#tshask

i can’t really remember any of my organic, original reactions to the secret history because a) i read it in such a hazy blur in the space of like two days and b) it was quite a while ago so so much of my thoughts concerning the secret history have been tainted (in a good way) by other’s opinions and perceptions of the characters. like i’m inclined to think of judy poovey as black because of this edit by @mermaidyke i got attached to, even though she probably isn’t in canon. 

i definitely felt it was rushed, i remember thinking it was such a loose ending to a book that builds such wonderful tension. like everything else in the novel was examined and turned over with such depth and the nature of an epilogue is to provide an overview of events, but that didn’t really lend itself so well to the secret history as i (and others) tend to perceive it.

i almost felt it had the affect of nostalgically looking back on one’s childhood home and it not being all you remembered, although maybe that was the point -- in showing everything that came after as plain and ordinary and so different from the heights of the novel, it was once again illuminating how damn stupid and rather morally reprehensible the actions of the greek class were, rather than casting a romantic glow over it, as richard is wont to do.

listen i am an Asshole, this ask has been in my inbox for 25 days and i have been musing on it, i just wanted to do it justice i guess. anyway, the way you “spot” an unreliable narrator is by noticing discrepancies between how they talk about events that other people talk about differently. unreliable narrators come out of their biases or blind spots.

i find it’s easier to pick them out on a second or third read, because the nature of a narrator, as you say, is to believe them. the second time around, you’re able to process the story as a whole and include the narrator as another facet of the narrative rather than someone you actively engage in. i find the wikipedia page breaks it down well enough, so you might want to check out that! 

personally, i head to google straight after i finish a book or movie, i like to know what other people are thinking and what i might have missed. i’m not inherently great at analysing lit or spotting unreliable narrators, but i work at it, and use the resources at my disposal. anyway, information specifically about richard papen and addy hanlon as unreliable narrators w/ examples from the books under the cut