31
DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 29, 2024, 02:33:32 PM »Yes they do.
"Unreliable narrator" is a specific literary term, a method/technique authors use; it has a specific meaning. Jim Butcher says he's using it, and shows us this in the books.
Being "naive" (inexperienced, ignorant) is very-specifically one well-known form of this "unreliable narrator" method.
I understand, but if you go back and read the different definitions of what an unreliable narrator is, Harry really doesn't fit, at least not consistently. Yes, he makes mistakes, can be inexperienced, and sometimes ignorant, but not consistently. I would like to see in context of what Jim actually said about Harry. Is Harry more reliable in the later books as he and we the readers learn more? Or can anything be believed since 95% of the time it is Harry who is doing the story telling? Harry who is lot more experienced and a lot less ignorant than he was in the early books, is he more reliable now? What I am saying is both can be true at the same time. Too many times the term "unreliable narrator" is the fall back crutch when there is no evidence to prove the poster's point one way or another.
The series is told in first person, this does present problems in the narration of the story. The teller can be wrong as Harry has been from time to time, especially in the early books when he was younger and trying to figure out what was going on. If this was a consistent pattern of his through out the books, would you enjoy reading the story if you believed the story teller was full of BS 90% of the time? Don't think so, and as the series has gone on, Harry alters his views about other characters and events as we do in life..