How do you handle an unreliable narrator?

[DokiDokiTsuna]

Not necessarily how you read one (although there's no reason you can't mention that) but how do you write one in a way that makes sure the readers get that they have only a limited (and often biased) perspective?

I'm currently writing a story told from the point of view of someone who's not particularly nice...they aren't mean, but they have a tendency to think of everyone besides themselves as an enemy, and to exaggerate their faults. I really hope all their insults and 'vitriol' () get the message across that they tend to misinterpret things, because I can't really afford to have them think about everything from all sides all the time: not only is it disruptive to the story flow, it's not really realistic.

[LCT_m_a_d]

This is probably why I prefered Tom Sawyers adventure over Huckleberry Fin's

[skicoak]

You have them narrate, from a point of view, that the actual story doesn't support.

Depending on how early you want the audience to know the narrator has bias/misinformation, you set up the primary conflict between reader's and narrator's perception.

[DiegoPalacios]

To show a bias in a narration, you have to show that they are a character telling their own version.

It could be by them explaining what happened to a friend/family member/ a police officer/judge/anyone that may need an explanation. the listener can even question some of these statements to show how biased the story it is.

Emphasis on the exaggerations and contradictions can be helpful

ex: so then, i borrowed his sword.......without his permission.......and without a deadline to give it back.

[dawgofdawgness]

You just have to constantly remind the audience that the narrator's opinion isn't always accurate by showing that their truth sometimes contradicts with the book's reality.

Ex.if you ever read catcher in the rye, you'll realize that there are some instances where Holden's observations are obviously super exaggerated and/or questionable.

You definitely shouldn't use the unreliable narrator trope as an excuse for inconsistent writing, though. "This plot point never happened because the MC just made it up! " Don't do it...

Also, there should be a purpose for making your narrator untrustworthy. Usually the trope is used to write an extremely opinionated /bias character so as to add to the story.

[BobbyjoeX]

i know this is about writing but imma throw in my two cents... or a nickel since canada nolonger has pennies

.... the History Channel's common Narrator infuriates me

[skicoak]

.... the History Channel's common Narrator

The who?!?

I obviously don't watch enough History Channel.

[BobbyjoeX]

theres a guy that narrates almost every history channel show, and hes a broken fucking record....

[skicoak]

and hes a broken fucking record....

Broken like in he repeats himself?

Because that sounds perfect... those who do not learn from the History Channel, are doomed to....

[Croik]

I read a novel years ago called The Somnambulist whose narrator was extreeeeemly unreliable. The protagonist was a Sherlock Holmes type and the prose was really sarcastic about him, always digging into his faults. I thought the author had it in for the archetype and was just trying to dismantle it, but....

spoilers

It turned out the story was being narrated by his Moriarty all along, and the final act shifted to their first person present tense point of view.

Which was really interesting, though not well handled, because the plot by then was dissolving into chaos and nonsense. Everything in that book was "really cool idea, bad execution." But I still remember the twist fondly, because suddenly it made sense why the protagonist was so pathetic, hahaha.

That's the unreliable narrator I like - ones where you can trust that the events are actually happening, but the perspective on them is slightly different. When a narrator is SO unreliable that you're not sure WHAT happened, or have to ask ~is this character even real~ I lose interest. Ambiguity in a story is great but there are times when the creator pushes so far that it shatters their trust with the audience, and it starts to feel like cheating (aka Heavy Rain, even though I personally didn't have a problem with that one because I liked the character so much).

So I guess as far as advice goes, I would say, above all else, don't LIE to your reader. Everything else is fair game. And remember that you chose your protagonist and their specific point of view for a reason. Things outside their POV, even if objectively true, might not matter to the story as much as you think it might, so don't feel the need to reexamine their POV unless that too is part of the story.

[penguininvasion]

Be honest to your readers about how your character behaves, even from their perspective. Harry Potter is a great example of this. In "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," the reader only has Harry's perspective to go on. We're fed information about Professor Snape that leads Harry, and us, to believe he's a terrible person trying to get the stone for himself. It's much later that we understand that, no, Snape was trying to help but Harry was too biased to believe anything different. The information given to the character--and reader by extension--should be based on a truth, which the character twists. That's my take on it, at least.

[nostalgicroxas]

I'd recommend the book "As I Lay Dying" since it has over 5 characters narrating each chapter from their own perspective, leaving the reader to sort of put them together themselves of what's happening in reality and why. One of the most interesting chapters is one near the middle where it's narrated by a young child.
Importantly it's all first person, with no omnipresence.