Monday, January 7, 2013

Taking Things at Face Value


            At first, Rollo Martins’ suspicions of foul play in Harry Lime’s death might seem far-fetched and ill-founded.  He initially comes to his conclusion after a few drinks with Calloway, based solely on a biased view of policemen: “You are running true to form, aren’t you?…[Y]ou couldn’t pin it on anyone, so you’ve picked a dead man.  That’s just like a policeman” (316).  In addition, Kurtz’s toupee immediately leads him not to trust Kurtz, simply because “[t]here must be something phoney about a man who won’t accept baldness gracefully” (322).  However, evidence suggests early on that Martins may be on to something.  Kurtz’s and Anna Schmidt’s accounts of dying wishes do not align with Koch’s story of an instantaneous death.  And when Martins goes back to question Koch about the incident, the revelation of the presence of a third man confirms that something was covered up.
            Graham Greene’s use of frame narrative throws another layer of uncertainty onto the narrators themselves.  Greene calls attention to this near the beginning of the novel: “I have reconstructed the affair as best as I can.…It is as accurate as I can make it…though I can’t vouch for Martins’ memory” (308).  That little musing at the end sets up a tension between the two narrators, both of whom already have their own flaws.  Calloway has an interest in the case as a policeman, and in order to tell the story, he “reconstructed the chain of events which…prove [him] to be a fool” (318).  These details set him as a biased and perhaps untrustworthy narrator.  Furthermore, the chain of events comes “from Martins a long time afterwards…when the trail was nearly cold” (318, 322).  Martins can use this amount of time to polish the account given to Calloway, considering the mistrust that results from their first encounter.  Even though frame narrative can be used simply as a means of storytelling, the reader cannot count out anyone in Greene’s “fallen world” of crime, destruction, and deceit.
            Reading a detective story always involves playing the game of whodunit, so as we move to Part VIII and onward, it is fitting (and fun) to ask the question: At this point in the novel, what do you think really happened to Harry Lime?  With many characters’ reliability in question, no alternative theory can be too crazy.  Greene has set up for a surprising, exciting conclusion with the opening chapters of The Third Man.  I look forward to seeing what surprises lay ahead as we continue to uncover this mystery.

1 comment:

Brendan Emmons said...

Vincent makes a great point about how difficult it is for the reader to invest his or her faith in any given party. I think this is intentional on Greene's part. Carol Reed's film frequently utilizes what are known as Dutch angle shots where the camera is tilted off to the side. Such a technique could be a metaphor for Greene's vision of his flawed, morally oblique cast of characters. Many of the scenes are ridden with shadows as well. In this post-war Vienna, the lines between good and evil are not so black and white but are blurred by the complex moralities and goals of the cast. Martins' goal appears noble, painting himself as the harbinger of justice against Calloway and his forces who label Lime as a racketeer. Yet Calloway seems guided by a sense of justice, convinced Lime's criminal activity is highly involved with his "death". Even as Martins and Anna seek to clear Lime's name, the reader gets a sense that Martins is meddling in something beyond his responsibility, indirectly causing Koch's death. Anna also involved herself with Lime in forging a passport. She has thus involved herself in some form in the shady dealings of Harry Lime. What side can the reader invest his sympathies with and who is trustworthy? The reader cannot be sure, but I'm pretty sure Greene intended this to be so as it allows him to comment on the nature of good and evil in the fallen world he sets his tale in.