With this, there comes the haphazard collection of facts, and a lack of reliability, allowing for a less that strict interpretation of the narrator’s words. The very introduction of the Basavriuk to the reader is shrouded in ambiguity. His accounts mainly of how “he prowled about, got drunk, and suddenly disappeared as if into the air, leaving no trace of his existence.” While this may leave a aura of mystery to the character, it also allows for the suggestion that he does not exist at all. Such actions are that of the human id, acting out of impulse but never being truly separate from the rest of the psyche. Similarly, Petrus seems to act in accordance with his id, declining to rationalize his actions. The introduction of Petrus and Basavruik in accordance to one another accredits their extremely similarities. The impulsive recklessness of both, as well as the many shortcomings of the former leads to the notion that the latter is a manifestation of Petrus’ …show more content…
In addition to displaying signs of mental unrest at the start, the catalyst of rejection led to further mental deterioration. This is all but confirmed at the conclusion; once Petrus is claimed by Basavruik, (which can only be presumed as his death) his fantasy shatters. What he had thought to be retribution for his brutality is revealed to be no more than broken pottery. The removal of the protagonist’s mind from the telling of the tale presents a more realistic, and accurate “reward”. All he had done proves to have been of his own accord, his mind contorting it to be free of guilt. As his mental foundation begins to crack with his progression in years, this becomes more and more apparent to the reader that is forced to experience the tale with the same warped lens. While this bias is prominent in the start of the telling, the logic begins to falter and Petrus’ altered mental health seeps through the cracks of mismatched