Edward always wanted to be a big fish in a big pond. The reader is left to wonder whether an inaccurate story can still be a true story. But beneath it is the sadness of a father and son who never connect on a personal level. The stories he weaves are often implausible and whimsical, and the book contains plenty of humor. Wallace simultaneously entertains and moves the reader. To underscore this point, William relates the story of his father's last days multiple times - each telling slightly different than the one before. Memory and embellishment can change a story over time. As a result, William wonders how well he knows his father. Worse, Edward spent much of his son's childhood away from home. Edward's stories are always entertaining, but William wonders how much truth they contain. On Edward's deathbed, William tries unsuccessfully to begin a serious conversation with the man who always spoke in jokes, anecdotes, and tall tales. William refers to his father as a 'mythical creature.' The stories were often fantastical, and Edward was almost always the hero of these stories.

He traveled the world and met many people, and when he came home, he told stories to William. Edward was an adventurer who could never stand to stay in one place for long. Or rather, he tells Edward's life story as Edward told it to William. William Bloom tells the story of his father, Edward. But what about an unreliable narrator relating the stories of his unreliable narrator father? Daniel Wallace gives us that in his 1998 novel 'Big Fish.' An unreliable narrator is not an uncommon device in storytelling.

From big fish by daniel wallace