One particular moment within the text that grabbed my attention and made me even frustrated with the novel was on page 338. The moment Mr. Fairlie’s narration begins he takes it upon himself to declare, “I will endeavor to remember what I can (under protest), and to write what I can (also under protest); and what I cant remember and cant write, Louis must remember, and write for me. He is an ass, and I am an invalid: and we are likely to make all sorts of mistakes” (336). Here Mr. Fairlie states that he as a narrator cannot be trusted. The fact that Mr. Fairlie is openly claiming within the beginning of his narration that he cannot attest to the absolute truth within his writing forces us to read this section of the novel with great scrutiny, as we readers simply cannot fully trust what is being said about the events in any way. How are we to know what is being withheld and what is correct? The declaration of this that Mr. Fairlie openly states about himself not only forces the reader to question his validity, but it also forces the reader to wonder why Marian, a strong and intuitive woman, is able to trust Mr. Fairlie to help out Laura amidst her engagement troubles. If Mr. Fairlie cannot be trusted as a narrator, how can he be trusted as an advocate for Laura? Not only does Mr. Fairlie force the reader to question his trustworthiness and accountability throughout the story, but Laura also shows moments when she does not seem to be ‘remembering’ the full truth, as seen within her conversation with Marian after she speaks with the woman in white down by the boat house. The fact that the narrators at times show signs of forgetting or openly claiming that they may not be writing the full truth is very problematic, because it forces the reader to question the authenticity of all that is said and happening.
2 thoughts on “Trusting the narrator”
Comments are closed.
I was also tremendously frustrated by the opening to Mr. Fairlie’s section of narration; he, clearly, has the most dire case of hysteria to ever exist despite the fact that he is a male character. I think he has the most feminine qualities of any character in the book and that is demonstrated in this passage. This section also ties in with Marian’s memory and the constant reflections back on how important it is that her memory is as strong as it is. I too find this section suspect; how can we trust anything written in his section? It makes me wonder how many of the sections are actually true accounts of the events, particularly at the end of Marian’s section with the end notes added by Fosco; are these accounts correct? It’s an interesting way to consider the way the novel is presented. In a side note, I also kind of want to punch him for being so unreasonably cruel to his servants!
I also found this claim by Mr. Fairlie to be very frustrating. I was very intrigued by the fact that Wilkie Collins decided to include this in the chapter. It is always interesting to see how narrations from various perspectives play out. In my other English class we recently finished Northanger Abbey, where the narrator was unknown, but very influential. Depending on a narrators voice and tone, the reader often times alters his or her views in accordance. I found Mr. Fairlie an interesting choice.