Daniel Perowne Interior Monologue

Henry, a neurosurgeon who has no love for literature, nonetheless describes parts of the brain (which he would know by heart) with figurative language he claims to not understand. The use of free indirect discourse, therefore, resembles interior monologue and shows that the narration is frequently solipsistic in nature (Gauthier 9). This solipsistic nature reveals the challenge which anyone faces who seeks to step outside of their own world to get to know the other. Although, Perowne is unable to do this with any of the other characters in the novel. A reader, at the same time, is obliged to step outside their own world to understand a character. Furthermore, Perowne’s view of the world can not be changed, while that of the readers can. The narratorial commentaries are in that aspect used to undermine or mock the way Perowne looks at the world. On the other hand, they also allow the reader to understand someone who is different from them. Therefore, narratorial commentaries are introduced ‘‘to evoke empathy with a character, or a degree of distance
I will hereby use the definition of a narratorial comment given by Jahn to distinguish Perowne’s own thoughts from that of the implied narrator. Jahn states that a narratorial commentary can be changed into the character’s own observations or thoughts (451). I will perform this test for narratorial commentaries before I start analysing their effect on the reader. Moreover, I will support my claims with results from different empirical research done on the effects of narrative on readers. Furthermore, under the influence of the earlier research done by Green, Root and Gauthier, two prominent effects of narratorial commentaries can be distinguished: they can evoke empathy or they can create a distance between reader and character. 146