The Good Soldier: Unreliable Narrator 3 key examples

The author pits Leonora and Florence in fundamental moral opposition to one another. Leonora's character is consistently depicted as being concerned with moral uprightness, discipline, and adherence to societal norms and expectations. She’s heavily aligned with the word “should” throughout the book. In contrast, Florence embodies a more “modern” approach, less concerned with truthfulness and more focused on appearances. Rather than the word "should," the verb “to want” appears a great deal in descriptions of her. Leonora is portrayed as emotionally restrained to the point where John perceives her as almost sexless, like “marble.” This emotional containment is in line with the stereotypical Englishwoman of Ford’s books, reserved and controlled. Florence, on the other hand, is passionate and volatile, "weak-hearted" in more ways than one. She embodies Ford's more expressive and emotional American stereotype. The author characteristically aligns English stoicism and a stiff upper lip like Leonora’s with a romanticized view of Old World values, especially in the face of a world rapidly changing with the onset of global war. Although neither woman is completely blameless, Leonora is depicted as being more morally upright than Florence.

This moral dichotomy between the two women is aligned with the broader religious divide between Catholicism and Protestantism, another common concern in Ford's novels. The author ties Leonora's Catholic background to her commitment to traditional values while Florence, as a Protestant, takes a more liberal and individualistic approach. As with many of Ford's female characters, ideas of social conservatism and a kind of internal moral uprightness are linked to Catholic Englishness. Leonora is “strong-willed,” stoic, and rational. She's fundamentally concerned with her marriage’s internal consistency and with doing damage control on Edward’s infidelities. She’s internally conflicted, as she loves her husband “with a passion that was like an agony, and hated him with an agony that was as bitter as the sea.” Florence is more expressive, and her conflicts are more externally visible. Even though he is furious with her for her infidelity, John also depicts her as a tragic figure. Her unrequited love for Edward is linked to her general sense of social inferiority, as she feels she can never quite “get the better” of Leonora. The two women are literally placed in competition for the affection of the same male character.

The effect of these contrasting characters on the narrator is significant: his vision of the differences between the two is a major factor in the changes in his own attitude to marriage. In a way, the comparisons he makes between Leonora and Florence lead to John’s disillusionment with both love and religion just as much as their affairs do. Although Florence is actually John's wife, his intimacy with her doesn't seem to beget any kind of sympathy from him. Florence's betrayal shatters his romantic ideals, while Leonora's comparatively rigid virtue forces him to reassess his understanding of morality and goodness. His struggle to reconcile his experiences with his beliefs and perceptions contributes to the unreliability of his narration.

The recurring motif of August 4 as a pivotal date in Florence's life serves multiple purposes. Firstly, it acts as a constant in her otherwise chaotic existence. Each significant event that occurs on this date, from her birth to her marriage, represents a moment of hope or tragedy, which changes the course of her life. Even though things often seem chaotic, this repetition of a specific date emphasizes the cyclical nature of her experiences. Each August 4 marks a new chapter or turning point.

Secondly, while August 4 may appear arbitrary in Florence's lived experience, it ties together the novel's narrative structure for the reader. The date becomes a tool for organizing the fragmented storyline, as the narrator draws connections between the key events in Florence's life that all happen on this date. It also shows how superficially John understands his wife. He can reduce the significance of her life to a recurring date on a calendar, as if she’s a national holiday. His perception of her as being so easily simplified is part of his unreliable narration: although he purports to understand her, he clearly does not.

Additionally, the motif of August 4 foreshadows a significant historical event: the day the United Kingdom entered World War I. This connection, foreshadowed toward the end of the novel, adds a layer of historical context to the date. The motif links the personal tragedies and events in the characters' lives to the larger, impending catastrophe of the war. The novel’s titular “good soldier,” Edward Ashburnham, is caught up in the conflict of many “August 4ths,” although he dies before the actual World War begins. In a way, the motif points to the "battles" of emotional infidelity all of Ford's characters become embroiled in.

The phrase "very minute study" is laced with verbal irony as it’s used here. John is obviously very concerned with the "minute" details of Leonora’s love life, as he spends much of the novel pondering the reasons for both her behavior and Edward’s. Here, he dismisses the need for a detailed examination of Edward and Leonora's progression towards "complete disunion," yet the novel itself is a meticulous, “minute” exploration of their relationship and its gradual deterioration. This contradiction highlights John's role as an unreliable narrator, as he undermines the entire point of the story he is narrating. The irony lies in the fact that the reader is, in fact, embarking on "a very minute study" of the characters' disunion throughout the novel.

Furthermore, the use of the word "necessary" is also verbally ironic, particularly in the context of Leonora's past. Throughout the novel, she’s portrayed as incredibly reserved and enigmatic. Any information about her, given her closed-off nature, seems vital for understanding the dynamics of the story. John’s dismissal of the need for detailed analysis is ironic because the reader feels that such an exploration has been a long time coming. This short statement, seemingly straightforward, actually deepens the novel’s sense of disconnection and its enigmatic tone. It underscores the central idea that events in the world of The Good Soldier are all up for subjective, biased interpretation by the person telling the story.