As part of the "create a non-obvious question for Undertale" assignment I came up with the question: "Who is the narrator and what effect does this character have on the story?" I wish to attempt to take a stab at my own question as I don't really have an example of this myself. In a narrative sense most text in RPGs can be described as non-diegetic, meaning it is not a part of the world's story. If a narrator gives a description of a table for a game it is assumed that this description is for the player alone as every character can see the table and come to this conclusion on their own. In the case of Undertale the subject of the narrator becomes complicated as the game proceeds.
First, the narrator seems to make observations that are more than just descriptions of items. Early on if the player takes too much candy from the bowl they're scolded by the narrator for being greedy. During battles the narrator often times sneaks in witty observations that are easily ignored if the player is trying to get through the battle quickly.
Second, once the player has moved past specific points in a No Mercy run or have fully completed the Pacifist run then the narrator's tone drastically change. The Pacifist ending has the narrator take on a lighter tone and only then do they begin to refer to the player character as Frisk. This implies that even the narrator had no knowledge of Frisk's name which contradicts the assumed omniscience that comes with an RPG's narration. The No Mercy run changes the narration for a dark pessimistic tone. This new narration is marked with red text as opposed to white in order to draw the player's attention to the changes and it reveals that the narrator is not just a character in the story but also a character who is affected by whatever actions the player takes.
If the narrator is indeed Chara or the first Fallen Human then this only enforces Undertale's message promoting responsibility with choice. The narrator can become hostile to the player but like most encounters in the game their is no need to fear or destroy them. Through achieving the Pacifist ending the narrator becomes optimistic and controversially the No Mercy ending leads to a hostile narration. This subversion of the traditional narrator allows for an extended example of Undertale's core mechanic. Characters like Flowey, Asgore, or even Sans can be defeated or spared in a single encounter but the narrator is always present and is never directly confronted. Their character is the final test of the player and this test is evaluated over the course of the game, not just a single encounter.
So I actually really like the Chara!Narrator theory and there's a lot of pretty compelling evidence for this, or at least for the idea that the narrator is a different entity altogether. We know for sure that the narrator isn't Frisk. For one, when looking in any mirror, the narration text calls Frisk "you" instead of "me." Okay, this isn't a smoking gun on its own. But the usage of "me" vs. "you" in the narration isn't just a throwaway, it's important. takes a chilling twist in the Genocide run, when looking in a mirror at the end yields: "It's me, Chara."
There's lots of other points where the narrator seems to reference things that only Chara would remember, such…
This is a fun analysis of the narrator’s identity, thank you for sharing. In my midterm paper I am also writing somewhat about Undertale’s narrator and their relationship to both Chara and the player. One thing that strikes me is that the narrator is like a DM (Dungeon Master) in Dungeons and Dragons: much like DMs respond to strange actions of their players by telling them what the results are, Undertale’s narrator responds to the player clicking on various entities by providing extended descriptions of objects or enemies. This comparison becomes especially interesting when you consider that it suggests the narrator has an understanding of the world that is different from that of the player. I’m not just talking about…