I don't know what you guys put as your answer to the first question on the quiz on Wednesday, but as soon as I read it I instantly related both "Wieland" and "The True History of the Kelly Gang" as influences to my perception of "Gould's Book of Fish." In similar way and dissimilar ways, I saw my opinion of narration for our current novel, be shaped by my reading of the past novels. The obvious similarity between "Gould's B.o.F" and "The True H.o.t.K.G" lies in the language the narrators use. Both Gould and Kelly use improper English and bad grammar to narrate their story, so we have gotten used to reading a bit more carefully when trying to fully understand the unclear narrations. However, thought this part of the narration is clearly similar between the two, I think that Clara's narration throughout "Wieland" can be used to observe the narration at a depth greater than comparing it to Ned Kelly. When considering Clara as a narrator, we had to always keep in mind that she was the sole narrator; therefore, she can not always be trusted especially in biased situations. I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel as if we have to keep our guard up as we progress in the novel. To begin with, Gould is an unreliable source because of his criminal activity; however, it seems as if this is almost a journal writing (like Kelly's) and he is being honest in this accusations and ideas. I guess we will be seeing during the next couple of chapters........
For the quiz this past Wednesday, I also thought of both Wieland and True History of the Kelly Gang as “preparation” for reading and understanding Gould’s Book of Fish. However, I disagree with Kristel in that Gould uses bad grammar in his narration. Compared to narrator Ned Kelly, Gould’s grammar is not as horrible as the grammar visible in True History of the Kelly Gang. I had more difficulty understanding Ned Kelly than William B. Gould. Even though Gould narrates with longer sentences that appear to “run-on,” I can better understand the information he is trying to convey. I also agree that we cannot fully trust Gould as a narrator in the novel, and that first person narrators Clara (from Wieland) and Ned Kelly have prepared our class as readers for Gould’s narration. I view Ned Kelly as more of an unreliable narrator and that his story more closely relates to Gould since both men were convicts. However, we still do not have concrete evidence that Gould is lying or manipulating parts of his narrative. As readers, we must try to uncover the reasoning behind Gould’s narration and search for any information that would prove Gould to be “untrustworthy.”
ReplyDelete