Unreliably Odd or Oddly Unreliably?

by Regina C.

Writing in first person means you are writing from the point of view of one person, "I" walked down the street, and "I" tripped on an ice patch and fell down. When writing in first person  only one character's point of view is perceived to the reader. The thoughts of the character are heard, but not of any of the other characters.  The story unfolds as the character shares details about characters and events that take place in the story. Only what the character knows is known. Though we may know things about other characters in the story, our knowledge is limited because only what the character shares with the reader is known.

Often as a reader you also have to take into account the character's trustworthiness. Are they sharing all the information with you? Are they giving you the correct information or are they hiding things and lying to you? As a reader what the narrator tells us can't be trusted completely, you have to decide if the character is reliable or not. Can you trust the information that is given to us the narrator? Is he/she telling us the truth? Are we getting all the information or is some being held back? This information must be decided by you as the story unfolds and you get to know the person's character.

First person narration can be used in a variety of genres, but the most common use of first person narrative is in detective stories. The most famous example of which is Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. It is most commonly used in mystery novels because information is revealed to the reader as it is revealed to the character. The puzzle unfolds for you throughout the course of the novel as the character discovers clues and uncovers plot.

Another common use of first person narratives is in autobiographical books or memoirs. A memoir or autobiography is an account of a real person's life. It is told from the point of view of the person and therefore is often told in first person. The author tells you about events that happened in their life as it happened to them and the thoughts and feelings they had about that event. As a person when life happens to you, you only know what you are thinking as events are happening, which makes sense for memoirs and autobiographies. Often at the end there will be a period of reflection where the author looks back and an event and draws some conclusion from what happened.

Dean Koontz's Odd Hours is narrated in first person like a detective story. You discover with Odd, the protagonist of the story, a plot to bring nuclear bombs onto US soil, and the plan to drop them on large cities. As Odd interrogates different people involved in the plot you learn more and more about the plan to decimate the US. Because you have access to Odd's thoughts you can see the conclusion he draws from all the information he receives and the plan he makes to try and foil the plot, but you don't what the bad guys are thinking. Are they going to try to change their plan because they know about Odd figuring out their plan? Are they going to have more guns and ammo to stop Odd from foiling their plan? "They might have decided that they dared not return to the harbor with the bombs. If they executed a contingency plan to bring the nukes ashore elsewhere along the coast, I had no chance of stopping the operation…" (Koontz 230) Odd doesn't know this information so we don't know this information, you just have to watch what unfolds.

Not only is Odd Hours by Dean Koontz a detective story it is also a memoir. Throughout the course of the story while Odd is trying to foil the plan to bomb the United States, he reflects upon the actions he took and the decisions he made. When he was going to storm the boat that held the nukes he had no plan, he was just going to go for it. "...I have found that my seat-of-the-pants approach works well.." (Koontz 233)  "By doing, I learn what to do. By going, I learn where to go. One day, by dying, I'll learn how to die…" (Koontz 233) He reflects on how having no plan usually works out for him, and making it up as he goes along is the most  effective way for him to get things done.

The most important question that should be considered though is should you trust Odd? Is he telling you everything pertinent for the development of the story? Does that fact that he is trying to save the country make him a trustworthy character? Or does the fact that he killed multiple people throughout the course of the novel take away from his noble cause? That's for you to decide.