Post History
Yes. If it's done well (which is going to be harder than it looks), it can work. A narrator with opinions isn't so uncommon (The Book Thief is a good example) but characters that talk back, well ...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2019-12-20T00:40:35Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41474 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T10:38:53Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41474 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
Yes. If it's done well (which is going to be harder than it looks), it can work. A narrator with opinions isn't so uncommon (_[The Book Thief](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19063.The_Book_Thief)_ is a good example) but characters that talk back, well that's quite rare. **I would pair it with an irreverent style** , as Vonnegut does, meaning characters (or a world) that don't take things all that seriously. Because this will include the rule that narrators and characters do not interact. If you violate other conventions (even ones that can be done in real life), ignoring the character/narrator wall won't turn off or confuse your reader. **I would also add in a layer (or 3) of absurdity.** This can also be quite realistic (both in tone and because it has or could happen). An example is [The Trial](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17690.The_Trial). To the reader, the absurdity of a character talking back to a narrator would fit in with a world where everyday life is absurd.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2019-01-21T18:25:16Z (almost 6 years ago)
Original score: 6