03-07-2007 07:40 PM
Certainly Red likes Andy, he tells us so. How does King use Red as a narrator? He's a confessed (to us) murderer who doesn't even understand what it means to be rehabilitated. Why do we trust him so implicitly?
03-10-2007 11:46 AM
As far as Red goes I think that we can believe him because even though we dont directly hear any of the story from anyone else it at least appears that there are others that can back up his story. Also, if it were a real life story there would be things that we could check for ourselves. Also, I think that generally we do not have first hand experience of what life inside a prison is like and therefore have to at least on some level accept his story as true simply because we have no way to argue it. I guess that I belive that his story is true for the most part. My daughter watches a show on television in which the narrator ends each show with the statement, "That's exactly what happened. Pretty much." And I found myself thinking that is probably a pretty true statement of any story that someone tells. Besides, what would it benefit him to lie to us, even though he claims at the end that it is his story it really is mostly about Andy and therefore what would it benefit Red to lie?
03-11-2007 10:42 AM
Red might lie to tell a good story. What else is there to do in prison?
I found the differences between Andy and the other prisoners to be striking. I think that's one aspect of Andy's character that helps the reader think him innocent. A seed of doubt is also planted by Andy's intellect: Would a man of his intelligence leave such obvious evidence of the crime?
03-11-2007 02:06 PM
SK seemed to have fun writing both of these stories and both are tales of admiration and true friendship. Admiration for not exactly politically correct characters, I suppose, but somehow SK managed to make their struggles against the law have a mythic quality for me. A stretch at times, but believable enough to make good stories or at least not make me care if the narrator was stretching the truth. For some odd reason, I want to believe a narrator that is admiring their subject. I liked that both narrators managed to hone special talents in prison – Red could get things and Homer taught himself to rope flies.
Both stories worked for me because of the narrators. I can’t see either one of these working so well if Andy Dufresne or Johnnie Dillinger’s were the storytellers.
03-11-2007 08:12 PM
03-13-2007 05:00 PM
I agree, I don't want to be in Andy's head- I like being in Red's though. I think being linked to Andy's thoughts would give me insight that, #1, we don't need, and #2, would be hard to believe. He doesn't have an internal conflict, his conflict is external, so there's also no need to have his thoughts.
Have you seen the movie, by the way?
03-13-2007 07:31 PM
03-15-2007 05:53 PM
Tim Robbins! What can I say, he's the only one I'll ever be able to imagine in the role. He's got that 'almost smile' thing that he does - very Andy Dufresne.
03-15-2007 06:36 PM - edited 03-15-2007 06:36 PM
I guessed wrong early on with this story. In the first few pages, Red talks about his wife being pregnant when they were married, and how three people died in the car accident (his wife, the neighbor woman, and the neighbor women’s infant son). So, I assumed that Red had a child out there somewhere and was hoping it was going to play a part in this story. I certainly read too much into that one.
Message Edited by TeresaF on 03-15-200706:38 PM
03-18-2007 06:03 PM