Subject: Severian - unreliable narrator?

From: adrianmarley <adrianmarley at yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:48:58 +0000

I'm currently working my way through Gene Wolfe's _Book of the New
Sun_. I have read quite a bit about this work and know that it is very
highly regarded among sf critics and fans. A lot of what I've read,
though, refers to Severian as being an unreliable narrator.

My question is this: In what way is Severian unreliable? Can anybody
point out specific instances of where is being unreliable or where he
is telling lies?

Cheers,
Adrian.

---

From: vivian <darkbloom at ru.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:02:02 +0000

>point out specific instances of where is being unreliable or where he

Adrian:

The Wolfe on-line discussion list is filled with information like you
request, but is somewhat difficult to search given its massive amount
of posts. Here, at any rate, are two that may help:

http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0028/0427.shtml

http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0307/3619.txt.shtml

viv

---

From: Andrew Wheeler <acwheele at optonline.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 21:52:45 +0000

> point out specific instances of where is being unreliable or where he

I don't have chapter and verse in front of me, but one big red flag is
that Severian both says that he has perfect recall and then (as the
books go on) says that he has "forgotten" some detail or other.

-- 
Andrew Wheeler: Professional Editor, Amateur Wise-Acre
-- 
If you enjoyed this post, try my blog at
http://antickmusings.blogspot.com
If you hated this post, you probably have bad taste anyway.

---

From: seanc <discjonz at yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 22:59:42 +0000

> http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0307/3619.txt.shtml

Thanks to the original poster for asking a question I have also
wondered about, and to viv for providing explicating links.

I'm not entirely convinced that this evidence makes Severian an
unreliable narrator; at the very least, the subtle discrepensies
described in the linked material don't necessarily mean that he got the
more significant portions of his story wrong.

Even supposing that the evidence is sound, there's still the matter of
motive.  My underlying question is, what purpose would it serve for
Severian to prevaricate?

Best,

Sean

---

From: Rich Horton <rrhorton at prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 23:28:48 +0000

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:52:45 -0400, Andrew Wheeler

>books go on) says that he has "forgotten" some detail or other.

That's Roy Lackey's reading -- wherever Severian remarks on his
perfect memory, he is shown to stumble. However, that does not make
him a classical "unreliable" narrator -- that is to say, one who lies
for self-serving (or narrative-serving) reasons -- but simply an
imperfect narrator.

---

From: Michael Grosberg <grosberg.michael at gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:32:08 +0000

> point out specific instances of where is being unreliable or where he

Well, he doesn't lie outright, but from time to time he may hold
information from the reader to maintain suspense.

One specific instance is the one where he is lured into a cave by, as
it turns out, Agia (I don't remember the exact circumstences - it's
been a long time since I read it). As he's going in he already suspects
she is inside, but he doesn't tell the reader.
He also fails to inform the readers about his motives for not telling
dorcas he knows about her past.