That book club meeting where we argued for 45 minutes about whether the unreliable narrator ruined the story or made it brilliant

I was in the camp that loved the twisty perspective in 'The Silent Patient' but half the group hated it for exactly that reason, so who's right when the author's whole point is keeping you guessing - should a narrator earn your trust first before they break it?

2 comments

2 Comments

miller.paul3d ago

Huh, I gotta push back on that a little. An unreliable narrator isn't supposed to earn your trust first, that's like saying a magic trick should show you the rabbit before it pulls it out of the hat. The whole point is the ride, the doubt, the feeling of being tricked as you figure things out. If they were upfront and honest, where's the tension or the fun of discovering the truth for yourself? It would just be a normal story with a flat ending. You're not supposed to trust them from page one, you're supposed to question everything they say, and that's what makes it brilliant.

blaker752d ago

Yeah the magic trick analogy is spot on. I've had to explain this to a few writing groups before, and the best way I've found is to tell them to look for small contradictions early on, not big red flags. The narrator should feel mostly believable until you start noticing those little cracks, like remembering a room differently than they saw it or misquoting a conversation. That's when the fun really starts.