# data[].attributes.body
I still find it a little bit odd the fact the narrator is portrayed to be the deceased son of the father that sells the villagers blood, but at the same time, the way he is characterized, I guess gives off some good thoughts about him. Looking back at what I've seen so far from the book, I think the narrator can be trusted. The fact that he doesn't focus in on himself or just to his family, but gives more insight towards his grandfather and his objectives to help the large sums of people in their village that are suffering from AIDS is something that makes this more recognizing.

# data[].attributes.body
Forgot to make an account Gavin S is the last 1 b4 lillian

# data[].attributes.body
Ashton made me think about how he is somewhat perfect view point because he was in the village from beginning but also got both the story of the villagers and the kingpin.

# data[].attributes.body
Changing the Narrator would completely switch up the story, because you would hear how he picked up the tomatoe and if told from a different prespective all you could be told is lies. SO i think its important that the narorator is who he is. And i do believe he can be trusted.

# data[].attributes.body
Even if he didn't die from the AIDS itself, he died because of it in some way.

# data[].attributes.body
I didn't really have any initial thoughts about the narrator. I did have sympathy for him though. For the way he had died and how he is watching his grandpa go through rough times with his father and overall the impact of the AIDS pandemic on their village. I do feel he can be trusted because of his knowledge and views on the events taking place. I don't think that there is any reason not to trust him. I feel that changing the narrator would change that close connection between characters and the story line. I feel having this dead child follow his family gives a feeling of close connection and you can see both sides of this pandemic (life and death).

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the narrator is a good narrator he makes the book seem interesting and makes me want to read the book. i also think that he can be trusted because he is telling everything that is going on and it is the truth plus he is also dead so he dosent really have anything to hide. i think that if it was a different narrator like an adult then i think the story would be bland and boring and not the same.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with LJ that a child as narrator provides a lot of potential bias

# data[].attributes.body
I think that like since the narrator is the dead boy it gets perspetive on what other peoples lifes are like and not just basic on one persons life and what they see. I think that he can be trusted becaseu why not and anyways it a dead boy, like why would you trust him. I think that if the narrator was to change that there would be a hole different perspetive on the story because its being told in someones perspetive but like the boy just sees everthing that is happening.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm going to branch of of Paige's post agreeing with Payton's post because that brings a very good point to how having a narrator that explains the story in a neutral as it is than an emotional type of narrator that is trying to persuade us into their opinions.

# data[].attributes.body
I think having a child as a narrator will always leave room for bias opinions and not being told the entire story. He could be influenced by his parents which often is emotions not facts. So because of this I am a little weary of trusting the child. But getting that first hand experience and having the innocence leaves some wiggle room for trust. But I do really enjoy having him as the narrator because he seems not totally emotion driven but still has good morals.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that because he is dead he has nothing to prove, he has a perspective that doesn't appear to be bound. But I wonder who he blames for his death. I think we can trust him, and more then we could trust many other's perspectives. I think other narrator's might give more insight, especially on his death, but I think this narrator does a good job of understanding.

# data[].attributes.body
Payton's post: I did not think about the things that you had touched on and I appreciate your thoughts. Specifically how the narrator doesn't narrate emotionally, but chooses to follow grandpa and the townsfolk rather than his direct family.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with whatJoey is saying in regards to the child having an outside opinion. he is able to sympathize with those families that ahve experienced death but is also able to relate to the blood dealers.

# data[].attributes.body
i think think the narrator is a good person. i dont think he is lying about anything because you know if he is like whos he going to tell? his dead buddies? their dead too. i think if the narrator was grandpa or the dad the story would be a lot different because you would feel other peoples emotions but with this person ebign the narrator i feel like he doesnt have a specifc emotion twards anything.

# data[].attributes.body
I actually disagree with Rhena. I don't think that the narrator being dead completely removes the possibility of opinion or bias. I think that even in death, this character shows respect toward grandpa by sharing with the audience how grandpa was so willing to help the people of ding village and how he takes responsibility for his family. He also seems to neglect talking about his father unless it is in regard to grandpa, in my opinion because he has a bias against his father for pretty much ruining their town and getting our narrator killed by proxy.

# data[].attributes.body
I like the narrator and their very detailed descriptions of the important events that are happening in the book. The narrator is a dead child that died from a poisoned tomato that was sitting on a rock on his way home from school. I believe he can be trusted because the story he is telling is basically the aftermath of his death. If you were to change the narrator to a different character in the book it would mainly focus on their opinions on things instead of an outside opinion in which the dead child does and gets the point across.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the narrator offers a unique perspective to the story.  There are many layers to him as a narrator, not only is he dead, but he also is closely related to who Ding Village's blood kingpin. His perspective is in some ways neutral, but his affection towards his father and grandfather places them into a familial light for the reader. I think that any other narrator would have a less neutral opinion, and I think the fact that he has experienced the negative effects of being on the other side of the epidemic but also learning about those who have been affected by AIDS.

# data[].attributes.body
first off the child was poisoned

# data[].attributes.body
The narrator is the dead son of one of the largest blood kingpins in Ding Village, he was poised as a result of the AIDS epidemic and this act was to get back at the kingpin. I believe he can be trusted because he is related to the kingpin and is seeing everything that is happening within the village, and understands what death is like. Changing the narrator would most likely change the entire story, how the epidemic is taking place and the meaning of death.

# data[].attributes.body
- So far I'm pretty neutral on the reader. For being a child, he seems relatively knowledgeable about everything going on in town, almost omniscient. I think that he's likely pretty trustworthy, however I believe that he has a bias against his father. He doesn't narrate emotionally, but chooses to follow grandpa and the other townsfolk's stories rather than that of the rest of his direct family. It seems to me that this is because his father is the direct cause of his death. I believe that if there was a different narrator we wouldn't get as much fact, especially from a living narrator. In my opinion, i think that a living narrator would give us a lot of uncertainties about the epidemic hitting their town, rather than the fact this child has from being the son of a bloodhead and the grandson of (basically) the town's mayor(of sorts)

# data[].attributes.body
it works as it talks to the reader and gives the details. it is told by a dead child so what ever they think or do doesnt effect the actual story. he can be trusted as in death, opinion is unneeded and he cant change anything except how he tells the story. If you were to change the narrator, the story telling will change to a different pace and style that might not give the correct information. the change of narrator might also change the connection the dead child has with the grandfather than a random person who was probably a background character.

# data[].attributes.body
The person that is narrating is a dead child and maybe since hes a child he cannot be trusted due to his younger age and how kids don't exactly see the world in a as is way. Maybe if the narrator was grandpa in the story, he would have a greater hated towards the son and not say things as they are. Like if the son did something good and the grandpa resented him still or held a grudge, the grandpa would make that good thing seem fake.

# data[].attributes.body
The person narrating is a dead child who died from aids and is watching over the world to see how things play out. I personally believe the boy can be trusted because he's telling it from his perspective and understanding of death personally. Changing the narrator would change the understanding and meaning of death, how the world is viewed and more. ~Robin Miota

# data[].attributes.body
I like the narrator. He makes me actually interested in the book. I think he can be trusted. From what I can tell he has nothing to hide and he has been telling the truth so far. I feel like if we changed the narrator then the book would be a bit boring. I like having a child as the narrator because it brings more energy and emotion to the book. - Josh

# data[].attributes.body
Narration

What are your initial thoughts about the narrator?

Can he be trusted? Why?

How would changing the narrator change the story?