voice gives the reader the guidepost to understanding Francis and his actions to come. This chapter functions as the closest example of a reliable, omniscient narrator who is the only one in the novel world fully aware of everything surrounding Francis, including the afterlife and the task that Francis must perform, which he is unaware of, but which the reader knows.<\/p>\n

Read the rest at Num\u00e9ro Cinq Magazine. Click here.<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0Rashmi Vaish   Introduction Fictional reliability as a device of point of view is one of the most complex elements of craft. It relates to the ways in which an author causes the narrators or characters to interact with the fictional world and each other to present different perspectives or points of view to manipulate… Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7795","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-out-back"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3OdoH-21J","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7795","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7795"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7795\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7797,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7795\/revisions\/7797"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7795"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7795"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/douglasglover.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7795"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}