Saleem as unreliable narrator: what can this teach us about stories and history?

he himself notes
that his memory is unreliable and that "no sane human being ever trusts someone else's version
more than his own" (253). is he saying that no one should really trust his version of the past as
the real truth? it is just his own truth. Can the reader take his unreliable narrator-ness as a
commentary on history? History, as we are so often taught, is told by the victors; history is
written according to bias and perspective of the author(s). The American version of the
American Revolution probably sounds different than the British version. Although history tries
to be the truth, the truth is subjective. My truth is different than yours. Our truths may not line
up with actuality, with the reality of what really happened. Saleems errors and falsifications
show the reader that they must be careful when choosing who to believe; history changes. His
India is different than the readers India. It is up to the reader to determine which one to believe,
and even then, is either one real? Be cautious with history and stories and dont accept another
persons versions of events as the real truth.
And S. P. Butt said, If they can change the time just like that, whats real any more? I ask you?
Whats true? (90) time can be changed, stories can be changed, history can be changed. How
can we judge what is the truth? How can we judge what is real? Does everyone have their own
version of truth, which may not coincide with reality? (see quote 2)
Whats real and whats true arent necessarily the same. True, for me, was from my earliest
days something hidden inside the stories Mary Pereira told meNow, writing this in my
Anglepoised pool of light, I measure truth against those early things: Is this how Mary would
have told it? (90) stories change depending on who is telling them; everyone has their own
version of events. can the same be said for history? (see below)
I was already beginning to take my place at the centre of the universe; and by the time I had
finished, I would give meaning to it all. You dont believe me? Listen (148) spending time
trying to convince the reader that he should be believed
Re-reading my work, I have discovered an error in chronology. The assassination of Mahatma
Gandhi occurs, in these pages, on the wrong date. But I cannot say, now, what the actual
sequence of events might have been; in my India, Gandhi will continue to die at the wrong time.
(198) the first big error that is factual enough to be a cause for concern; if you cant even get a
recorded date of death correct, how can we trust your memory with the events that happened in
your personal life that arent recorded so clearly? And of course in YOUR India. History
changes per person
Does one error invalidate the entire fabric? Am I so far gone, in my desperate need for meaning,
that Im prepared to distort everything --- to re-write the whole history of my times purely in
order to place myself in a central role? Today, in my confusion, I cant judge. Ill have to leave it
to others. (198) admitting that you might be adjusting history and changing history to suit
your own needs
history, in my version (233) history changes depending on who is telling it
Memorys truthit creates its own reality, its heterogeneous but usually coherent version of
events; and no sane human being ever trusts someone elses version more than his own. (253)
are you accusing the reader of being insane for trusting your version, if they do so? Or are you
warning them to not trust your account because it is not their account?
Its a dangerous business to try and impose ones view of things on others. (254) hmm but you
are doing exactly that, are you not? Imposing your view of history on the readers?
And then it occurs to me that I have made another errorthat the election of 1957 took place
before, not after, my tenth birthday; but although I have racked my brains, my memory refuses,
stubbornly, to alter the sequence of events. This is worrying. I dont know whats gone wrong.
(265) you are making errors; how can we trust anything you are saying if you cant even get
more factual information correct (ie years of elections?)
Cutting up history to suit my nefarious purposes, I seized on WHY INDIRA GHANDI IS CONGRESS
PRESIDENT NOW (311) cutting up history seems to be a pretty pervasive habit
I glued my completed notemy first attempt at rearranging historyon to a sheet of paper
(312) and now here you are again potentially attempting to rearrange history
There are as many versions of India as Indians; and, when set beside Cyruss India, my own
version seems almost mundane. (323) the stories all depend on who is telling them
I am rushing ahead at breakneck speed; errors are possible, and overstatements, and jarring
alterations in toneI remain conscious that errors have already been made, and that, as my
decay acceleratesthe risk of unreliability grows (325) thank you for admitting that you are
unreliable and will become more unreliable
what actually happened is less important than what the author can manage to persuade his
audience to believe (325) oooh nice direct admittance to potentially falsifying events
Compare it with the mere fact of the holy fuss over the theft of a hair; because every last detail
of that is true, and by comparison, an old mans death is surely perfectly normal. (334) spends
time trying to convince Padma to believe his stories





1. Introduction
a. Saleem as unreliable narrator: what can this teach us about stories and history?
b. And S. P. Butt said, If they can change the time just like that, whats real any
more? I ask you? Whats true? (90)
i. time can be changed, stories can be changed, history can be changed. How
can we judge what is the truth? How can we judge what is real? Does
everyone have their own version of truth, which may not coincide with
reality? (see quote 2)
c. Whats real and whats true arent necessarily the same. True, for me, was from
my earliest days something hidden inside the stories Mary Pereira told meNow,
writing this in my Anglepoised pool of light, I measure truth against those early
things: Is this how Mary would have told it? (90)
i. stories change depending on who is telling them; everyone has their own
version of events. can the same be said for history? (see below)
d. history, in my version (233) history changes depending on who is telling it
e. Thesis: Saleems errors and falsifications show the reader that they must be
careful when choosing who to believe; history changes. Be cautious with history
and stories and dont accept another persons versions of events as the real truth.
2. Body 1: Errors
a. Re-reading my work, I have discovered an error in chronology. The
assassination of Mahatma Gandhi occurs, in these pages, on the wrong date. But I
cannot say, now, what the actual sequence of events might have been; in my India,
Gandhi will continue to die at the wrong time. (198)
i. the first big error that is factual enough to be a cause for concern; if you
cant even get a recorded date of death correct, how can we trust your
memory with the events that happened in your personal life that arent
recorded so clearly? And of course in YOUR India. History changes per
person
b. And then it occurs to me that I have made another errorthat the election of
1957 took place before, not after, my tenth birthday; but although I have racked
my brains, my memory refuses, stubbornly, to alter the sequence of events. This is
worrying. I dont know whats gone wrong. (265)
i. you are making errors; how can we trust anything you are saying if you
cant even get more factual information correct (ie years of elections?)
c. I am rushing ahead at breakneck speed; errors are possible, and overstatements,
and jarring alterations in toneI remain conscious that errors have already been
made, and that, as my decay acceleratesthe risk of unreliability grows (325)
i. thank you for admitting that you are unreliable and will become more
unreliable
3. Body 2: Trying to convince reader to believe his version
a. Compare it with the mere fact of the holy fuss over the theft of a hair; because
every last detail of that is true, and by comparison, an old mans death is surely
perfectly normal. (334)
i. spends time trying to convince Padma to believe his stories
b. Its a dangerous business to try and impose ones view of things on others.
(254)
i. hmm but you are doing exactly that, are you not? Imposing your view of
history on the readers?
c. I was already beginning to take my place at the centre of the universe; and by the
time I had finished, I would give meaning to it all. You dont believe me?
Listen (148)
i. spending time trying to convince the reader that he should be believed
d. There are as many versions of India as Indians; and, when set beside Cyruss
India, my own version seems almost mundane. (323)
i. the stories all depend on who is telling them
e. Memorys truthit creates its own reality, its heterogeneous but usually
coherent version of events; and no sane human being ever trusts someone elses
version more than his own. (253)
i. are you accusing the reader of being insane for trusting your version, if
they do so? Or are you warning them to not trust your account because it
is not their account?
f. I am only the first historian to write the story of my undeniably exceptional life-
and-times. (354)
i. Yes, so what you say we have to believe, right?
g. You may legitimately ask: Did it happen in just thisAnd surely she couldnt
have been five hundred andbut I swore to confess to everything (382)
i. Acknowledging the readers potential disbelief and attempting to convince
them otherwise
4. Body 3: Consciously falsifying information/changing history
a. what actually happened is less important than what the author can manage to
persuade his audience to believe (325)
i. oooh nice direct admittance to potentially falsifying events
b. I glued my completed notemy first attempt at rearranging historyon to a
sheet of paper (312)
i. and now here you are again potentially attempting to rearrange history
c. Cutting up history to suit my nefarious purposes, I seized on WHY INDIRA
GHANDI IS CONGRESS PRESIDENT NOW (311)
i. cutting up history seems to be a pretty pervasive habit
d. Does one error invalidate the entire fabric? Am I so far gone, in my desperate
need for meaning, that Im prepared to distort everything --- to re-write the whole
history of my times purely in order to place myself in a central role? Today, in my
confusion, I cant judge. Ill have to leave it to others. (198)
i. admitting that you might be adjusting history and changing history to suit
your own needs
e. once upon a time. No, that wont do, theres no getting away from the
dateAnd the time? The time matters, too. Well then: in the afternoon. No, its
important to be more (353)
i. Was going to withhold factual information
f. I have been only the humblest of jugglers-with-facts; and that, in a country
where the truth is what it is instructed to be, reality quite literally ceases to exist,
so that everything becomes possible except what we are told is the case (389)
i. Two things: 1) did you just admit to messing around with facts, and 2) the
country dictates the truth and history so we shouldnt believe them (but
arent you telling us to believe what you dictate? Hmmm who to trust, and
why?)
ii. Related quotes:
iii. the story I am going to tell, which is substantially that told by my cousin
Zafar, is as likely to be true as anything; as anything, that is to say, except
what we are officially told. (400)
1. That really isnt convincing me that you are telling reality; and
again, bashing the official govt version of history
iv. But did it or didnt it? Was that how it happened?...Nothing was real;
nothing certain. (406)
1. Basically in this entire section about the war, narrator is throwing
out possible things that happened without giving any actual factual
information. We cant trust his version of events because even he
has no idea what really happened. And again, he continuously
bashes the official version and decides it is the most unrealistic
possibility of events because it is the official version. Here is the
narrator telling us quite directly to not believe history because of
the way it is told and the reasons it is told that way (politicsself-
interestetc) which is also a reminder to not trust his version of
history because he is telling his entire story in self-interest as well
5. Conclusion: offer new idea
a. My truth is different than yours. Our truths may not line up with actuality, with
the reality of what really happened. Saleems errors and falsifications show the
reader that they must be careful when choosing who to believe; history changes.
His India is different than the readers India. It is up to the reader to determine
which one to believe, and even then, is either one real?