(urth) Introduction and Breath

[David Stockhoff]

Absolutely. But I think the "more unreliable than is usual in science 
fiction" standard applies, in which case all the characters you mention 
are indeed unreliable. Often in SF, a character voices exposition, e.g., 
"We have occupied this planet since it was colonized by Terra in the 
First Empire. Our main exports are ..." This is something of a 
benchmark; we can always tell when the bad guy lies.

Villains, of course, say "Ours is a peaceful planet that has never known 
war, etc." Captain Kirk always gets to the bottom of this.

But the Nebraskan is a great example of unreliability, because he 
doesn't lie. Yet, we cannot trust his narration---that's all that 
"unreliable" means. Similarly, when Blood appears at the manteion 
unnamed, the narrator is, by conventional standards, being almost 
dishonest. The fact that he makes the reader guess is important, not the 
clues he offers.

On 4/17/2011 6:31 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> From: "David Stockhoff" <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>
>
>> I think the test here is "more unreliable than is usual in science 
>> fiction." It's a pretty low bar Severian clears with ease, just by 
>> his lies of omission.
>>
>> Gerry's comment that, to Severian, "just a moment ago" is long enough 
>> to compose ~50 written pages by hand is another example, however 
>> limited in effect.
>
> I think the main meaning of this episode is the slightly cruel joke 
> about Nicarete being left to wait on the Autarch's whim once again, 
> after spending her life waiting in the antechamber of previous 
> Autarchs. Severian's absorption in his writing just sets it up.  I 
> wouldn't call it an example of an unreliable narrator, really.  He 
> didn't notice the time passing.  It's not an unnatural thing not to 
> notice; anybody might be unreliable in the same fashion.
>
> For me, the term 'unreliable narator' implies that the author is 
> telling us another, different story disguised behind the overt story 
> the narrator is telling is; either the narrator is lying or he doesn't 
> understand what's going on.  I really don't think that either is the 
> case with Severian.
>
> A narrator who simply makes mistakes or who doesn't know everything 
> isn't unreliable in this strong sense.  Maybe we could define 'weakly 
> unreliable' and 'strongly unreliable' - but I personally feel that the 
> expression 'unreliable narrator' should be reserved for the strong 
> sense.  Probably all Wolfe's characters are unreliable in the weak 
> sense - consider the Nebraskan in 'The Nebraskan and the Nereid' 
> discussed earlier, for example.  We are told what he sees, but he does 
> not realise that he is meeting the same girl in the inn and the 
> sea-cave, so we are not told.  But does that make him unreliable?  It 
> certainly does not make him a liar, anyway.
>
> - Gerry Quinn
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 110417-1, 04/17/2011
> Tested on: 4/17/2011 6:32:27 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
>


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 110417-1, 04/17/2011
Tested on: 4/17/2011 7:39:01 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
http://www.avast.com