The narrator of “Madagascar Plum” is a former officer of the Sai Gon army, who suffers from PSTD. He recounts a story of a little girl at his company took to help the cook. It is discovered that she is sneaking off in the middle of the night, and each night she takes with her some food. The Officer describes what occurred from this scenario.
I believe that the narrator is a reliable one because he is willing to talk about this action, and admit to what he did. He reveals that he is an alcoholic, which is something most people will not admit to, which I think also gives him some credibility. He is able to admit that he decided to kill this child, for what turned out to be almost no reason. If he were lying why would he say that he was the one who killed her. Most would try to prove their innocence for this crime. The officer does not try to hide anything about this story, and it all comes out, and he gives reasons as well as explanations for the actions that he and his company took.
Because I believe that the narrator is a reliable one, it is much easier for the readers to take his word for the truth, and not have to think twice about what he says. While some details may or may not be flawed, by believing that the narrator is reliable, we can take the story as presented to us, and form the story, without much biased, for the simplest and possibly the most authentic story as a whole.
The narrator of “Madagascar Plum” is a former officer of the Sai Gon army, who suffers from PSTD. He recounts a story of a little girl at his company took to help the cook. It is discovered that she is sneaking off in the middle of the night, and each night she takes with her some food. The Officer describes what occurred from this scenario.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the narrator is a reliable one because he is willing to talk about this action, and admit to what he did. He reveals that he is an alcoholic, which is something most people will not admit to, which I think also gives him some amount of credibility. He is able to admit that he decided to kill this child, for what turned out to be almost no reason. If he were lying why would he say that he was the one who killed her? Most would try to prove their innocence from this crime. The officer does not try to hide anything about this story, and it all comes out, and he gives reasons as well as explanations for the actions that he and his company took. It is revealed that this man was under the influence of alcohol during this scene, and this may have clouded his judgment, or even how he remembers the story taking place. While certain details may have been changed, added, or erased, I think that as a whole, the readers can believe this story and can believe in the truth of the narrator.
Because I believe that the narrator is a reliable one, it is much easier for the readers to take his word for the truth, and not have to think twice about what he say. While some details may or may not be flawed, by believing that the narrator is reliable, we can take the story as presented to us, and form the story, without much biased, for the simplest and possibly the most authentic story as a whole.