The Ackroyd book, wasn't it?
It was.
I haven't read Bayard's take on that.
He does a similar thing. Murderer as named in the story is not actual murderer, etc. I thought it was fun, even if it was hard to take seriously.
He loses me when he start talking about independent action from characters and deep animosity on the part of the author, but his theory otherwise is sound.
I had trouble with the whole "author does not know what his characters are really doing" type of thing. Bit odd. But interesting all the same.
Well, it makes sense if you see it in the context of reader reception theory like Iser, ie that there are gaps in every text which the reader has to fill in, and the author cannot control that. But not in the "they are actual people with intentions and plans" kind of way, which I felt is how he portrayed it.
*MySmiley*
structured procrastinator
structured procrastinator
Unreliable narrators: yay or nay? Or neigh? And if so, and you are a horse, how are you typing?
- 12/03/2010 05:20:09 AM
777 Views
Re: Unreliable narrators: yay or nay? Or neigh? And if so, and you are a horse, how are you typing?
- 12/03/2010 09:12:23 AM
595 Views
I enjoyed reading the Bayard.
- 12/03/2010 11:55:09 PM
532 Views
Re: I enjoyed reading the Bayard.
- 14/03/2010 10:56:54 AM
595 Views
Re: I enjoyed reading the Bayard.
- 16/03/2010 10:37:35 PM
566 Views
I think it's fairly logical that genre fiction doesn't employ it as often.
- 12/03/2010 01:21:06 PM
751 Views
I think that unreliable narrators tend to be written by more experienced or skillful authors.
- 12/03/2010 06:56:06 PM
536 Views