Trouble portraying an unreliable narrator

DancingMaenid · Sep 29, 2007

This concern recently came up for me, and I wanted to get some input.

I have a novel I'm in the planning stages of, and it dawned on me that first person might be a good way of doing it. Ideally, I think it would be best. My character would be an unreliable narrator, and I like this idea a lot. He suffers from delusions and generally has a biased outlook on people that would I would like to portray in first person.

However, one issue I'm having is thinking of a way to make it more or less clear that some things are very much real and presented the way they really are, while other things aren't. This is the only issue I'm having with the first person idea. Because if some of the things he believes are just a figment of his mind, why isn't the whole story, potentially? The fact that it's a fantasy story heightens this. I don't want the story to be overly confusing, either.

Are there any ways to go about this?

TrainofThought · Sep 29, 2007

Why not have another POV? One the reader can follow and see the difference between a troubled mind versus the sane. This is the only way I can think of that will help the reader understand the frenzy going on in his head while knowing if what he says is true.

DancingMaenid · Sep 29, 2007

Do you think that would work with first person, though? I know there have been novels with multiple first person POVs, but it's not something I've ever come across in my reading.

lkp · Sep 29, 2007

Try reading Arthur Phillips' The Egyptologist for a good example of how you might do it. He uses a number of first person narrators *all* of whom are more or less unreliable, but reading all of them together makes the real story clear. You'll find that even with an unreliable narrator, you can trust the reader enough to "get it."

TrainofThought · Sep 29, 2007

It will work if it’s done right. I’ve read books (The History of Love, My Sister’s Keeper) and my WIP have multiple first person POVs. The chapters shift to another character’s POV so the reader isn’t confused. Maybe someone will come along with a better idea. Good Luck!

blacbird · Sep 29, 2007

No problem at all, that I can see. My current unpublishable WIP is a first-person unreliable narrator thing, and it's great fun (for me; likely nobody else will ever see it). You can lie and prevaricate and quibble and grovel as much as you want. What's the problem?

caw

Azraelsbane · Sep 29, 2007

blacbird said:
No problem at all, that I can see. My current unpublishable WIP is a first-person unreliable narrator thing, and it's great fun (for me; likely nobody else will ever see it). You can lie and prevaricate and quibble and grovel as much as you want. What's the problem?

caw

I'm with the cawing one on this. My first novel was first person from an unreliable narrator, but my betas thought it was funny as Hell.

You pretty much know she's unreliable by page 3, but being crazy is part of her "charm."

Just Mike · Sep 29, 2007

Go to your local library and pick up a copy of The Murder of Roger Aykroyd by Agatha Christie.

DancingMaenid · Sep 30, 2007

blacbird said:
No problem at all, that I can see. My current unpublishable WIP is a first-person unreliable narrator thing, and it's great fun (for me; likely nobody else will ever see it). You can lie and prevaricate and quibble and grovel as much as you want. What's the problem?

caw

Really, the only issue is that it's a fantasy novel. I'm having trouble seeing how I can make it so that it's clear that the fantasy elements are real in the story, and not just in my character's head, but that he's also unreliable about other things.

Ideally, I'd prefer to have only one POV, but I could make it work with two POVs.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll look up some of those books.

JoNightshade · Sep 30, 2007

Two suggestions, if you want to stick to your one narrative POV:

1) Have other people in the novel question your narrator when he does stuff or says stuff that identifies him as a bit loony. If other characters are questioning your narrator's sanity, the reader will too. This could even work well if you have the narrator trying to justify why he's right and they're wrong.

2) Have him reveal his unreliability by getting stuff "wrong." IE, he tells a story one way, then later tells it with other conflicting details.

Azraelsbane · Sep 30, 2007

DancingMaenid said:
Really, the only issue is that it's a fantasy novel. I'm having trouble seeing how I can make it so that it's clear that the fantasy elements are real in the story, and not just in my character's head, but that he's also unreliable about other things.

Ideally, I'd prefer to have only one POV, but I could make it work with two POVs.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll look up some of those books.

Would your MC really be confused as to the fantasy elements of the world? I'd think, if he/she lived there it would be like looking at a chair, not really something to be skewed. When I think of unreliable narrators I don't question whether or not the person in front of them is REALLY holding a gun/slinging fire, I question their opinions about why the person in front of them is doing so.

My 1st person novel goes fantasy after about 200 pages (which is one of the reasons why I decided not to query it...queries for books with a real genre scare me enough). It works well, and none of my betas were confused.

An unreliable narrator doesn't mean they need to be put in a mental hospital, they're just a bit (or a lot) too self-absorbed, imo. I realize your guy suffers from delusions, but if you work it some way... I don't know, as if he doesn't understand they are delusions until after they happen? Or in this case, an extra pov would likely be helpful, as others suggest, and yes, this can work in first person.

maestrowork · Sep 30, 2007

First person is great for unreliable narrator -- just GREAT. The way to balance it out with "reality" is by using other characters. Their reactions, dialogue, action, etc. to counteract the narrator. If the narrator filters everything through his/her delusional mind, then you can use other characters to act as the readers' advocate.

I'm going to bring up Fight Club again... I mean, talk about fantasy vs. reality. But Palahniuk did it so well...

And part of the fun of unreliable narrator really is that we (readers) have no idea what is true or not. That's suspense. Eventually, the writer has to spill the beans, but through the process, he can take the readers on a wild emotional/psychological ride that is just exciting in 1st person. When done well, it can be the most fascinating.

DancingMaenid · Sep 30, 2007

Azraelsbane said:
Would your MC really be confused as to the fantasy elements of the world? I'd think, if he/she lived there it would be like looking at a chair, not really something to be skewed. When I think of unreliable narrators I don't question whether or not the person in front of them is REALLY holding a gun/slinging fire, I question their opinions about why the person in front of them is doing so.

A little more info on my story:

The main character is a vampire in a world where vampires have recently been "outed," so to speak, and the human reaction has been big.

Mostly, this guy's just very biased. But he also has some hallucinations and delusions. Now, for this character, there's no way he could construct a delusion so big as to include everyone in the whole world (his delusions are more self-centered), but what's to convince the audience that the vampire angle is one of the few parts of what he says that's definitely a true part of the setting/story?

Azraelsbane · Sep 30, 2007

DancingMaenid said:
A little more info on my story:

The main character is a vampire in a world where vampires have recently been "outed," so to speak, and the human reaction has been big.

Mostly, this guy's just very biased. But he also has some hallucinations and delusions. Now, for this character, there's no way he could construct a delusion so big as to include everyone in the whole world (his delusions are more self-centered), but what's to convince the audience that the vampire angle is one of the few parts of what he says that's definitely a true part of the setting/story?

You mean as in, whether or not he is really a vampire or just making it up? This can easily be done through other characters, watching feedings, hunting with others, etc. I think if it's marketed as a vampire story, people won't question it.

If you mean, how do you convince the audience that the vampire angle on what's happening in society is true, hmm, I don't think that's important. Each reader will get something different out of your story, and you can have a sympathetic bastard as a narrator, imo. Making him sympathetic will coax your readers into believing him/buying into his opinions on a basic level. That's the key, imo.

jodiodi · Sep 30, 2007

Just Mike said:
Go to your local library and pick up a copy of The Murder of Roger Aykroyd by Agatha Christie.

You recommended it before I could!

This book is first person and I absolutely loved it when I read it. It's done very well.

DancingMaenid · Sep 30, 2007

Azraelsbane said:
You mean as in, whether or not he is really a vampire or just making it up? This can easily be done through other characters, watching feedings, hunting with others, etc. I think if it's marketed as a vampire story, people won't question it.

Yes, that was my concern. I might be overthinking this a bit, but that's what I do. I guess this might be one time where I'll just have to trust the readers. The big important difference is that, like you said, the vampire angle is collaborated by other characters. The stuff that's a product of his bias/imagination, tends not to be collaborated by other people. Marketing would probably be important, too.

Bruce Baker · Sep 30, 2007

PLEASE, at the end, make it third person...

:Soapbox:

Please write everything you want to say in the first person. It REALLY gets the juices going. But for the love of all of us who loath first person fiction (it famously separates the reader from the story because all is filtered through the eyes of first-person narrator) PLEASE re-write it all at the end o make it third person. Good luck!

Azraelsbane · Sep 30, 2007

Bruce Baker said:
Please write everything you want to say in the first person. It REALLY gets the juices going. But for the love of all of us who loath first person fiction (it famously separates the reader from the story because all is filtered through the eyes of first-person narrator) PLEASE re-write it all at the end o make it third person. Good luck!

I respectfully disagree. If first is done well, you don't care that you're separated from the real story, because the MC's story is the one you care about when all is said and done.

Bruce Baker · Sep 30, 2007

Interview with the Vampire...

:flag:

...is the only great novel I can ever remember reading that was first person narrated. Like many people, I almost immediately stop reading when a self-indulgent author starts going on about "I did this...and I did that...and this is what IIII thought about it." I say, 'Good for you, yourself, and you. You're not a Vampire, so you're not the ONLY reliable witness to EVERY event that takes place in the story. But I say this with love...

Sage · Sep 30, 2007

Bruce Baker said:
...is the only great novel I can ever remember reading that was first person narrated. Like many people, I almost immediately stop reading when a self-indulgent author starts going on about "I did this...and I did that...and this is what IIII thought about it." I say, 'Good for you, yourself, and you. You're not a Vampire, so you're not the ONLY reliable witness to EVERY event that takes place in the story. But I say this with love...

So you must have a problem with 3rd person limited too. Instead of "I" insert "he" or "she." Also, in first person (& tight 3rd) you don't need to have "I thought" anything (it's implied), although sometimes it's helpful for flow. And unless the story is actually autobiographical (or Mary Sue-sical), the author's "self-indulgence" has nothing to do with the use of "I".

Bruce Baker · Oct 1, 2007

Why "I" is self-indulgent...

Sorry. I only meant that "Me" saying what "I" had for breakfast is much easier to recount than "me" describing what "he" had for breakfast. First person is the EASY, LAZY road for a writer, and I find it seldom done well outside of trusted narrators like Mark Twain and Anne Rice. I feel really, REALLY strongly that an otherwise good story can be ruined by first-person narration. It is EASIEST of all to write, and a good way to get a story going if yer stuck, but it feels INCREDIBLY self-indulgent when I read it...as I comically put it to a friend the other day, "I don't want to know what 'YOU' had for breakfast, I want to know what 'HE' had for breakfast!" lol

jodiodi · Oct 1, 2007

I actually find it harder to write in first person than third because it's easier for me to be omniscient (can't spell worth crap) than to limit the story to what one, personal narrator sees. Even though I write in third person and am attempting for the first time to do it with only one PoV character for the whole book, I just have a very hard time writing from simply 'I'. Therefore, my opinion differs in that I think first person is terribly hard to do well. "Do Well" being the key phrase.

Azraelsbane · Oct 1, 2007

Bruce Baker said:
Sorry. I only meant that "Me" saying what "I" had for breakfast is much easier to recount than "me" describing what "he" had for breakfast. First person is the EASY, LAZY road for a writer, and I find it seldom done well outside of trusted narrators like Mark Twain and Anne Rice. I feel really, REALLY strongly that an otherwise good story can be ruined by first-person narration. It is EASIEST of all to write, and a good way to get a story going if yer stuck, but it feels INCREDIBLY self-indulgent when I read it...as I comically put it to a friend the other day, "I don't want to know what 'YOU' had for breakfast, I want to know what 'HE' had for breakfast!" lol

Whether it's "I" or "he" the characters are mine. They're all me, every last one of them in one aspect or another. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't know enough to write them as 3-dimensional characters. I know what the characters are going to do, all of them, whether I write it in 1st or 3rd pov.

Also, I don't really see that much of a difference between povs. Swapping takes time, but not really much energy or thought. Here's a little example.

1st person-

The third quarter was intense, more so than I would have liked it to be. The Raiders plundered the end zone, but as the clock ran down to the last minute of fourth quarter play, not one field goal had been attempted. I began to doubt if I would ever have a chance to put my plan into action.

3rd person-

The third quarter was intense, more so than he would have liked it to be. The Raiders plundered the end zone, but as the clock ran down to the last minute of fourth quarter play, not one field goal had been attempted. He began to doubt if he would ever have a chance to put his plan into action.

Instant pov change, and there's absolutely nothing more challenging/less self-absorbed about it. Being able to change I to he and my to his does not make one a better or worse author.

Red-Green · Oct 1, 2007

I also happen to be someone who as a reader prefers third person, but it's no more difficult or easy than first person. That said, I do really enjoy third person with a very limited field of view--I'm working on a suspense novel right now that is third person, but the narrator's pov is limited entirely to what my main character knows. It's an interesting exercise. All the same, anything well done is enjoyable. So, while I prefer third person, one of my favorite books is Martin Amis' London Fields. An excellent story with a completely untrustworthy narrator, if you're looking for comparative books.

maestrowork · Oct 1, 2007

Bruce Baker said:
"I don't want to know what 'YOU' had for breakfast, I want to know what 'HE' had for breakfast!" lol

The problem is not who has what for breakfast. The problem is if you say "I don't care if you had breakfast" it means your character doesn't hook the readers. It has nothing to do with whether it's first person or 3rd person. In fact, I'd counter and say that 3rd person is the "lazy" way of writing because you're depending on the plot ("he had breakfast") to carry you, instead of characters. First person depends very much on the narrator -- if your first person narrator fails to engage, then you fail. There's nothing "lazy" about first person. In fact, it's one of the hardest to do well.

And first person isn't necessarily self-indulging. The only time when it's self-indulging is when there's a lot of navel gazing, "woe be me" internal monologue going on instead of external events, actions, and resolutions.

Good first person is wonderful.

Trouble portraying an unreliable narrator

New kid...seven years ago!

A flowering bud of bitchiness

New kid...seven years ago!

A flowering bud of bitchiness

Agony is defeat

A trifle upsetting, isn't he

New kid...seven years ago!

has finally arrived

Agony is defeat

Fear the Death Ray

New kid...seven years ago!

Agony is defeat

Reflections of Reality

New kid...seven years ago!

Agony is defeat

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Reflections of Reality

Agony is defeat

KoalaKoalaKoala!

Fear the Death Ray