Time for a rant. Buckle in.
Here’s a wild thought: when a book is written in first person, it is being told by the character, not the author. I know—groundbreaking stuff. And yet somehow, readers still confuse the two. Let’s set the record straight:
If a character in a novel has a bad take, a skewed memory, or a limited perspective, that’s not the author messing up. That’s literally the point of first-person storytelling.
“But That’s Inaccurate!” — Not Always
Let’s talk about The Song of Achilles for a second. Some folks love to shout, “It’s not historically accurate! Achilles would never agree to Patroclus giving away his armor!”
Okay. Deep breath.
Let’s look at this like sane people. The entire book is told through Patroclus’s eyes. Patroclus, who is in love with Achilles. Who idolizes him. Who romanticizes every move, every breath. Do you really think he’s going to present Achilles as anything but brave, golden, generous, and godlike?
Of course Achilles’s flaws are softened. Of course he’s shown as tender, noble, tragic. It’s called narrative bias. Patroclus isn’t giving us a lecture on history—he’s telling his story. He’s not trying to give us a biography of Achilles. He’s trying to survive, to make sense of his world, to hold onto the person he loves in a time of war and blood and fear.
And guess what? That’s good writing.
First-Person Narrators Are Not Objective
A first-person narrator is not reliable. They’re subjective. They lie. They remember things wrong. They justify their mistakes. They highlight what matters to them. That’s the point.
If a first-person character says something problematic, narrow-minded, or just plain wrong, it doesn't mean the author endorses it. It means the character is human.
This isn’t just about The Song of Achilles. This is about every novel where readers mix up character and creator. When a narrator is selfish or insecure or naïve or full of misplaced pride—good. That’s what makes them believable.
You think Patroclus is going to portray himself as cold? Selfish? Petty? No! In his eyes, he’s just a guy trying to make it out alive in a world that sees him as useless. He’s soft, scared, and in love. Of course his lens is skewed.
Don’t Expect Omniscience from Mortals
Not every story is supposed to give you an omniscient god’s-eye view of the truth. First-person is intimate, flawed, emotionally charged. You’re supposed to question the narrator. You’re supposed to notice what’s missing. You’re supposed to read between the lines.
That’s the beauty of it.
Final Word: Let Characters Be Biased
Stop calling books inaccurate when what you really mean is the character has a personal perspective. That’s not an error. That’s literature. If the narrator loves someone, they’ll paint them in light. If they hate someone, it’ll be all shadow. That’s how real memory works too.
So next time you catch yourself blaming the author for what a narrator thinks, says, or does—pause. Ask yourself: is this really the writer speaking?
Or is it just a flawed, messy human being, doing their best to survive on the page?
Spoiler: it’s the latter.
Craving more rants, insights, and literary truths? Follow Literary Lens—where we defend characters' right to be messy and writers' right to write them.
Comments
Post a Comment