Nothing But The Truth

The theme of truth versus perception is introduced in the epigraph, which first paraphrases the oath that usually precedes testifying in court. Avi immediately undercuts the idea of absolute and complete truth by posing a question—”Does anyone say no?” (1)—to highlight the idea that even with the best of intentions, we fail to tell the truth. Coupled with the title, this epigraph places emphasis on the question of whether truth is fully represented by the characters and documents in the subsequent chapters.

Rather than using narration of a single or objective narrator, the documentary novel tells a story through memos, diary entries, letters, transcripts of conversations, an exam, and narrative grading comments. Because of the unusual format of the writing, the reader is forced to come up with some means of making sense of the assembled documents. When combined with the epigraph, the documents can be read as clues that might reveal particular truths about the characters and events.

The documents in this section fall roughly into two types—formal, impersonal documents such as the memos and more subjective, personal documents such as Philip’s diary entries and Ms. Narwin’s letters. The memos provide important context for the narrative, specifically that the school has a procedure for morning announcements, that Philip has moved to Ms. Narwin’s class for homeroom, that Ms. Narwin believes she needs additional training to reach her students, and that an important vote on the school budget is coming up.

There is ambiguity and the potential for conflict in the language if these objective documents are read closely. The first memo’s instructions to students to “stand at respectful, silent attention” (1) raises the question of how one can be respectfully silent, for example. When Dr. Seymour requests in his March 18 memo that staff refer the public to his office for questions regarding the upcoming vote, he does so because “[a]n informed voter is a wise voter. Let us inform the voters with the truth”(16). What this truth might be is relatively vague—”educational excellence,”“our vision of the educational future here at Harrison High,” and the possibility of steep budget cuts are all possible parts of that truth (16)—but the memo fails to offer a definitive take on what the truth is. The important point of the memo seems to be to remind the staff that Dr. Seymour’s office is ultimately tasked with supplying this truth. Subsequent events reveal, however, that Dr. Seymour is incapable of controlling the message about the school. The community simply has a different perspective on the school’s needs and responsibilities.

The more personal documents introduce important characters such as Ms. Narwin and Philip, and reveal conflicting perspectives on reality. Philip’s vision of Ms. Narwin portrays her as a boring, rigid, intolerant presence in the classroom, while Ms. Narwin’s letter to her sister, comments on Philip’s paper, and request for money to improve her teaching indicate that this portrait is incomplete and colored by Philip’s lack of interest in English and academics. Ms. Narwin’s perspective on Philip is also an incomplete one. She sees him as incapable of appreciating literature (this is not quite true: Philip simply hates Call of the Wild and is more than willing to read books such as The Outsiders because he is able to relate to them), and his observation that she can be harsh is indeed borne out by the comments on his exam.

With such varied perspectives on the same events and issues, the conflicts that emerge seem almost inevitable. Avi’s use of multiple documents to set up these conflicts helps the reader take a critical approach to the narrative moving forward.