Gogol and Unreliable Narrators

On September 6th, the Vocal team posted the "Unreliable Narrators" challenge inspired by Paul Stewart, Bridget Couture, and Mackenzie Davis.

If anyone is looking for inspiration, or simply a wild read, I encourage them to seek out the short story Diary of a Madman by Nikolai Gogol.

I came across this short story by accident, reading other Gogol stories earlier this spring as I worked on teleplay based in the same time period. Having been a fan of Gogol's works for years, I've consistently inundated anyone who will listen about how funny (and surprisingly modern) the absurdist piece The Nose is, or how wonderfully creepy and terrifying the gothic nightmare The Viy is). But the Diary of a Madman is one I had somehow overlooked.

Written in 1835, Gogol's story takes the form of diary entries starting October 3rd and ending "34 March, February, 349." Yes, you read that right. And the illogical dates are just the beginning of Gogol's creativity in writing a story from the perspective of a man descending into madness.

While the short story is broken down into daily (albeit sporadic) entries, it's essentially a two-part story. The first half features the Narrator as a clerk, while the second half sees the Narrator as the King of Spain. (It's evident in the story, but for my summary purposes, to be clear, the Narrator is 100% Russian, 0% Spanish.)

In the first half of the story, the Narrator operates mostly in the plane of reality. He recognizes dates; he goes to work, attends the theater, etc. However, he's essentially just high-functioning because while doing these things, he is starting to deal with some serious mental health issues.

In this section, the Narrator is obsessed with two thing: his status and his boss's daughter. He begins operating with unconventional thinking, experiencing delusions of grandeur and struggling with erotomania. He frequently analyzes his position relative to others and quickly starts viewing himself above his particular status, often in positions he likely would not be able to achieve.

The object of his infatuation, the daughter of the man he works for, can do no wrong in his eyes. He concludes she favors him because of slight glances and behavioral tics. He is so caught up with his attraction, that he stalks her home in his downtime. Then, as luck would have it for him, he overhears her dog speaking human language. Rationalizing the weirdness, he decides he should steal correspondence this dog has written to another dog because this will help him uncover what his beloved has been thinking and saying about him.

When he gets his hands on these "letters" he finds out that the object of his affection not only makes fun of him, but is set to be married to someone else, notably someone of higher status.

At this point in the story, the Narrator shifts his focus. He reads an "alarming" story in the papers reporting the Spanish throne is vacant, and his wild imagination becomes convinced that the king must be in hiding.

The Narrator's first diary entry off the plane of reality occurs soon thereafter, and it's evident by title (being the first entry that doesn't make sense) and by content (because nothing he writes is true at all).

"The year 2000: April 43rd. -- To-day is a day of splendid triumph. Spain has a king; he has been found, and I am he. I discovered it today; all of a sudden it came upon me like a flash of lightning."

The remaining entries focus on the Narrator in his quest to take the throne. He has left every piece of his old world behind (work, love, hygiene). He believes himself to have made it to Spain and to be undergoing Spanish customs necessary before he can ascend, but in reality, he has been taken to an asylum.

I know am I not doing this story the justice it deserves. It is a relatively quick read (about 15 pages), but every entry is absolutely perfect and so full of craftsmanship, that it feels like you've experienced a full novel. I would absolutely love to spend a good six months writing a full analysis of everything that makes this story spectacular, but in an attempt to focus my analysis (and save my writing calendar), I would highlight the fact that Gogol's strongest attribute in this story is his ability to make a legible story solely from the view of an unreliable narrator. Specifically, Gogol writes a story where we know the narrator is unreliable, not because Gogol tells us, but because the Narrator does, and Gogol does this by employing the following tricks:

1. He uses diary entries. Diary entries can feel overdone in today's narrative landscape, but when writing about an unreliable narrator, it is helpful to have a place that not only records their general thoughts, but also things that they read, and then their thoughts on those things. It allows us to get extra information (all grounded in reality), while getting our narrator's hot-takes, meaning we can see how well our narrator is reality testing.
2. He uses dates (and non-dates) in those entries. The other benefit to using a diary set up, is we can see when events are taking place relative to one another. It gives us a sense of pacing for the story, and in this case, allows us to see how the character is oriented to time and space. Gogol's Narrator (who existed in 1835) started on real days like "October 3rd", and progressed to the "year 2000", on days of the year like "April 43rd", and in fun months like "Marchember." Sometimes, he's even outside of time: "No date. The day had no date."
3. He writes about people recognizing and addressing the narrator's odd behavior. Gogol does a good job of laying the seeds early that something is amiss. His Narrator talks about not liking his work because of one of his supervisors, but then acknowledges that his dislike for him comes from the fact that the supervisor has been confronting him about his behavior change. "For some times past he has been in the habit of saying to me, 'Look here, my friend; there is something wrong with your head.'" Planting this impression in the first few sentences of his story, already alerts the reader that the Narrator is struggling with something in the story's reality, which might make him less than reliable when interpreting things later.
4. His Narrator confirms he is not crazy, but acknowledges he's been close to it. Gogol does two clever things here. First, in the early stages of the story, when the Narrator is confronted with something that simply cannot be (i.e., talking dogs), the Narrator questions if he is drunk, but then adds, "That happens pretty seldom." This is such a smart character trait to mention, especially at the beginning of the story, because Gogol lets the reader know what is happening (and what will come next) is not substance induced. Secondly, Gogol's Narrator makes several comments about thinking that he was "going mad" but reclaiming himself. What this tells the reader is that the Narrator is operating in a different mental state, one where he assumes he is functioning normally, but in reality, he is not.
5. His Narrator describes reality and people's reactions to his behavior, but then interprets them incorrectly to fit his schema. This is another fun one. Gogol's Narrator will present a ridiculous situation (which he believes to be wholly true) then describe how others react to it. The reader, understanding the situation to be incorrect, comprehends others' reactions to mean one thing, while the Narrator interprets them differently, all the while building upon his delusions. An example of this comes when the Narrator first arrives at the asylum. He held the delusion for most of the story that representatives from Spain would be dispatched to collect him and bring him to the throne. When staff from the asylum show up, he willingly leaves with them, assuming they are the deputation. He then arrives in the asylum and believes that the other patients are soldiers because their hair is cut short. When he is beat by the staff, he believes it to be a custom necessary for him to take the throne.
6. Gogol starts out with symptoms from a few different mental illnesses, but then focuses and dives deep into one. One shouldn't diagnose without all the facts, but Gogol's Narrator definitely displays symptoms of various delusions throughout the story. As I noted above, his delusions initially are focused on his status and his attraction to a woman. When he breaks with reality completely, he becomes the King of Spain. Notably, he does this after the woman not only rejects him, but rejects him for someone of higher status. It is important to note, too, that the woman didn't outright reject him. The rejection comes from a letter that the Narrator reads. This letter suggests that the woman makes fun of him, but also suggests she doesn't really know who he is. It is interesting then, that the Narrator's delusions of grandeur don't just increase to the level of the woman's fiancé, but they explode, so that he becomes someone she would have to know (or want to) know.
7. Gogol's Narrator talks utter nonsense or gives gobbledygook facts. It's like word salad only more narrative. Gogol's Narrator will add "facts" to his entries that are not facts at all. One of my favorites is that Spain and China are the same country. The Narrator encourages anyone who disagrees to write the two names on a piece of paper and they will see they are spelled the same. (Linguistic spoiler alert, they are not the same in Russian either, if anyone was wondering). Another fun one: the Narrator noted experiencing anxiety in one of his entries because the earth was going to sit on the moon, and the moon is very frail, being repaired in Hamburg, after all.
8. Gogol's Narrator stops mid-sentence or changes subjects. There are a couple of occurrences throughout the short story, where the Narrator will start a thought and then just stop mid-sentence. Other times, he will quickly change between subjects. While we all do this, it's also a pretty common mental health symptom, and a clever way of showing the Narrator's struggles.
9. Gogol deploys foreshadowing. Gogol's foreshadowing complements the two halves of the story, providing the reader with a clear understanding of reality in the first half to compare to the growing madness of the second. For example, the Narrator first talks about others finding him scattered, then has clearly scattered thoughts in later entries. In another example, the Narrator states he is surprised no one threw him in an asylum for incorrectly saying he was a "titular councilor" when he knew himself to be a king. Later, he's taken to an asylum for these beliefs. It's a simple, yet effective strategy that not only provides the reader with anticipation but satisfaction in the full descent to madness.

Alright, so to be fair, there are several "Diary of a Madman" stories, by several other great authors (including Guy de Maupassant and Lu Xun). It is possible these stories have just as compelling if not other clever techniques for telling a story from the point of view of an unreliable narrator. I have not read them yet. (I will!) And I am a bit biased, since Gogol is one of my favorite authors, but with the artistry that Gogol showed in 15 pages, I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to see a master at work.

If you have the chance, I hope you'll read the King of Spain's memoir. And to all those who enter the contest, good luck!