Something that I've been thinking about a lot is how trustworthy of a narrator Gunnar Kaufman is. The main reason I've been asking myself this question is that the narrative voice is Gunnar from the present when he is the messiah and renowned poet. This means that he isn't telling his story as it happens but what he remembers it as. As such it is vulnerable to him altering memories of the past of even interpreting his experience differently than he did at the time. We had a similar discussion about the Narrator in Invisible Man and how we weren't sure whether we could trust him for similar reasons.
The other reason I have trouble trusting the narrator is it seems like he is embellishing the story to at least some degree. Take for example the scene when he is recounting how he told his story of his entire family tree when he was in elementary school. For one, I find it hard to believe he can remember what happened in elementary school clearly, because I, for one, know that I can hardly remember anything from them. But putting that aside it is still strange. For one he is surprisingly eloquent for his age. I'm pretty sure there was no one at my elementary school who could speak that well and I'm pretty sure I couldn't even now. The other thing about that story is when Gunnar is telling it he uses words most elementary schoolers would use. Just a few examples are quintessential, daguerreotype, and honeysuckle. One other example of something that seems embellished is his introduction to the sport of basketball. However, at the same time, Gunnar in the present has sold 126 million copies of a book of poetry so maybe his childhood isn't as embellished as it seems.
I really like this post and hadn't considered your very valid point above!! I agree that a lot of his story is embellished but then again, for someone who has sold 126 million copies of a book, he must be pretty special. I think this is relates to what we were talking about, how the setting is like an alternate America where there are just a few things that are off.
ReplyDeleteI think he definitely does embellish the story however, I don't think its inaccurate. Many of his embellishments could easily just be exaggerations about the actual events that are supposed to help him prove a point or make a joke. The way the story is told could definitely be inaccurate but it could also very easily just be Gunnar exerting his artistic license. Additionally given the way the book is changing at the moment, I would definitely say that at the very least lots of it is accurate if not all of it.
ReplyDeleteNow that I think about it, his basketball career does seem suspiciously unrealistic. For example, Scoby's power to never miss a basket borders on the realm of fantasy. Perhaps he really does remember thing differently.
ReplyDelete