"I never lie," he lied.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

I was reading a discussion of The Thief, and one of the people said that what was cool about the book was that Gen treats us, the readers, like he does everyone in the story, and lies to us all (probably with a smirk, they said).

Although he leaves out a whole lot, I can't think of any times Gen actually tells any lies in his narration to the reader. We talked recently about whether it's possible to guess the surprise ending from the clues that are given and some people thought it is possible.

Did anyone guess the ending, or even know Gen was hiding something? Do you all think Gen lies to the reader? Any examples?

Comments

[willow-41z.livejournal.com]

Can you count lying by omission? Because there is the minor fact that he forgot to tell us he was the Thief of Eddis, and Hamiathes' Gift wasn't lost...

I read it after I read QoA, so my answers are going to be skewed. And my sister has my copy of all three books. But I think I was sort of expecting a surprise twist.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Because there is the minor fact that he forgot to tell us he was the Thief of Eddis, and Hamiathes' Gift wasn't lost...

Heh. Yeah.

Now that I think about it, one of the people I forced to read the book figured out that Gen had Hamiathes' Gift after he sat in the tree rebraiding his hair. But not the Thief of Eddis part. I read QoA first, too, so I already knew his secrets.

[dannybailey.livejournal.com]

Being the most clueless reader in the world, I didn't catch on to anything and was completely suprised at the revalations at the end of The Thief.

My Dad, on the other hand, had worked out the ending before the traveler's had even got to Attolia. I asked him what he predicted he would happen and he said something along the lines of "I think that thief kid is probably going to end up being from that country in the mountains." Go figure.

Looking back, I see a lot of clues about Gen being Eddisian. Like, for example, the way he stuck up for the Eddisian people when they talked about pronunciation of the country, and the way he knew so much about Eddis. Also, the Magus basically flat out says "So your part Eddisian, Gen? Ya know, there's a thief in Eddis who's about your age and has the same name as you. Small world, huh?" I think as readers it couldn't get much more obvious without being flat out told to us.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

My Dad, on the other hand, had worked out the ending before the traveler's had even got to Attolia.

Go, Dad! That is awesome. Did he read the other two books, too?

[emmaco.livejournal.com]

I think I had been alerted by some online discussion that there was a twist, but didn't pick up that Gen had the Gift or that he was the thief. I think gobble books up too quickly to be a good mystery reader. However, I just remembered that I originally thought Gen might be female - it was a twist I had recently encountered in another story and there isn't anything at the start of the book to confirm gender.

I'm pretty sure my partner guessed that Gen had the Gift after the hair re-tying, and that people off the Diana Wynne Jones mailing list guessed the whole kit and caboodle. So I don't think there were lies, just very subtle clues.

[anon8.livejournal.com]

It's much easier to see the clues on a rereading, but a very, very careful reader who is expecting something might pick up on things the first time.

Sprinkled in are hints that he is not who the Magus (and therefore we)thinks he is: like during the initial interview with the Magus where the Magus tells Gen he doesn't pretend well, and Gen's thought was that he (Gen) almost said something he shouldn't have. Gen also mentioned he had to hide his smile when the Magus tells him to keep his mouth shut about working for the king upon leaving the city--as if things are going Gen's way, or according to some plan, instead of him being dragged into something he doesn't want. Then there was his anger and repressed words after the riding crop incident, and how he thanks Pol "in his own words." As mentioned earlier, the saving an extra hairtie and rebraiding his hair after the Attolian ambush. But unless you're looking out for hidden clues, it's so much easier to dismiss these as random little passing thoughts than as slipups and revelations, so perhaps it's not the words that are lies, but the overall harmless impression Gen gives the reader and his companions that his remarks are something that it is okay to dismiss; it leads all to underestimate him. In the end, I felt it was more of a, "wow, that's so cool he could tell so much and we still didn't get it; let's go reread" rather that a "ugh, he tricked us" reaction. A little like how the Magus is rueful and put in his place at the end, rather than angry. Perhaps in being in a similar boat with him, we are more sympathetic toward the Magus's actions and motives than we were at the beginning?

Though I guess I do agree that omission is still a lie, being potentially as misleading as a blatent lie, though it's much easier to forgive the former and laugh if the joke is on oneself.

Sorry for the long post, felt the need to blab a lot after the hiatus.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Yay! anon8's back.

A little like how the Magus is rueful and put in his place at the end, rather than angry. Perhaps in being in a similar boat with him, we are more sympathetic toward the Magus's actions and motives than we were at the beginning?

His rueful reaction at the end, along with his apology to Gen and actions towards Gen when he was injured, made me like him very much by the end of the book. Quite a turnaround, considering what he was like at the beginning.

I felt "tricked" to some degree, but not unfairly so, especially after rereading and finding so many clues throughout.

[fabricalchemist.livejournal.com]

more of a, "wow, that's so cool he could tell so much and we still didn't get it; let's go reread" rather that a "ugh, he tricked us"

Exactly!! People usually see what they want to see, so if you're expecting him to be 'gutter scum', you aren't going to be looking for hints that he's really the Queen's Thief...but they're still there, all the same :)

[fabricalchemist.livejournal.com]

Honestly, it took me an embarasingly long time to get the ending. It was like, "Wait, this book is smart?!"

But in all fairness, the best thing about writing in first person is that you can play tricks like that; the readers are entirely dependent upon the voice of the story. 'The Turn of the Screw' is one very good example of this...you think you know what's going on, and by the end, you have NO IDEA if the voice is crazy, or the events occurring are simply that fantastic. The story never says.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Oh, I remember reading that and thinking, "what's going on??!". Another example is The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie. I always felt that book cheated and was unfair in its omissions.

And weren't you awfully young when you read Thief? Maybe a reason for the time to get the ending.

[fabricalchemist.livejournal.com]

I didn't really feel tricked with Turn of the Screw or The Thief (haven't read Christie); you kind of start to realize that you must be getting skewed information--or not. I think I like the first person not only because it makes the story more intimate (like a friend telling you the story) but also because the story can be flawed (like a friend exaggerating said story to make it more interesting, and therefore you filter the story based on your knowledge of said friend). That authors exploit this really makes you have to think and re-assess your reading. I think it bothers people because there isn't a second party to go to to confirm or deny the friend's questionable telling of the story :)

Which reminds me. 'Interview with the Vampire' is an excellent example. The sequel to it, 'The Vampire Lestat' is written in first person as well, but from the antagonist's POV...so, in a way, you get a better idea of what really happened, and it changes how you felt about the first book. Or it did for me, anyway.

[sandtree.livejournal.com]

It was like, "Wait, this book is smart?!"

That was exactly my reaction. But personally, I love being tricked by books, as long as when you think about it afterwards, you can see the clues. Some books have these twist endings that just come out of nowhere, and THAT'S annoying if there are NO clues leading up to it. But when there ARE clues, and I just don't get them, it's awesome. :D

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

anon8 mentioned this:

during the initial interview with the Magus where the Magus tells Gen he doesn't pretend well, and Gen's thought was that he (Gen) almost said something he shouldn't have.

I hadn't really noticed that.

And, OMG!, I just noticed this:

When Sounis dumps the chest of money out while in the Magus' office, Gen says:

"My uncle used to keep that much under his bed and count it every night."

Wasn't his uncle EDDIS??? So it could be true?

[anon8.livejournal.com]

Haha, it could totally be true. Or one of his other uncles, sons of the late king, since he portrays his uncles as obnoxious. I suppose it was his way of saying he wasn't fazed by so much gold, since he couldn't say to Sounis, "Sure I've seen that much: I was napping in your treasure room last time." heehee

Very nice catch Checkers :)