Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/43851
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Most books written in the first person have a likeable narrator, but it's absolutely not necessary. However, as readers we do have a natural tendency to sympathise with the narrator, and the tension between this sympathy and the moral character of the narrator can be a very effective device.

An interesting example is Nabokov's _Lolita_, which is not only very popular but also highly critically acclaimed. With the exception of the prologue and epilogue, it is (unreliably) narrated throughout by Humbert Humbert, a narcissistic paedophile who describes in great detail his immoral desires and actions. Nabokov does make him very "likeable" on the surface, very charming and eloquent, but it would be difficult to read the book and actually like him. This leaves the reader in the uncomfortable position of rather enjoying the narrator's company but seeing him as the monster he is. (Note: if you've only seen the film, it's quite different from the book, and treats the Humbert character more sympathetically.)

_American Psycho_ by Brett Easton Ellis is also unreliably narrated by a monstrous character, and Timur Vermes's _Look Who's Back_ is actually narrated by Hitler (and was a best-seller in Germany). I'm sure there are many others.

Original score: 12