“In this one moment, Marla’s lie reflects my lie, and all i can see are lies. In the middle of all their truth.”

It baffled me slightly that he saw all the people who were dying as in a moment of “their truth” when just a few lines before this one he was ridiculing them (the dying people and those who ran the work shop) to be all liers to some degree. They couldn’t look at death in the face and name it for what it was. I think that the narrator really does see the people in his group as a product or still living in a lie instead of accepting their death, I think that is why he revers Chloe so. However the only moments of truth from these people are when they have those involuntary occurrences do to their diseases, like going in to a ciesure because your brain has shrunken. Which is why I think that even in these beginning stages I would see in some respects the same person only that Tyler is freed by pain and the narrator is depressed by his inability to function with conviction.

This brings me to the whole duality subject. I was mostly interested in reading this book so that way I could see or read how an auther can split up a character without making it seem like two different ones until the very end. And i think he does it seamlessly. First he introducer “Tyler Durden” as a character all on its own, yet when Tyler speaks his voice is not differentiated from that of the narrator, and I think I only noticed it because I saw the movie and was looking for the distinction. And I believe this to be true only because of the way which the narrator always points to the you falling asleep, however I think that in some respects the narrator is talking about “tyler” falling asleep and then there are moments when Tyler is saying that the narrator has fallen asleep. It seems only evident when the narrator begins to talk about the same thing in two different lights. For instance the splicing of pornographic pictures in the movie at the first the narrator describes it as “your boring attempt to…

Leave a Reply