A person who reads a lot gets access to various characters and their lives, but how much access does a reader really get? Some points of view, specifically first person and third person limited, are very limited and readers do not understand what is really going on. The purpose of a novel is to be entertained and understand a perspective you never pictured before. In The Silence of the Lambs by Thomas Harris, the reader gets to oversee an investigation in various points of view like serial killers and FBI agents. In Defending Jacob by William Landay, the reader gets a limited point of view by only seeing what the defendant’s father goes through rather than what everyone is else is going through. In a book like The Silence of the Lambs, readers
…show more content…
The novel uses first person, and the reader only sees the thoughts and actions of Andy Barber. While the reader does see the actions of other people, it is only seen in Andy’s point of view. His point of view can be biased because he is the defendant’s father; his son Jacob is on trial. In first person point of view, the reader cannot really rely on the narrator because the narrator’s reliability goes into question when the narrator does some actions that are questionable. In the novel, Andy does some actions that are questionable. Andy discovered information on Jacob’s iPod that incriminated Jacob in the murder of Ben Rifkin and Andy did not know what to do in the situation, so “[He] brought [the iPod] down to the basement and laid it on [his] little worktable, glass slide up, and [he] got a hammer and smashed it” (Landay 212). Andy smashed the iPod to make sure Jacob is not incriminated in the murder. As a reader, they are supposed to get all the facts while the reader is presented with them. Is the reader supposed to rely on a narrator who is biased towards the defendant and does actions that are questionable? A narrator who is biased to a particular side will not give us all the facts when presented to the audience, but rather will give the reader the facts when it is most convenient for them. The narrator is also a former …show more content…
Clarice Starling, a FBI trainee, investigates the Buffalo Bill murders with Dr. Hannibal Lecter & the FBI’s help. The book takes place in third person point of view, where the narrator tells the reader everybody’s thoughts and actions. The narrator gave the reader the killer’s motives, “[Jame’s] unhappy childhood was the reason he killed women in the basement for their skins (Harris 357).” The narrator gave the audience the facts when it was presented to the narrator; the reader is able to see other character’s point of view beside Clarice or Dr. Lecter and get to see other characters like police guards or another agent in the investigation. The reader is getting all these point of views and getting all the facts in the investigation in order to be an informed reader. The outsider point of view is less biased because there is no room to lie and skew facts compared to first person where the narrator gets benefited from the facts and does not care about the reliability of the story being
The novel uses first person, and the reader only sees the thoughts and actions of Andy Barber. While the reader does see the actions of other people, it is only seen in Andy’s point of view. His point of view can be biased because he is the defendant’s father; his son Jacob is on trial. In first person point of view, the reader cannot really rely on the narrator because the narrator’s reliability goes into question when the narrator does some actions that are questionable. In the novel, Andy does some actions that are questionable. Andy discovered information on Jacob’s iPod that incriminated Jacob in the murder of Ben Rifkin and Andy did not know what to do in the situation, so “[He] brought [the iPod] down to the basement and laid it on [his] little worktable, glass slide up, and [he] got a hammer and smashed it” (Landay 212). Andy smashed the iPod to make sure Jacob is not incriminated in the murder. As a reader, they are supposed to get all the facts while the reader is presented with them. Is the reader supposed to rely on a narrator who is biased towards the defendant and does actions that are questionable? A narrator who is biased to a particular side will not give us all the facts when presented to the audience, but rather will give the reader the facts when it is most convenient for them. The narrator is also a former …show more content…
Clarice Starling, a FBI trainee, investigates the Buffalo Bill murders with Dr. Hannibal Lecter & the FBI’s help. The book takes place in third person point of view, where the narrator tells the reader everybody’s thoughts and actions. The narrator gave the reader the killer’s motives, “[Jame’s] unhappy childhood was the reason he killed women in the basement for their skins (Harris 357).” The narrator gave the audience the facts when it was presented to the narrator; the reader is able to see other character’s point of view beside Clarice or Dr. Lecter and get to see other characters like police guards or another agent in the investigation. The reader is getting all these point of views and getting all the facts in the investigation in order to be an informed reader. The outsider point of view is less biased because there is no room to lie and skew facts compared to first person where the narrator gets benefited from the facts and does not care about the reliability of the story being