Does the author seem to have a friendly, unfriendly, or some other type of relationship with the audience? Why do you think so?

Piers Paul Read seems to be telling the story in a very unbiased, objective manner. His relationship with the audience is professional and businesslike. He does not put his own thoughts or feelings into his retelling of what happened in the mountains. He relies only on what the survivors have told him. Piers Paul Read has nothing to prove in writing this book, so he doesn't develop any sort of friendly/unfriendly relationship with the audience. He adds nothing of his own character to the story, so the reader doesn't develop any sort of feelings toward him. He doesn't have to be defensive in his writing. It is almost as if the sixteen survivors are writing the story through Piers Paul Read. His tone is very flat; he portrays all emotion through dialogue between the characters and observations. Somehow this does not make it unenjoyable to read. It is actually quite riveting, and I'm not exactly sure how.