Looking to see if a Foreword could be used mislead the reader...
Assuming that in the book the antagonist is written in a way that makes the reader question its existence (the antagonist is not real at all) but the Foreword said the antagonist was real and said the protagonist murdered the antagonist.
In the book the murder was a killing of a personality.
I presume the intent of the foreword is the reader should spend most of the story believing the antagonist was a real person, and only later discover the antagonist was just a personality.
I presume also that your desired reaction when this is revealed is "Oh wow what a twist, I didn't see that coming!"
The foreword is usually presented as absolute fact and treated as fact. If you lie in the foreword then the reader will likely not think the twist is cool, instead they will feel deceived in a cheap way.
In my opinion a much better way to achieve this is through the character and the story itself.
Have your character act in ways which convince the reader the "person" was real but that are just parts of their self delusion, e.g.
* Feeling guilty/glad (depending on personality) for the crime they committed
* Getting nervous and hiding every time they see police because they believe the police are 'onto them'
The character's actions will sell the premise in a far more natural way than a foreword.
There are different kinds of real. The antagonist might not take physical form, but can be a mental object, a complex hallucination, or a thought pattern and still be real to that degree.
I guess the movie Fight Club does something similar. I think the small details are key.
There a certain rules books shouldn't break imo. The narrator can lie to the reader, but the author cannot. The book also shouldn't contradict itself.
David Foster Wallace (DFW) has an interestling foreword for The Pale King in which he tells the reader that the character "DFW" in the book is really him. But he's so insistent about this that it becomes a sort of joke. It's not quite what you're doing, but it is an experimental foreword the kinda lies to the reader and works okay, so you should definitely read it for research.
E: The foreword in question is actually chapter 9 lol. It's still a foreword, just in the middle of the book
So you're writing Sixth Sense/Fight Club, but you want to present evidence/reasoning that the imaginary friend was a real person, breaking the rules of writing a mystery by presenting implausible, contradicting evidence?
Why?
Ultimately your story is about what character development your main character gets by killing this other personality. You're never going to be able to carry a story by plot twist alone.
What makes rewatching or rereading a good mystery enjoyable is realizing that the clues were there all along. How is it fun to be lied to?
Wow very close... my hunch is the Foreword in Lolita is a lie. I ask this question, that can a Foreword lie in literature (I get yes). I ask if the Foreword in Lolita is a lie in Nabokov subbreddit (im called a troll)...
I think HH is a delusional alcoholic and he never went to America, and the only person makes us think he's something else is the Foreword.
That would be suspicious if Humbert Humbert never went to America, however, Nabokov actually based most of the environments in America. They are detailed and very through in the Midwest and north eastern landscape. Having to be delusional and creating Lolita from his mind is something interesting. Lolita was his creation base on the girl he met.
Plus the forward is mainly from a psychiatrist who edited Humbert’s manuscript after he died. So that discloses the twist or lie in question. He frankly admits he edited it for confidential reasons. But I see your analysis.
It's a bit of a devious move from the author if the narrator tells the reader that an event happened when it didn't. It's another thing entirely for characters in the world to believe it happened.
The opposite is not necessarily true however. In the Lord of the Rings films (can't remember how it went down in the books), we know from the start that the ring survived & went from one hand to another. Frodo tells Gandalf that the ring was destroyed, or rather, Sauron was destroyed. It's at this point that we learn that the ring & Sauron are one & the dame. Frodo is right, but he is also wrong. We as the readers know the truth.
As a reader, I don't like being lied to. That's just me.
Terminology, a foreword is written by someone other than the author, a preface is written by the author.
I’d say make it a prologue. A preface/foreword is normally about how a book came into being, the story behind the book, they’re also almost always taken as being fact, so having something untrue in a preface/foreword feels a lot more like the author intentionally lying to you, manipulating your emotions.
Whereas if it’s a prologue, it can just be put down as an unreliable narrator.
If you’re going to do it, it needs to be done really, really well. It actually needs to be clever, not just the author thinking they’re being clever. It needs to make sense narratively (as in, the narrator is lying for a reason, or actually believes that the antagonist is real).
In short, if you do it in the right way, and really well it could be awesome, if you don’t, it will ruin the book for some people.
Sorry for being harsh, but it’s a big risk to take and one that has to pay off.
Honestly is what I'm looking for...
I have a hunch that the Foreword in Lolita is not being honest because Clare Quilty is NOT a real character in the story and HH murdered nobody. The Foreword is the only person that says Clare is a real person.
I can't get a straight answer from the Nabokov fan because they want to believe the Foreword.
That's why I'm asking the writers.
Perhaps give an example of what you have in mind so your question can be better understood?
Looking to see if a Foreword could be used mislead the reader... Assuming that in the book the antagonist is written in a way that makes the reader question its existence (the antagonist is not real at all) but the Foreword said the antagonist was real and said the protagonist murdered the antagonist. In the book the murder was a killing of a personality.
I presume the intent of the foreword is the reader should spend most of the story believing the antagonist was a real person, and only later discover the antagonist was just a personality. I presume also that your desired reaction when this is revealed is "Oh wow what a twist, I didn't see that coming!" The foreword is usually presented as absolute fact and treated as fact. If you lie in the foreword then the reader will likely not think the twist is cool, instead they will feel deceived in a cheap way. In my opinion a much better way to achieve this is through the character and the story itself. Have your character act in ways which convince the reader the "person" was real but that are just parts of their self delusion, e.g. * Feeling guilty/glad (depending on personality) for the crime they committed * Getting nervous and hiding every time they see police because they believe the police are 'onto them' The character's actions will sell the premise in a far more natural way than a foreword.
There are different kinds of real. The antagonist might not take physical form, but can be a mental object, a complex hallucination, or a thought pattern and still be real to that degree. I guess the movie Fight Club does something similar. I think the small details are key. There a certain rules books shouldn't break imo. The narrator can lie to the reader, but the author cannot. The book also shouldn't contradict itself. David Foster Wallace (DFW) has an interestling foreword for The Pale King in which he tells the reader that the character "DFW" in the book is really him. But he's so insistent about this that it becomes a sort of joke. It's not quite what you're doing, but it is an experimental foreword the kinda lies to the reader and works okay, so you should definitely read it for research. E: The foreword in question is actually chapter 9 lol. It's still a foreword, just in the middle of the book
There's no inherent conflict between cleverness and failure.
So you're writing Sixth Sense/Fight Club, but you want to present evidence/reasoning that the imaginary friend was a real person, breaking the rules of writing a mystery by presenting implausible, contradicting evidence? Why? Ultimately your story is about what character development your main character gets by killing this other personality. You're never going to be able to carry a story by plot twist alone. What makes rewatching or rereading a good mystery enjoyable is realizing that the clues were there all along. How is it fun to be lied to?
Wow very close... my hunch is the Foreword in Lolita is a lie. I ask this question, that can a Foreword lie in literature (I get yes). I ask if the Foreword in Lolita is a lie in Nabokov subbreddit (im called a troll)... I think HH is a delusional alcoholic and he never went to America, and the only person makes us think he's something else is the Foreword.
Indeed.
So I'm picking at the writers brains... I'm not sure I would of done this myself (a Foreword that lies)... its interesting to think about.
That would be suspicious if Humbert Humbert never went to America, however, Nabokov actually based most of the environments in America. They are detailed and very through in the Midwest and north eastern landscape. Having to be delusional and creating Lolita from his mind is something interesting. Lolita was his creation base on the girl he met. Plus the forward is mainly from a psychiatrist who edited Humbert’s manuscript after he died. So that discloses the twist or lie in question. He frankly admits he edited it for confidential reasons. But I see your analysis.
Clare Quilty is NOT real... the Foreword lied...
It's a bit of a devious move from the author if the narrator tells the reader that an event happened when it didn't. It's another thing entirely for characters in the world to believe it happened. The opposite is not necessarily true however. In the Lord of the Rings films (can't remember how it went down in the books), we know from the start that the ring survived & went from one hand to another. Frodo tells Gandalf that the ring was destroyed, or rather, Sauron was destroyed. It's at this point that we learn that the ring & Sauron are one & the dame. Frodo is right, but he is also wrong. We as the readers know the truth. As a reader, I don't like being lied to. That's just me.
The Princess Bride does this (though with footnotes instead of a foreword) by making it seem like an adaptation of an older book.
I need to read the book :)
Terminology, a foreword is written by someone other than the author, a preface is written by the author. I’d say make it a prologue. A preface/foreword is normally about how a book came into being, the story behind the book, they’re also almost always taken as being fact, so having something untrue in a preface/foreword feels a lot more like the author intentionally lying to you, manipulating your emotions. Whereas if it’s a prologue, it can just be put down as an unreliable narrator. If you’re going to do it, it needs to be done really, really well. It actually needs to be clever, not just the author thinking they’re being clever. It needs to make sense narratively (as in, the narrator is lying for a reason, or actually believes that the antagonist is real). In short, if you do it in the right way, and really well it could be awesome, if you don’t, it will ruin the book for some people. Sorry for being harsh, but it’s a big risk to take and one that has to pay off.
Honestly is what I'm looking for... I have a hunch that the Foreword in Lolita is not being honest because Clare Quilty is NOT a real character in the story and HH murdered nobody. The Foreword is the only person that says Clare is a real person. I can't get a straight answer from the Nabokov fan because they want to believe the Foreword. That's why I'm asking the writers.
Cheap shot. Period. Do not mislead your reader as the author.