I think that Ned does exaggerate many details. He portrays himself as the underdog many times, however he usually comes out of the fights he gets into with who he says are bigger and stronger men victorious. This is especially true in the case of his fight against Wild Wright. Ned says he is very nervous as he sees Wild Wright with "legs like adjectival fenceposts [and] his arms like thighs" (185). Though the story of the actual fight is not narrated by Ned himself, it is narrated by Joe Byrne, who is one of the most loyal followers Ned has had. Even if Joe did not exaggerate at all about Ned's boxing prowess, he did not say anything about Wild Wright's bulk and how evenly matched the two were. This comparison comes solely from Ned, whose best interest is to portray himself as the victim in this situation.
This is only one case in which Ned exaggerates to make himself look better. One such example is the letter that Sgt Kennedy gave him as he was dying. I think that Ned did dwell on the letter in order to redeem himself from the murder that he had committed, especially since Kennedy had only been trying to surrender. I think that he does feel guilt, but exaggerates it. The sentence where he says he has nightmares about killing Kennedy was awkwardly inserted in an unrelated passage (255). I think he realized, as he was writing, how little remorse he had shown so far. The sentence about his guilt was almost an afterthought, but was written with the intention to show Ned in the best light possible.
Ned is writing to his daughter, and this influences his writing immensely. His daughter is most likely going to grow up hearing bad things about him. This is most likely going to be the one positive account she will get of her father, and the way this is written reflects that.
I agree with this post by Preethi in that Ned Kelly does exaggerate his narrative in some ways. Like Preethi said, this narrative is written for his daughter. I also agree that this may cause Ned to exaggerate certain parts of his story in order to make him look better. For example, when Mary Hearn and Kate Kelly were confronted by the police regarding Ned’s whereabouts (263-265), I find it hard to believe that the police would treat the two ladies and baby George with such cruelty and disrespect. I think Ned may have exaggerated their encounter with the police in order to possibly justify his actions within the narrative.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read the title of this post, “How reliable is Ned Kelly?” I also began to see a connection between this novel and our previous novel, Wieland. In Wieland, Clara is the only author who is telling the story. She may or may not have been entirely truthful when recounting her narrative or describing how she truly felt about certain events or characters. In True History of the Kelly Gang, Ned is the only narrator for the majority of the book. Like Clara, he may not be entirely truthful as a narrator in order to portray himself in a different way.