The idea is, simply, a novel told in entirely first person. The action takes place in front of you as you have been made a part of the drama. Kinda like an actor who talks to the camera. It may make people uncomfortable as it infringes on their freedom to suddenly become kidnaped - - for lack of a better term - - and held hostage to the story. In fact the story will make some people feel uncomfortable on so many levels. The overall effect I want to achieve is the Stockholm Syndrone effect. For those who do not know, Stockholm Syndrome is a very real problem where a hostage will begin to sympathize with their captor. In the end, I want to get a “How dare you toy with my emotions like that!” feeling from those who read the book.

The catch lies in the two people relating the story of the events leading up to the murder and the actual murder. One is lying, the other is telling the truth. The story switches back and forth as to who is the actual “bad” person, as neither one is exactly an angel.

Peace,
Scott
 

And even if the novelist is experienced, I don't want to end with a feeling of "how dare the author toy with my emotions." I don't want to be tricked. If I felt that way, I'd throw the book across the room and vow never to read that author again.
 

And of course, making people detest the author personally is not entirely uncommon, if you'll check out a relevant thread here on Hatrack.

So...ah, what exactly are you proposing?
 

I realize that first person is nothing new. I just want to take it to the next level. Just a book that leaves the reader in rattled emotional state, good, bad or otherwise.

Peace,
Scott
 

It's all been done, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't.

You are reading this in second.

Everyone else who sees this, well, they are in third person.

 

The idea itself sounds like the story of the two brothers guarding two doorways. One brother always lies, and the other always tells the truth. One doorway leads to safety but the other leads to deah. But you don't know which is which, or which brother is which. How do you get the correct answer out of either of them? (Answer: Ask one brother, "If I ask your brother which door leads to safety which one will he say?" Than take the other door, 'cause if he's the liar he'll point to the Door of Death and if he's the truth-teller he'll still point to the Door of Death 'cause his brother the liar would have pointed to that one.)
 

"Judge not lest you be judged."
Matthew 7:1

Its more of a character study. You learn to hate one character and like the other and then when you least expect it, the tables get reversed and the person you love, like or felt sympathy for turns out to be son of a *^%$! and you realize that you mis-judged the person you despised.

Peace,
Scott
 

Peace,
Scott
 

I think it's in very poor taste to even consider something like that. It's okay to have a first person narrator who lies, but as the author you are constrained to trip the unreliable narrator up enough so that the audience knows that something is up with that account. Like in a movie, when a supposed good guy has a French accent

If you have an unreliable narrator and deliberately hide the narrator's lack of reliability from the audience, then you're just cheating. Anyone can do that, usually it just happens on its own because the author is a novice writer. And if you set out to write your story that way, sure.

But simply surprising the reader is never worth making them distrust you as a writer. And if you don't know the difference between the writer and the narrator, then you don't have any business trying to write a complex first person fiction. It is also a bad idea to fool the reader in order to "teach 'em a lesson." That will [i]really[/] inspire disgust.
 

Actually figuring out where to go with a story sometimes plagues me no end. I've got novels that have a beginning and an end, but nothing in the middle. And I've got stories that have a scene or two written out, but have not finished because I can't see where to go next.

(I'd post 'em in Fragments and Feedback, if they weren't longer than thirteen lines. I also started to write a description of one extensively-worked-on idea, but it seemed too wordy to include in somebody else's thread.)
 

There are ways that you can achieve that effect, great writers do it all the time (well--it's one way to be a great writer, anyway). Get the readers desperately involved in the outcomes of your story, weild your god-like power over the lives of the characters they love without restraint, take the audience to the brink of insanity...all of that. But you can't do it just by using a trick ending. A trick ending will never be more than a trick ending, and usually it will be a good deal less.

Just learn not to lie to your readers
 

All of what you said is why I will resign that idea to the mystery genre, when I have time to get to it. I just thought I'd put the ball in play here to see how sci-fi and fantasy fans may react if the same plot line were told in their genre. Apparently, it will not be accepted.

I never said anything about lying to a reader.Like a well written mystery, the clues will be there, one has to dig and the mystery fans like to dig, decypher and try to get one up on the writer in the hopes of figuring out the solution before the author presents it.

Peace,
Scott

[This message has been edited by Zodiaxe (edited January 09, 2006).]
 

I think what people are telling you is that readers resent the "Ha, ha! I tricked you!" sort of tale, where you pull a deus ex machina style ending out of the hat. If you are going to have a twisty-turn ending, be sure to lay the clues throughout the story. Then the reader will say, "Wow, I shoulda seen that one coming!" instead of: "What kind of stupid idiot does this author think I am?"

 

If you have two narrators in the same story, and make it absolutely clear that they cannot both be telling the truth, then your readers will be actively trying to figure out which one is lying. As long as you make it logical for them to believe you when you reveal which is the liar, that's good enough for me.

You can trick them by having the liar seem like a nice guy, but you cannot trick them by making it illogical to believe that person could be the one lying about everything. In the end, it probably works better with your stated purpose for the readers to feel like believing the liar rather than to have logical reasons for doing so.

In the end, though, this still doesn't achieve what you claimed you were after. Remember, probably only those readers that managed to correctly suspect the liar will end up getting anything out of your story. Every reader that becomes utterly convinced that the liar is truthful will only throw your book against the wall and blog harsh things about you. As a writer, your job is to toy with the emotions of the reader. This is a given. But let the readers notice you're doing that, and you've failed. It's that simple.
 

Which, regardless of how one may feel about the movie, was a good read and very interesting in regards to style, idea and execution. You could say it was educational.

Warning: If you haven't read it, and you're not happy with your job, DON'T read it at work. Especially if you work in customer service.
 

In my opinion, it is best to think of devices to fit the story, not the other way around. Thinking of a story to fit a cool new literary technique will generally result in a, for lack of a better word, bad story.

Side note: JmariC, It would appear that my opinion of Fight Club is exactly opposite to yours. I thought it was a great movie (one of my top five), but not a very good book.