Stories told from different points of view

Just listened to two books by Arthur Phillips: "The Egyptologist" and "Angelica". Both were learning experiences because he told the stories using two or more (in the case of Angelica) unreliable points of view. Sometimes going over the same ground with two or more people. It's compelling story-telling. It is also frustrating, in that in the end you are still not absolutely sure what happened. Both are historical novels but more experimental than the usual. Both are crazy but well worth reading. In the beginning of each novel, you are not sure which of the points of view is more insane and/or off. By the end of the novels, you are able to form an opinion on that question if no other. Some lessons for me- unreliable points of view can be very good but it's good to have more than one and make that a major theme of the novel. Like people tell stories about the past to look good themselves or that different delusions about what happened can fit together to get close to the real happenings of the past, but not perfectly. Going to go for "Prague" by Arthur Phillips next.