[ SECRET POST #2485 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2485 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Sleepy Hollow]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Twilight]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Lana Del Rey / Marina and the Diamonds]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Long Way Round, Long Way Down]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Star Trek: The Next Generation]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Pacific Rim]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Game of Thrones]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Captain Marvel]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 034 secrets from Secret Submission Post #355.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: What do you consider counts as an unreliable narrator?

[intrigueing]

I'd say all narrators should be somewhat unreliable to be believable. A narrator that is so unreliable to be actually described as unreliable, I think, only counts if the narrator's unreliability is a key part of what makes the story work. For example, Lolita just wouldn't be Lolita if Humbert Humbert was reliable -- it'd be a totally different story. Not so with The Great Gatsby -- Nick's biases add to the story because they make it feel like he's a real person observing another real person, but don't drastically alter it.

Or, say, contrast the narrator of the Tell-Tale Heart with the narrator of The Black Cat. The Black Cat's narrator is not 100% reliable, but he's self-aware and flat-out says that he was acting irrational, and tells the reader certain things might have just been his imagination, not claiming that his actions were logical or that the gallows-shaped patch was real, and his unreliability as a narrator is not central to the story, it's just enough to make it believable that a guy who did that stuff is telling this story. Whereas one of main points of The Tell-Tale Heart is that the narrator is batshit insane and is convinced, and continually trying to convince the reader, that he's not.

Of course, there are some narrators who fall in the middle or whose reliability can be interpreted very differently by different people. Like, everyone disagrees about how much information Watson was exaggerating or twisting or hiding in his stories.