Unreliable narrators are a dime a dozen these days, to the extent that they’ve become cliche. (That’s not to say it can’t be done well. Everything old and worn can be renewed). In the days of Ford Maddox Ford, the unreliable narrator was a narrative device you didn’t often see used in mimetic fiction.* But FMF (yes, I’m calling him that) wasn’t just interested in a narrator you couldn’t trust (does John Dowell ever actually lie, or does he elide?), he also employed what he called “impressionistic techniques”, to imitate the non-linear quality of memory. So, what we get is a decidedly untrustworthy narrator telling us a story out of order about infidelity, tragedy and death. And it’s awesome!

Set before Dub Dub 1**, Americans John Dowell and his wife Florence meet English couple the Ashburnhams, Captain Edward and Leonora, at a spa in Nauheim, Germany. The Dowells are there because Florence has heart problems and they’re seeking treatment. The couples form a friendship, one that will last nine years. But, we know going in that their relationship will end in tears — as Dowell tells us, this is the “saddest story I have ever heard” (“The Saddest Story” was the novel’s original title). We also know that by story’s end, Edward and Florence will be dead. This isn’t a spoiler. Dowell is keen we know this straight off the mark. So armed with all this foreshadowing, we’re expecting a sorrowful story about a friendship sundered by tragedy. But that’s not what we get. Instead, as the narrative unfurls out of order, we discover that no one, not least John Dowell, can be trusted.

The Good Soldier is a short novel, but it’s dense. There’s a scant amount of dialogue but rather long, descriptive paragraphs, each one a testament to Dowell’s slippery state of mind. At first, he comes off as gormless, duped by his wife Florence, who married him as a cover for an affair she was having with a “lower class” man (class plays a significant role in the story – especially the horror of having an affair with a man or woman of low standing). But the further we go, the more we start to doubt Dowell’s temperament, given glimpses of his cruelty and savagery. It leaves us to wonder whether he killed his wife (of course he bloody well did) and whether he manipulated Edward to take his own life (errrrr, yes!).

I did chuckle at an early review of The Good Soldier which suggested FMF would have been better served, for the sake of clarity, to tell his story chronologically. How else is a reader meant to figure out whether Dowell is a lovely, simple-minded bloke or an evil, violent bastard? Even now, with the publishing world glutted with unreliable, prickish characters, The Good Soldier maintains a freshness that more contemporary works struggle to match. I’ve read some tremendous “older” novels this year, but The Good Solider would be at the top of the pile. It’s just that good.

*Go on, provide your examples, but they must predate 1915 and be mimetic… horror and crime don’t count! Neither does Chaucer! OK, you can have Chaucer.

** Because there was no War when FMF drafted the novel. Also, while “The Good Soldier” wasn’t his choice the title certainly didn’t hurt sales when it came out in 1915.