The Too Unreliable Narrator (was: What really happened on the tower)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 155744


> 
> Neri:
> I agree with Eggplant that the unreliable narrator card was
> overplayed. Originally this argument was that the narrator describes
> things from Harry's PoV, and therefore it can represent Harry's
> personal interpretation rather than objective realty. Fair enough. But
> now people claim that the narrator sneakily avoids describing facts
> that Harry *must* notice and has no personal reason to avoid
> describing, like if it was he who hexed Fenrir. This is a completely
> different thing. Surely nobody here claims that Harry doesn't know if
> he shouted "petrificus totalus" or not, or that it's a question of PoV?
<snip>
 But I pointed out that until now JKR had never used a
> non-description to spring a surprise on Harry and us, and for a good
> reason, I believe.

Pippin:
Not true, I'm afraid. The narrator leaves Harry's point of view and follows
Hermione as she bumps into Quirrell and attacks Snape, precisely so as
to avoid telling us what Harry must know: when his broom stopped 
bucking.

Of course like any  trick this kind of deception cannot be
used too often or the readers will be annoyed rather than 
surprised. But if JKR wants  to trick and not con us, she 
has to let  us catch her narrator being sneaky now and then,
just as she has to let each of her disguised villains tell an
obvious lie.

Pippin