In the short story, "Car Crash While Hitchhiking" Denis Johnson presents us with a capricious narrator; who falls in and out of an altered state while recounting the events of a nonlinear car crash. The narrator conveys the impression of being a wanderer, claiming he has hitchhiked with several people before the events of the wreck. The unsteadiness of this story falls upon the narrator's consumption of drugs, which were given to him by three different people: A salesman, a Cherokee Indian, and a college student. This drug-induced state grants the narrator a sense of hyper-awareness and foresight that further raises questions of the narrator's credibility and the character he encountered. In a dreamlike state, he denies sharing his knowledge of the events to the people around him. His actions here restrict the reader's security in the stories realism. Presented by the agency of a fragmented plot, it is through an unreliable narrator and foreshadowing that leads the story to the eventual descent of the drug-fueled, narrator's loss of sanity; exploring a certain state of mental illness.
Within the first sentences, the narrator directly lays out the plot. This is given to the reader through the third person point of view. At first, the recounting of events emerges as straightforward. That is until the phrase, “killed forever”, surfaces onto the page (1). This is stated in the second sentence when the narrator reveals his blurred recap. The word “forever” highlights that this type of death depicted in this phrase is permanent; while there is another underlying type of death that is temporary. Furthermore, the narrator implies that it is possible to be killed momentarily; proceeding to suggest that he might be entrenched in this fleeting state. From here the story switches to a first-person point of view, giving insight on the current situation, of the narrator being woken up, homeless, to the pouring rain. This also reveals the fragmentation that will occur throughout the tale. The story goes on to detail the narrators’ “less than conscious” condition, which is a result of the drugs that were given to him from his early encounters(1). This highlights that the events to be told will be held with a grain of uncertainty, leaving the reader to question the actuality of the affairs presented. The fact that the story is told through a drug-induced narrator, forces the reader to reconsider the realism of his experiences. Moreover, the blatant intention of the narrator's unreliability shows the reader that he might be mentally ill which would skew the perception of the story. By the story being told through a sedated narrator, it grants a look into an addict's mind. Through this, we can see how unaware he was during these experiences. This limits the point of view of other characters in the story and restricts our perspective to a biased context.
It is through foreshadowing that it reveals the narrator's knowledge and acceptance of the events to come. This is shown when the narrator “knew” the Oldsmobile would stop for him and “knew” there would be a tragedy to come (1). This foresight of events informs the reader of the narrator's delirious state, blurring the lines between sanity and insanity. His knowledge of circumstances grants him the ability to predict the outcome and even prevent the effects that will prevail. Yet he chose to withhold information, revealing to the reader that he simply does not care. This restraint of knowledge causes harm to himself and the people around him, highlighting an addict's acceptance of faith and unwillingness to change. The next series of events details the narrator’s precedence to fall asleep, with a nine-month-old seated next to him. Then he was suddenly awoken by the crash he foresaw earlier. This is the second case where the narrator admits his expectations for the upcoming events. This is declared when he states, “I'd known all along what was going to happen,” revealing the omen that comes in to play (2). Moreover, this leaves the reader to wonder why he does nothing to stop this. Previously mentioned this could further highlight the fact that addicts do not care about themselves or the people around them. Only moving along because they have to. This captures the narrator's skewed stream of consciousness because of his foresight of the harrowing circumstances that happen throughout the story.
The narrator denies the knowledge that he knows to undertake the rejection of authority; by doing so in an attempt of asking questions for which he already knows the answers. This is shown when Johnson writes, “What happened,” when the narrator had previously foreshadowed the wreck that would occur (2). This reveals that the narrator is fully aware of the situation at stake, further proving his desire for detachment from his actual reality. The wreck forces the narrator to come to terms with his existence, yet he is severely impaired by the narcotics. Which in result restrict his condition of actuality. In continuation, there is a flash of hope for the narrator's credibility. This is displayed when he states to the truck driver, “There’s a wreck. Go for help.” (2). Within the next few sets of lines, a glimpse of the narrator's questionability comes into play. This is exposed when he states, “I thought I should talk to them.” (4). The emphasis on the word “thought” highlights his reassurance of whether to impose his insight of observation or yield back to a bystander. From here, the narrator falls fully into his submissive state when he attempts to hand over the child from his arms to the truck driver. The child was evidence from the wretch and by dismissing this evidence, it gives him the power to uphold his right to be a testimony to the accident. This shows the reader that the narrator shuns the position of being a credible witness and exposes his transformation as a complete bystander, in contrast to his earlier assistance. Furthermore, he develops the gender of the child when the truck driver asks if it is a boy, to which the narrator replies, ‘Well, I think so,” (2). This secures the narrator is refusing information because he had known the child was a girl along. This shows his fear of being faced with his reality.
Throughout the story, the narrator reveals that there is another fundamental sadness in life which is not death itself. This is conveyed by his lack of empathy and unableness to show remorse towards the events that happen around him. After the wreck, the narrator reveals to the reader his knowledge of the man’s painful fait, yet he continues to analyze the situation instead of helping. “....I looked down into the great pity of a person’s life on this earth”(4). This highlights that the narrator thinks life itself is meaningless and is unable to feel emotion towards the people around him. This detachment of emotion and desensitized outlook on death could be linked to his excessive drug use, causing him to become disassociated from feeling remorse. Moreover, when the narrator states, “I don't mean that we all end up dead, that's not the great pity,” this clearly shows that the narrator does not believe death is the ultimate tragedy (4). Johnson is conveying that life on earth can become harder than dying which could highlight why he chooses to tell the story through a sedated drug addict. The narrator's struggle with drugs withholds his ability to feel guilt or grief, causing him to not fear death or see it as a sorrow; but rather to see death almost as a relief. Johnson’s use of an unreliable narrator helps to depict a detached stream of consciousness that questions morality and sanity. Furthermore, this could highlight Johnson's negative view on life, revealing to the reader that he believes the greatest -99ii9struggle is going through daily life itself.
This short story holds more than a hitchhiker who experiences a series of events leading up to a tragic car crash. This story illustrates a man who is unable to come to terms with his reality, which in result, leads him to excessive drug use. The narrator hides his burden of knowledge from the people around him by asking questions to remove his power of credibility. Johnsons do this by formulating a fragmented plot, leaving the reader to question what events occurred first and what events occurred last. This unclear plot helps to give insight into a sedated man's mentality, which is hazed and detached from the rational world. Laid out in the first sentences, the narrator holds foresight of the disastrous events to come; yet he carelessly accompanies his encounters, while secretly withholding his consciousness. Johnsons explores an ill mentality that reveals the narrator’s unemotional take of death; expressing to the reader that going through life can sometimes be harder than death in itself. This is shown by the eyewitness, narrators’ desensitized state to the car crash and death he witnessed. These series of cataclysmic events lead the narrator into a full descent into a drug-induced breakdown, resulting in his inability to cope with the real world. Johnson's choice of telling the story through the eyes of an addict takes on the observation of a different kind of mindset; a junkie. The narrator's foresight of the accident and excessive drug use uncovers a man who is severely impaired with unclear perception and is eventually led to a pervades of his life. It is through foreshadowing and an unreliable narrator that Johnson ultimately questions the reality of the whole story itself, leaving the reader confused and wanting to know more.
