Trusting the Narrative Voice
Subversion of Readings Expectations
Many 20th-century novels on the other hand exploit this tradition to subvert readersʼ
expectations, and The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, an early example of this approach, is now
considered a milestone in the crime fiction genre. Its fundamental premise takes for granted
readersʼ complicity in a predetermined narrative contract. Detective novels enjoy a special
relationship with their readers, who assume the role of investigator and consequently become
embroiled in the fictional action. As with all whodunnits, The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
assembles an intricate puzzle for the reader to solve, but its key trick can only work if we trust
the narrative voice. It is Dr Sheppardʼs perspective that in turn shapes ours.
Incomplete Narrative
So, whilst Sheppardʼs account is scrupulously accurate, his narrative is teasingly incomplete. As
Hercule Poirot explains towards the end of the book, when he refers to the ‘reticence of the
manuscriptʼ, "it was strictly truthful as far as it went - but it did not go very far".
It is what Sheppard omits that is so telling, and the phraseology is intentionally ambiguous, so
that any re-reading immediately suggests alternative interpretations. Initially, however, as
gullible readers, we are more than ready to be seduced by Sheppardʼs measured and objective
tone and by his insistence on fidelity and the inclusion of tiny details – aficionados of crime are
after all always on the lookout for clues. In the absence of any other guide, Sheppard
appropriates the role of author to introduce all the essential information – characters, names,
locations and timings – that is required to enable the reader to solve the mystery. Inevitably this
has the added effect of deflecting attention away from him to the rest of the dramatis personae
(set of characters).
Double Meanings In Language
It can be asked how many of those statements presented in the novel by Dr Sheppard are
equivocal? "There was nothing to be done", says Sheppard. Does he mean that on medical
grounds he cannot save the patient, or that as a blackmailer and murderer, he realises he is now
in the hands of fate? And why does he delay ‘purposely? Why is he ‘upset and worriedʼ? The
surface rationale is that, as a doctor, he may have misgivings about the circumstances of Mrs
Ferrarsʼ death. The other explanation is that his behaviour and feelings are those of a guilty
man, who knows that this episode puts him in danger. Similarly, the economy of style and the
simple sentence constructions could be thought a reflection of Sheppardʼs lack of literary
sophistication. Yet with hindsight they emerge as a deliberate ploy. As Hercule Poirot drily
points out, "Dr Sheppard has been a model of discretion".
Breaking Narrative Rules
It is difficult for a modern reader to comprehend the shock of Christieʼs twist-ending; in the
1920s, crime writers were bound by a series of ‘ten commandmentsʼ (published by Ronald
Knox), one of which prohibited that the murderer was the narrator of the story.
Restoration of Natural Order