Fallible Narration: ANew Historical Reading in Rushdie'sMidnight's Children

Abstract

InMidnight’s Children,the narrator, Saleemdoes not accurately recount the events in recent Indian history.At times he makes mistakes on details or dates, but he makes them intentionally, in order tocomment on the unreliability of historical and biographical accounts. Rushdie's writing reflects the rephrasing and reworking of a writer’s or a narrator’s mind. He also addresses the reader in the informal second person, and in so doing engages the readerin his life story much as a story teller engages his listeners.Saleem is ahomodiegetic narratorwho can enter the fictional world and distort the reality by imposinghis personal and subjective experiences as a character in the story.As a result, his identity is divided into two agents: one is the narrator and another is the focalizer. As a focalizer, he imposes his perspective in the focalizing process. Hence, his telling of history and focalization of the focalized turns to be misreading and misguiding. To avoid such danger of misreading, according to narratologists, counterfocalization is needed and to investigate the power-relation in the focalization, according to new historicists, alternative reading is required. Saleem as the focalizer and his focalization is fallible because he is unable to narrate the story properly. Thus, readers have to be critical by means of counterfocalzation and alternative reading depending on silences, gaps, incomplete voice and voice which are uttered but not clarifiedby the focalizer.