![]() ![]() The definite and indisputable shatter of the illusion of reliability happens, as it usually does, the moment the audience is exposed to the evident contradiction between the story and the narrative discourse. This declaration is, however, still part of an intradiegetic dialogue and as such, despite its credibility, it is not enough for the audience to fully ascribe to the idea of Rue’s voice being fallible. Fezco’s speech is emblematic and impactful not only because at that point in the show he has been portrayed as someone who mostly speaks the truth and deeply and honestly cares about Rue, but because, as a drug dealer, he might be the one person who knows better than anyone how addiction affects people's words. ![]() In response to Rue’s apology for how she treated him during a withdrawal crisis, he tells Rue that she shouldn’t worry, mainly because he doesn’t believe anything a drug addict says whether it be positive or negative, and he goes on to explain that an addict’s statements are flimsy, twisted and unreliable, as they are entirely based on the substance dependence. This directly connects to the most obvious and clear assertion that another character, Fezco, makes a few episodes down the line. The first hint of this specific technique is presented, albeit vaguely, in the second episode of the first season, when Lexi Howard, Rue’s childhood friend, accuses Rue of changing the version of reality as she pleases in order to gain the kind of empathy she needs in that moment, in a way that, as Lexi tells her, makes it seem like she has a “split personality disorder”. Furthermore, the alignment between the implied author as the camera and Rue’s voice as the narrator is apparently so definite that it seems acceptable to allow vague technical discrepancies in the artistic visual work.Īnother commonly utilized suggestion of the presence of an unreliable narrator is when other characters are employed as a sounding board as, in their dialogues and remarks, they subtly or overtly suggest the possible inaccuracy or instability of the narrator’s recounting. When this happens, however, the audience’s instinct is mostly to gloss over the declaration, mainly because Rue is the one leading the story and at that starting point the thrill of following the tale is far too intense to focus on any subtle hint of questionable narration. This happens immediately after the camera turns upside down in following Rue’s own drug-induced haze and, in effectively distorting what is known and accepted to be a credible depiction of reality, stands to suggest that the line between an objective eye and Rue’s point of view is, to say the least, dubious and opaque. Rue is, in fact, the very first one to warn the audience that her judgment is skewed, as in the first episode she herself states, plainly and clearly, that she is “not always the most reliable narrator”. ![]() One of the main clues that a narrator is unreliable comes, commonly, from the narrator itself, through an accumulation of remarks relating to the self, such as admitted inconsistencies in reliability, comments on their own cognitive limitations or memory gaps, or plain-clear admissions of their own untrustworthiness. Because of this multifaceted mode of narration, Rue's voice, as the main guiding force of the tale, is perceived to be the crux to fully comprehending the story and is rarely deemed to be fickle, untrustworthy or deceitful. Serving as a mediator between the story and the spectator, she performs discursive acts, narrating past events, reflecting on the nature of humanity or providing a commentary on the character’s actions and motivations. Rue's role as a narrator, similarly to the chorus in ancient Greek plays, is to frame the narrative and explain to the audience all the facets of the tale that are not rendered obvious by the mimetic or dramatic act. ![]() Her monologue quickly becomes an essential part of the narrative conundrum, as it is often a device for the spectator to connect the pieces of the story or a useful extradiegetic description that serves as an insight into the mind or past of the other characters. As the story moves further and Rue recounts events she herself admits she has not directly seen, her apparent omniscience further consolidates the audience's unconscious trust towards her narration. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |