Overview: In "The Zebra Storyteller," Spenser Holst states that the purpose of stories is to prepare us for the
unexpected. Though the storyteller thinks he is just spinning stories out of
his own imagination, in order to amuse, his stories prove to be practical.
Other storytellers make the function of fiction less
extraordinary. According to them, fiction enables readers to avoid projecting
false hopes and fears and shows them what they can actually
expect in their everyday lives, so that they can prepare themselves.
What else do you see in this symbolic piece of meta-fiction?
In "Happy Endings," Margaret Atwood (author of The Handmaid's Tale) addresses our need for closure as we read fiction. What makes for an appropriate ending to a work of fiction? What are we looking for? What should we be looking for? Atwood suggests how and why.
What does she mean by that?
Directions: Please read and study the following pieces of short fiction. Next, in this blog space, please discuss an idea from Holst and an idea from Atwood using one of the summer reading selections. Engage with each other. Use the text. Be genuine and authentic. Think about the value of words by being concise. Think about your audience. Also, revisit the blog. Read and respond to your fellow classmates. Get a dialogue going. Challenge each other. Be bold. Be brilliant.
"The Zebra Storyteller"
by Spencer Holst
Once upon a time there was a Siamese cat who pretended to be
a lion and spoke inappropriate Zebraic.
That language is whinnied by the race of striped horses in
Africa.
Here now: An innocent zebra is walking in a jungle and
approaching from another direction is the little cat; they meet.
"Hello there!" says the Siamese cat in perfectly
pronounced Zebraic. "It certainly is a pleasant day, isn't it? The sun is
shining, the birds are singing, isn't the world a lovely place to live
today!"
The zebra is so astonished at hearing a Siamese cat speaking
like a zebra, why-he's just fit to be tied.
So the little cat quickly ties him up, kills him, and drags
the better parts of the carcass back to his den.
The cat successfullyhunted zebras manymonths in this manner,
dining on filet mignon of zebra everynight, and from the better hides he made
bow neckties and wide belts after the fashion of the decadent princes of the
Old Siamese court.
He began boasting to his friends he was a lion, and he gave
them as proof the fact that he hunted zebras.
The delicate noses of the zebras told them there was really
no lion in the neighborhood. The zebra deaths caused many to avoid the region.
Superstitious, they decided the woods were haunted by the ghost of a lion.
One day the storyteller of the zebras was ambling, and
through his mind ran plots for stories to amuse the other zebras, when suddenly
his eyes brightened, and he said, "That's it! I'll tell a story about a
Siamese cat who learns to speak our language! What an idea! that'll make 'em
laugh!"
Just then the Siamese cat appeared before him, and said,
"Hello there! Pleasant day today, isn't it!"
The zebra storyteller wasn't fit to be tied at bearing a cat
speaking his language, because he'd been thinking about that veryt hing.
He took a good look at the cat, and he didn't know why, but
there was something about his looks be didn't like, so he kicked him with a
hoof and killed him.
That is the function of the storyteller.
"Happy Endings"
by Margaret Atwood
John and Mary meet. What happens next? If you want a happy
ending, try A.
A.
John and Mary fall in love and get married. They both have
worthwhile and remunerative jobs which they find stimulating and challenging.
They buy a charming house. Real estate values go up. Eventually, when they can
afford live-in help, they have two children, to whom they are devoted. The
children turn out well. John and Mary have a stimulating and challenging sex
life and worthwhile friends. They go on fun vacations together. They retire.
They both have hobbies which they find stimulating and challenging. Eventually
they die. This is the end of the story.
B.
Mary falls in love with John but
John doesn't fall in love with Mary. He merely uses her body for selfish
pleasure and ego gratification of a tepid kind. He comes to her apartment twice
a week and she cooks him dinner, you'll notice that he doesn't even consider
her worth the price of a dinner out, and after he's eaten dinner he fucks her
and after that he falls asleep, while she does the dishes so he won't think
she's untidy, having all those dirty dishes lying around, and puts on fresh
lipstick so she'll look good when he wakes up, but when he wakes up he doesn't
even notice, he puts on his socks and his shorts and his pants and his shirt
and his tie and his shoes, the reverse order from the one in which he took them
off. He doesn't take off Mary's clothes, she takes them off herself, she acts
as if she's dying for it every time, not because she likes sex exactly, she
doesn't, but she wants John to think she does because if they do it often
enough surely he'll get used to her, he'll come to depend on her and they will
get married, but John goes out the door with hardly so much as a good-night and
three days later he turns up at six o'clock and they do the whole thing over
again. Mary gets run-down. Crying is bad for your face, everyone knows that and
so does Mary but she can't stop. People at work notice. Her friends tell her
John is a rat, a pig, a dog, he isn't good enough for her, but she can't
believe it. Inside John, she thinks, is another John, who is much nicer. This
other John will emerge like a butterfly from a cocoon, a Jack from a box, a pit
from a prune, if the first John is only squeezed enough. One evening John
complains about the food. He has never complained about her food before. Mary
is hurt. Her friends tell her they've seen him in a restaurant with another
woman, whose name is Madge. It's not even Madge that finally gets to Mary: it's
the restaurant. John has never taken Mary to a restaurant. Mary collects all
the sleeping pills and aspirins she can find, and takes them and a half a
bottle of sherry. You can see what kind of a woman she is by the fact that it's
not even whiskey. She leaves a note for John. She hopes he'll
discover her and get her to the hospital in time and repent and then they can
get married, but this fails to happen and she dies. John marries Madge and
everything continues as in A.
C.
John, who is an older man, falls in love with
Mary, and Mary, who is only twenty-two, feels sorry for him because he's
worried about his hair falling out. She sleeps with him even though she's not
in love with him. She met him at work. She's in love with someone called James,
who is twenty-two also and not yet ready to settle down. John on the contrary
settled down long ago: this is what is bothering him. John has a steady,
respectable job and is getting ahead in his field, but Mary isn't impressed by
him, she's impressed by James, who has a motorcycle and a fabulous record
collection. But James is often away on his motorcycle, being free. Freedom
isn't the same for girls, so in the meantime Mary spends Thursday evenings with
John. Thursdays are the only days John can get away. John is married to a woman
called Madge and they have two children, a charming house which they bought
just before the real estate values went up, and hobbies which they find stimulating
and challenging, when they have the time. John tells Mary how important she is
to him, but of course he can't leave his wife because a commitment is a
commitment. He goes on about this more than is necessary and Mary finds it
boring, but older men can keep it up longer so on the whole she has a fairly
good time. One day James breezes in on his motorcycle with some top-grade
California hybrid and James and Mary get higher than you'd believe possible and
they climb into bed. Everything becomes very underwater, but along comes John,
who has a key to Mary's apartment. He finds them stoned and entwined. He's
hardly in any position to be jealous, considering Madge, but nevertheless he's
overcome with despair. Finally he's middle-aged, in two years he'll be as bald
as an egg and he can't stand it. He purchases a handgun, saying he needs it for
target practice-this is the thin part of the plot, but it can be dealt with
later--and shoots the two of them and himself. Madge, after a suitable period
of mourning, marries an understanding man called Fred and everything continues
as in A, but under different names.
D.
Fred and Madge have no problems. They
get along exceptionally well and are good at working out any little
difficulties that may arise. But their charming house is by the seashore and
one day a giant tidal wave approaches. Real estate values go down. The rest of
the story is about what caused the tidal wave and how they escape from it. They
do, though thousands drown, but Fred and Madge are virtuous and grateful, and
continue as in A.
E.
Yes, but Fred has a bad heart. The rest of the story is
about how kind and understanding they both are until Fred dies. Then Madge
devotes herself to charity work until the end of A. If you like, it can be
"Madge," "cancer," "guilty and confused," and
"bird watching."
F.
If you think this is all too bourgeois, make John
a revolutionary and Mary a counterespionage agent and see how far that gets
you. Remember, this is Canada. You'll still end up with A, though in between
you may get a lustful brawling saga of passionate involvement, a chronicle of
our times, sort of.
You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however
you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, either
deliberately fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by
excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic
ending is the one provided here:
John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and
Mary die.
So much for endings. Beginnings are always more fun. True
connoisseurs, however, are known to favor the stretch in between, since it's
the hardest to do anything with. That's about all that can be said for plots,
which anyway are just one thing after another, a what and a what and a what.
Now try How and Why.
We always want to know the ending of a story, often glazing over the middle to get there, but why is it the end that holds the power over the story. In 'In the Lake of the Woods', we see a story without a direct and clean-cut ending-- nothing is resolved, nothing is addressed, nothing is left behind but the framing of a decaying story. Atwood says there is only one ending, death, and that much is true in a sense, but in the context of the novel can we really say if that is the ending. Both John and Kathy go missing and are potentially dead, but somehow their story haunts on in the remembrance of whats possible-- gone, but not dead; remembered, but not wholly. It's stories such as these that leave us thinking about what death really is. Even Johns father, while unquestionably dead, is left haunting John, living on in the memory so that his impact remains omnipotent in forming Johns life. In another sense, we don't know this story, but it feels eerily possible and real. We see reflections of the Vietnam war and dirty politics everywhere in the present. Sure it's a story but it could be real-- a common teaching of our old friend O'Brien. What is the worth of a story? Just because it's a lie does that make it any less real?
ReplyDeleteThroughout the entire novel, I kept wanting a clear ending, some closure. The evidence section outlined numerous possible solutions to the mystery of Kathy's disappearance, but the novel ends without favoring one. We are left to decide for ourselves what truly happened. The novel's lack of closure leaves me considering all the outcomes; I want the outcome where John leaves for Canada to start a new life with Kathy to be true— the story tale "happy ending"— but I more realistically believe that Kathy is dead and John is running to escape his crime. Even if a story is not real, as fiction is not, the messages they provide can leave an impact on the reader. We do not know what happened to John and Kathy Wade but their story is still very real. A story has value if it make the reader re-consider the obvious.
DeleteI like that your response questions why is it that the end holds the power over the story. In most novels, there's a clear cut ending that wraps up the whole book. But ‘In the Lake of the Woods,’ we are left to form our own opinion on what happened. I believe that this ending is just as effective, if not more, than the typical resolution, as it allows us to create our own ending.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the Zebra Storyteller, Holst argues that the purpose of stories is to prepare us for the unexpected. I'd like to argue that this is not the case. We all separate stories from life in our heads, and when we read stories, we do so while knowing it isn't true. We have all read childhood stories with magical fairies in them; yet if confronted with one we would likely have the same shock as we would had we not read any stories with them. In a previous comment, Mr. Pellerin asked,"Just because it's a lie does it make it any less real?" I'd like to argue that in our knowledge that stories are made up, the stories do become less real to us. This is apparant in the hours, in which the characters are more affected by real life events than events in books. For instance, Laura was more profoundly affected by the idea that Virginia Woolf committed suicide, and Clarrisa is more profoundly affected by Richard's death than either was by the suicide in Mrs. Dalloway.
ReplyDeleteAlthough you make a reasonable argument that stories are less real if we know that they are lies, I would argue that the validity of a story does not depend on whether or not it is true. Many of the non-fiction, news stories we read or hear about have a significant impact on our lives. However, we often lack any personal connections to many of those real, true stories. Therefore, it does not take a personal connection to be able to relate to a fictional story. The story may be a lie but the messages are evermore true.
DeleteI agree that there is certainly an important distinction to be made here but I do not think we can say that Holst's message is clearly true or false. It's certainly true that if we were to encounter magical creatures we would still be very surprised even if we had read stories about them. However, it is also true that through reading stories like historical fiction, those based in fact and realism, we might be more prepared for new information. For example, one who reads books detailing the atrocities of a fictional war may be less disturbed to hear of those from a real one because they have already been confronted with these issues in their mind before.
DeleteA Siamese cat mastered the art of deception; imitating a lion, the small creature “successfully hunted zebras many months…, dining on filet mignon of zebra every night.” After acquiring trust with phrases like “Hello there!...It certainly is a pleasant day, isn't it?...,” the Siamese cat betrayed the zebras, tied them up, and devoured them for dinner. Likewise, as a child, John Wade was obsessed with magic. As a result, he was naturally drawn to the profession of politics, for it is another type of deception. His career was one large magic trick, convincing people to trust and vote him into office. Tony Carbo, once a campaign manager for John, made the distinction that “politics and magic were almost the same thing for him. Transformations—that’s part of it—trying to change things. When you think about it, magicians and politicians are basically control freaks” (27). John was initially successful in holding numerous, local political positions, until his lies began to unravel and the truth of his involvement in My Lai was revealed. Although a meta-fictional story, the tale of the Siamese cat resembles that of John Wade. The little creature and politician both were initially successful in their deception and artifice. However, once the storyteller Zebra considered the truth about the Siamese cat and once the public uncovered the truth of My Lai, they both abruptly failed. This idea of deception to acquire success appears evermore relevant to our society. Are there any examples in our society that connect to this idea of deception? Businesses lying to consumers? Athletes caught cheating? Politics?
ReplyDeleteThe parallel between the Siamese cat and John Wade is perfect. I found it really interesting how you connected their ongoing deceptiveness to each other's. It is interesting how in both instances, John and the cat both ended up getting caught lying, and paid a very heavy consequence for their actions. In today's society, there is certainly lots of deceptiveness, especially in the business and political worlds. However, unlike in these two stories, not all the deceivers get caught. Today, many people continue to trick others like John and the cat, in politics and in business, to further themselves in life, and sometimes they get away with it. For those who are never caught, are they morally correct for doing what they do to advance themselves, or should they have to pay the consequences like the others?
DeleteI also found the similarity between the Siamese cat and John Wade to be striking, showing that the combination of a large ego and trickery can be fatal. To answer your question, I believe there are many businesses deceiving consumers in our world. Last year in AP Lang we looked at Apple's ad in 1984 for their new computer, in which they encouraged people to buy the new Mac so that "1984 [wouldn't] be like 1984," referring to Orwell's bestselling book. However when you look at Apple today, you can see that they have basically created the tools for other companies to invade users' personal information, just as Big Brother did in Orwell's "1984."
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Zebra Storyteller”, the idea of the passage revolves around the tricky nature of telling a story. When the cat first encountered the zebra, he thought “why-he's just fit to be tied” (Holst). Upon this, the cat ties up the Zebra because the Zebra was caught off guard. Later in the story, when the Zebra thinks of a cat trying to speak Zebraic, he sees the cat. The Zebra is not caught off guard because he had just been thinking of the cat prior to their meeting. In this fable, every character plays an important role. Through the cat, we see the importance of telling the truth. The Zebra teaches us that being ignorant and superstitious can lead to harmful misconceptions. The storyteller plays with our imagination, pushing us to see how his ideas can or will come true. In the story “Happy Endings”, Atwood further shows the manipulation of storytelling. She tells a story with the same characters but uses different endings to explain what happened to them. With each story, there is a different ending that raises a multitude of emotions in the audience. The characters force the reader to want the best for them, particularly because of the first story involving John and Mary. Atwood focus on the importance of the story’s context, despite the fact that John and Mary’s death is “the only authentic ending” (Atwood). The manipulation of storytelling is something that makes readers think. This theme is what Tim O’Brien, author of In the Lake in the Woods, is mainly known for. He tells a story in one way while pushing the reader to believe a certain idea, then completely changes the shift of the story, further manipulating the reader to think something else. When reading a story, it is important to always consider the perspective. This is an extremely important factor when it comes to storytelling because it can make you see things in different ways. Like “The Zebra Storyteller” and “Happy Endings”, the way in which writer tells the story shows the purpose of storytelling. Like Tim O’Brien, these authors sought out to cleverly manipulate their stories in order to demonstrate the depth in which the reader can be manipulated. It is important to consider in what ways we are manipulated in life. It could be being consumers with the growing industry of products we are pushed to buy or it could be the prominent stereotypes that force us to act the same way.
ReplyDeleteGrowing up, we all watched Disney movies. Each with the same archetypal story-line, message, and ending, the stories all resemble one another, with different characters and settings. However, Margaret Atwood forces her readers to consider alternative endings. Instead of the typical, extraordinary stories with predictable endings, she writes a satirical series of stories with numerous, unexpected endings. Story A provides the classic ending, where everyone lives ‘happily ever after.’ The following stories relate to A but have negative alterations to them. This enables the stories to be more realistic but lacks the happy ending we all yearn. For instance, one story has a character purchasing “..a handgun, saying he needs it for target practice-and [shooting] the two [people] and himself.” Untraditional, different endings often make fascinating, relatable story-lines. However, would you still like Cinderella if it had a negative, alternative ending? How about Peter Pan?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you; I feel that though negative endings are of the untraditional sort, there is some beauty that lies behind them. Negative endings break the typical happy-ending patterns that we see all over the media and can offer a more realistic conclusion to the audience. Relatable (but not always satisfying) content can appeal more to others, as the generic "happily ever after" can sometimes portray an unrealistic standard to human life and scenario. That being said, I would be intrigued to see an alternative ending to many of the common productions from our childhood.
DeleteThe Grimm brothers wrote fairy tails, which many Disney movies were based off of. What's interesting is that Grimm's stories entailed twisted, dark, and gruesome plots and endings. However, the Disney movies that we see usually end in the beautiful prevail of the protagonist and the downfall of the antagonist, because, I agree, it is what we all yearn for. I feel that the Grimm stories are often unheard of or under rated, because they deliver the same unsettling vibes, like endings B and C by Atwood.
DeleteIn order to write a good story, one must be a good storyteller. In “The Zebra Storyteller,” Holst demonstrates the idea that the storyteller controls every aspect of the story. They have the power to create plot twists, unexpected turns, and they decide how the story will end. A storyteller knows how to intrigue the reader and can alter their own story to keep their audience interested. Similarly, Atwood demonstrates this concept in “Happy Endings,” as she writes a slew of possibilities that offer a more interesting story than the standard happy endings. Although it is true that all characters will eventually die, Atwood demonstrates the way in which the life of a character can be told to keep the audience interested. These ideas all align in with what Michael Cunningham does in The Hours. At the end of the novel, it is suddenly revealed that Laura Brown is the mother of Richard, with whom the reader has been following in Clarissa’s story. This revelation shocks the reader, effectively keeping one captivated in the story. This element of surprise is evident in Atwood’s short stories as well. For example in C, when John suddenly purchases a gun “and shoots the two of them and himself,” it catches the reader off guard, as this is drastically different from the classic happy ending. Holst highlights the storyteller’s ability to bring these elements of surprise and amazement to the story, as he has the storyteller in his own story see through the cat, as he already knew what the cat’s intentions were. Holst effectively changes the plot, as the storyteller “kicked him with a hoof and killed him,” signifying the key role of a storyteller.
ReplyDeleteSusan Matteucci
DeleteI think your argument is really interesting. The plot twist may be the most intriguing part of the story. Atwood tells us to focus on the how and why. Endings can often be predictable, and I think you make a good point in saying that the most exciting and maybe even the most important part of the book can take place in the middle, when the author throws the reader a curve ball.
Cathy Sie
ReplyDeleteBetween the works of Atwood, Holst, and O’Brien, endings seem to be the focal point of each piece. In Happy Endings and In the Lake of the Woods, both authors demonstrate numerous routes that the plot could have taken, and at the same time, toy with the audience's emotions; leaving the audience without closure evokes feelings of uncertainty and dissatisfaction. As Happy Endings narrows to a close, “Now try How and Why,” (Atwood) similarities reflect between how both authors take us through their pieces and ultimately force us to create our own endings. Happy Endings, as a whole, shares parallels between the ideas of mystery and possibility with In the Lake of the Woods. With The Zebra Storyteller, however, it is important to focus more so on the comparison of emotional behavior than the overall patterns within the piece. When the zebra storyteller unexpectedly encounters his bizarre creation from his imagination, he “kicked him [Siamese cat] with a hoof and killed him” (Holst). The Zebra’s emotional and fearful reaction can be metaphorically compared to John Wade’s character, leaving the audience to ponder over the connections. If Kathy returned to John, would he react the same way as the zebra (fearfully)? Is O’Brien trying to explain John’s emotional state with the lack of closure behind each hypothesis? Is that why none of the hypotheses conclude with Kathy’s return? Holst’s piece reveals and emphasizes many of the psychological ties behind the characters in O’Brien’s In the Lake of the Woods.
I found your connection between the zebras and John Wade very intriguing, which got me thinking about what it would take for John Wade to become more like the zebra storyteller, and therefore be better prepared for any outcome (hypothesis) that followed. Maybe if John became a truthful storyteller to those in his life, the "Sorcerer" within him would diminish, allowing him to live a relatively normally. At the same time, there becomes a point where what really happened and what seemed to happen begin to blend, a blending that all storytellers seem to make, whether they want to or not. The zebra storyteller crafted a story of truth without meaning to. John Wade crafted many stories based off lies and tricks, but somehow the truth was braided within them. However, there is one main difference between John and the zebra storyteller: John feared the truth while the zebra continuously searched for it. Wade ran from feelings, consequences, and life in general, while the zebra storyteller ran towards life and all it had to offer.
DeleteDavid Ritter
ReplyDeleteThe Zebra Storyteller by Spencer Holst and Happy Endings by Margaret Atwood are both pieces of metafiction. They each tell their own story but also carry within them a message about the essence of fiction and storytelling. Both stories break the so-called “Fourth Wall” by acknowledging the external world through references inside the text itself. In The Lake of the Woods by Tim O’Brien, in some ways, is also metafiction. As it reveals the mystery contained in the plot, it demonstrates the nature of a mystery. In Happy Endings, Atwood discusses the nature of endings: no matter the adventure, “the endings are the same however you slice it.” Everyone dies. This is demonstrated through various paths that lead to the same ending. In The Lake of the Woods uses a very similar tactic in its “Hypothesis” chapters. Each chapter shares a potential story, “a what and a what and a what” as Atwood would describe. However, these stories are unimportant. They are merely attempts to cope with the omnipresent conclusion: John and Mary are gone. I’ve seen several comments here to that effect but haven’t seen it discussed how these Hypotheses are also relevant to Holst’s claim. He asserts that the storyteller holds the power (and duty) to expand the Overton window and influence what is commonly perceived as true. O’Brien tactfully plays with the concept of truth in his story. He cycles between so many “truths” that by the end of the story, the reader is left scratching their heads, believing any one of them could be true, or all of them, or none of them. O’Brien’s book is on one hand an engaging fictional mystery, and on the other a commentary on the futility of seeking truth or closure from its narration.
I really like your idea of calling on the 'fourth wall' effect. It really adds an aspect to all the pieces I've read into a different light. Specifically, "Happy Endings", there's almost this voice that is telling you I know what you want, I'll say what you want, but will not give it to you. And I agree wholeheartedly that we see this in "In the Lake of the woods" as well as other fiction pieces of O'Brien's. And arguably that's the best part.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree that there's definitely room within these stories for readers to pick and choose which truths or parts of the stories they want to remember, just as John Wade picks parts from his memories to remember and parts from his memories to forget. The idea of truth becomes different for each character and reader involved with the story, giving individuality to all. Hearing and seeing only what you want is an idea many people subconsciously do, and these stories continuously toy with that subconscious desire. Sometimes you're granted the enjoyment of picking and choosing, while other times you're hit with concrete facts. John and Mary are gone. John and Mary die. But what (do you want to have) happened to them?
Delete"Happy Endings";I think it's interesting to entertain the idea that readers constantly seek closure in fiction writing,and that closure has to be a clear cut ending. I myself as an avid reader of dystopian novels, have always felt the instant gratification of a well closed, fully thought out ending. However "Happy Endings" in a way grapples with the idea that there is no such thing as a well closed, fully thought out ending. Instead they are seemingly unapologetically cliché. It's just the matter of how you get there. For example, the author of " Happy Endings" in examples D and E, are speaking of the same characters " Fred" and "Madge", they are set to be a wonderfully loving couple, who escape a tidal wave and then live happily ever after. Still a clear cut ending but it's how it is presented that gives us the feeling of 'wow, what a great ending'. When in facts its the same as all the others; and example E further proves that point to say that, you can even add extra obstacles such as " heart problems" or " cancer" to make it more worth or while. This idea in a sense makes me more inclined to actually favor endings such as the one at the end of the novel “ In the Lake of the Woods”. O’Brien makes sure that you are puzzled and left wanting more. Making the ending seemingly more appealing, and thought provoking. It makes you wonder, makes you angry, sad, maybe even happy. Even though, Margaret Atwood says that the only truly authentic ending is if both characters die, “In the Lake of the Woods” makes me think that, sometimes even just an abrupt ending can prove to be just as authentic.
ReplyDeleteSusan Matteucci
DeleteIn story E, when Atwood basically says that "if you like, it can be 'Madge', 'cancer', 'guilty and confused'". As though she is throwing plot points in with no care or reason. But in a movie or book, we would probably see this plot as interesting and attention grabbing. The only difference is those endings are more authentic. They have dialog and character development. So, Atwood is basicly telling us that the plot doesn't matter, it is the delivery. Did you see this when reading Atwood's piece?
Susan Matteucci
ReplyDeleteIn Margaret Atwood's list of endings to a story there is one thing in common: they die. If a story ends with two people in love, together, and alive then it will be be assumed the story ending A takes place after the author has finished writing, in which the two love birds have kids, retire, move to florida, and die. Death is always the end, therefore, authors should spend their time writing the how and why. This refers to how and why the characters died. Suicide? Cancer? Or good old fashioned story A? This is where the author gets to be creative and guild the reader. Tim O’brien, in his novel In the Lake of the Woods, uses this freedom to go in a different direction, deliberately not giving the reader a how and why. There are many theories, spanning from storyline A all the way to death by boiling water, but O’Brien never actually gives the reader a definite how and why, and tells the reader early on that they will never get one.
Does O’Brien’ diverge from Atwood’s perspective on the ending of a story means he used more creativity or less creativity? I think he used more, with each hypothesis he created another how and why. Adding more for the reader to digest.
These multiple how and why plotlines gives the reader a numerous amount of possible outcomes. The reader learns, as they read, that people who come back from the war with PTSD can control their illness from a scale of plot A to murder. Therefore, they should be treated as such: human beings with the capacity for a great life but dangerous if not given the help they need. This is what Spencer Holst says is the function of the storyteller; to expose their readers to different scenarios so, if one day they meet those scenarios, they will know what to do.
"Happy Endings" provides numerous endings to situations similar to everyday life. Initially the examples were almost expected but as she continued with the multiple examples they begun to be more as the stories continued. These abrupt endings distracted me from the beginning of these examples; forcing me to focus on the endings. As more examples of endings were told, more unrealistic and unexpected endings were provided. She makes it a priority for each example to be equipped with the tools of a happy ending. Although the title is said to be a "Happy Ending", this is not necessarily true for all of these examples. At the very end of example f, she states "John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." causing the ending of that particular example to be repetitive. The conflict of types of endings can be seen in " The Lake of the Woods". We as readers were never given a set and specific ending, especially since it was a mystery. Instead by the conclusion of the novel, we are still left with uncertainty and wonder in our minds. This uncertainty and wonder is erased with the simple statement of death in "Happy Endings". Although it is not the best farewell ending we would like as readers, we do not finish reading still questioning the ending chosen by the author.
ReplyDeleteI really like the point you bring up about being distracted by the endings of the stories, It really shifts the focus of the reader in a very odd way, changing the way most people would normally read and break down a story. Lake of The Woods definitely challenges the reader to piece together their own story from what the choose to be truth and what they believe to be from the mind of John Wade.
DeleteCody Ledoux
ReplyDeleteAll stories, from the fantastical to the autobiographical, have roots in human experience and emotion. No piece of writing is without a connection to the mind of the author, even a far-fetched piece of fiction needs a memory or thought process grounded in reality in order to be imagined. There are some special cases where personal connections are made to a text, both good and bad. Happy Endings is the quintessential example of this, because that is the entire purpose of the text. The misfortunes of John, Mary, Fred and Madge mirrors the lies told between John Wade and Kathy from In The Lake of the Woods. At different points of the novel, every part of Happy Endings connects with John and Kathy, boringly cheerful and excitingly depressing alike. What was to be perceived as a cut and dry story is broken, as Holst does in The Zebra Storyteller. From early into the novel, O’Brien lets the reader know that Kathy is gone. The ending is laid out early on, leading one to believe that there has to be something more to the situation. The fact that Kathy Wade is dead is not enough, there needs to be a reason as to why she's dead. The point of the novel, and the two short stories that are closely connected to it, is that it doesn’t matter why anyone has died. What’s important is that the characters have died at all. How they died is up to the reader to decide, whether they were drowned in a lake, or kicked in the head, or shot or rushed to the hospital.
ReplyDeleteBoth Atwood’s “Happy Endings” and Holst’s “The Zebra Storyteller” delve into the purpose of a story. In Atwood’s short story, it revolves around the lives of John and Mary, and although they have a happy ending, its the various journeys in B-F that make the story compelling. Similarly, the audience knows since the beginning that the women in The Hours are connected, but understanding the different ways they are intertwined is what makes it intriguing. Atwood also claims that “the endings are the same however you slice it”. This mentality parallels Clarissa’s declaration at the end of the book that no matter the choices the characters make, they all face the same conclusion. I agree with Laura in that “The Zebra Storyteller” shows how an author must balance not only interesting the reader, but also setting them up for the plot twists and ideas they want to share. This idea is demonstrated with the zebra storyteller, but I would argue that it is seen in the text as a whole. Within the first two sentences, Holst interests the reader with the unique characteristics of the cat and implies that speaking Zebraic will be the cat’s downfall. Cunningham uses Mrs. Dalloway as a device to foreshadow the lives of his characters and prepare his audience for their connection at the climax of the book.
Susan Matteucci
DeleteI liked how you focused on the reader's interest. You focused on the ending of Atwood's piece, saying that the endings are all the same. I wanted to also focus on the beginning. It starts when "John and Mary meet. What happens next?" I think that is like standing on the edge of a cliff, waiting for a numerous amount of stories to come out. So which do you think is more important/interesting to the reader? The beginning or the end? Both are the same for each story, so maybe the middle is the important part? I'm not sure.
In “Happy Endings,” Atwood is driving the idea that endings to stories are irrelevant. She wants to show how the endings do not matter as they “are the same however you slice it” and “they're all fake.” Atwood believes what matters most in a story is the beginning, and everything that happens before the ending. “In the Lake of the Woods” follows a very similar philosophy. Author Tim O’Brien does not care about the ending, which is what truly happened to Kathy. He only cares about what happened before that, which goes along with what Atwood believes. Both Atwood and O’Brien disregard the ending to the story and focus on the everything else. O’Brien examines the pasts of John Wade and other characters throughout his entire book, but never reveals what actually happened to Kathy, because in both his and Atwood’s minds, it does not matter, and as Atwood wrote, “beginnings are always more fun.”
ReplyDeleteIn Holst’s “The Zebra Storyteller,” death is one of the most prevalent themes. Multiple zebras die in the story, following with the main character, the Siamese cat, being killed in the end. In both “The Hours” and “In the Lake of the Woods,” there is certainly a theme of death. “The Hours” includes multiple suicides, while the whole mystery of Tim O’Brien’s novel is circled around a possible death. In “The Zebra Storyteller,” Holst was simply trying to send a message through a story, but there could have been many other metaphors used to explain his message, so why choose one with death? Clearly, with the language as simple as “he kicked him with a hoof and killed him,” death wasn’t a necessity to illustrate the message, so why use it as part of the metaphor? These, amongst many more stories, feature lots of events surrounding death, which begs the question, why are there so many stories written about death? Why are people so fascinated with death? Death is something that is shared amongst all people as something we will have to face inevitably. Yet, we know so little about it. We have no idea what will happen, and this mystery only illuminates the idea of death for us, which is why we are so fascinated about it, and why so many choose to write about it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEvery story has multiple sides and truths. At the end of “Happy Endings” Atwood summarizes by stating the simple ending in every case: “John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die.” But stories are about more than just the outcome. I agree with Cody in saying that the best stories are those where readers make personal connections, causing conclusions like the one in “Happy Endings” to be more than just two characters dying. Similarly “In the Lake of the Woods” by Tim O’Brien has chapters of evidence and hypotheses, making readers craft their own predictions about the truth of what happened. In “The Zebra Storyteller” Holst ends with the statement that “[t]his is the function of a storyteller,” encouraging readers to go back and find the root meanings between the facts, just as O’Brien does with many of his chapters. Although this may go against natural tendencies of wanting a conclusive ending, it showcases the reality that some stories are so intricate that they become too complicated to conclude altogether.
ReplyDeleteStorytellers entertain minds through lesson-filled stories. In “The Zebra Storyteller,” Holst is teaching readers to not be overconfident in their abilities, showing that in the end the “delicate noses” of the zebras hold more power than the “perfectly pronounced Zebraic” of the cat. John Wade of “In the Lake of the Woods” lives a life of lies and secrets, but through his magic tricks, his form of perfectly pronounced Zebraic, he gives off the impression of a happy, successful life for many years. Both Wade and the Siamese cat fail to acknowledge their weaknesses or tell the full truth, leading to their demise. This begs a question: is it more important to show substantial success in one field or have a well rounded skill set with no outstanding point of talent?
In both Atwood and Hoist’s short fictions the perspectives are really simple to read and the endings in both are also a major part of the story. In “The Zebra Storyteller” the Siamese cat tricks the zebras by speaking their language. However at the end the zebra storyteller is no fool to the cat and realizes it is not a lion and is instead a cat which is nothing to be afraid of. The ending refers to the zebra storyteller when meeting the cat and “so he kicked him with a hoof and killed him”. This ending shows that by anticipating the unexpected made the storyteller zebra wiser than all the others who could have realized the same thing and not have had to die. The same thing goes in “Happy Endings”, this whole short fiction is based on endings. In option A, it is the stereotypical love story where two people fall in love, get married, and live happily ever after. However what we have come to realize through B-F is that happy endings don’t always actually end happy. Most of the time they end with someone leaving unhappy or someone being hurt or someone stuck in a life they never wanted. These types of endings are a reality and people tend to pretend that the one in a hundred perfect happy ending happens to everyone. In most of Margot Atwoods endings someone ends up dying. These three stories all mostly have death as the ending. The way death comes upon the characters is different for each but not everyone gets the happy ending option A where “Eventually they die. This is the end of the story.” Like in “In the Lake of the Woods” I would say that endings are a major part of what makes a story. What really happened to John Wade as he left on his boat cast for nothing. In every book, the ending either ends happily, ends tragically, sets the stage for something to come or some combination of the three. Some endings are easy to anticipate and some make you have to reread over and over again to understand what you just read.
ReplyDeleteI really like your point about the way in which books always end. Thinking about the novels that I have read, I can easily think of an example for each of the endings you mentioned. I think that without even realizing, we all try to draw predictions based on certain aspects of the novels. Many books attempt to subtlety foreshadow their endings throughout the plot. Through these, we find ourselves trying to imagine the ending and in most cases, the ending that we want. When reading, I always find myself wanting the best for the character that I identify with most. I find myself willing to sacrifice a meaningful conclusion to a stereotypical happy ending.
DeleteEveryone has their own conclusion of what has happened in a story. In “Happy Endings” by Margaret Atwood, she proposes multiple endings to how the lives of two people end after meeting one another. The stories reach extremes of both happiness and depression, and show that one beginning can lead to multiple endings. Option A is the average love story depicted in our minds as normal and a “happy ending” while the other options show events more realistic. Atwood shows that while the reader may be more captivated with endings, “beginnings are always more fun.” In his novel “In the Lake of the Woods,” Tim O’Brien also captures the idea that beginnings are more essential to the story than the ending. When Kathy Wade mysteriously disappears he gives many hypotheses as to what happened to her but never gives a solid conclusion. While this may leave the reader confused and wanting a definitive answer, O’Brien is showing that everyone has their own interpretation of the truth and there may be more than one answer. In “The Zebra Storyteller,” Spencer Hoist is exploring “the function of the storyteller” through a series of captivating plot sequences, but also through hiding the meaning of the story within the plot. O’Brien chooses to tell his story differently, by recapping events and giving background details to the characters in his story. Just as every reader has their own conclusion of a story, every storyteller has their own voice.
ReplyDeleteDeath is waiting and unavoidable in all meta-fiction stories, but only few authors and storytellers will emphasize this fate, while other revel in happy endings and happy feelings. When one reads,”Once upon a time” (Spencer Holst ), one may think, “here we go again” as they prepare to settle for familiar plots and familiar endings that tease the possibility of closure, because deep down, we all just want answers. However, in The Hours by Michael Cunningham, the author wastes no time to describe every detail of Virginia Woolf's tragic suicide in the prologue. The reader must cope with this "ending" for the rest of the novel; even if Woolf moves to London or finds some delight in her mental suffering, she will not survive it. This is, as Spencer Holst explains in "The Zebra Storyteller", “... the function of the story teller,” killing off the siamese cat serves the same purpose as John, Mary, Madge, James' death in Happy Endings by Margaret Atwood. Because all characters, real, fiction, or however you spin it, "Eventually...die. This is the end of the story" (Atwood). These may not be the ending you prefer but, “you'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake” (Atwood) , therefore we can’t let Clarissa's party, or her nostalgic love affair with Richard distract from the fact that he is dying and will die. Tidal waves, love affairs, and valuable real estate can keep you busy, but death will always continue to chomp at the heels of every character. Does this mean the character's story doesn't necessarily end at the end of a story? What if every author revealed the demise of all of their characters?
ReplyDeleteIn The Lake of the Woods, the ending is uncertain, but it gives the apt amount of closure, as the ending is bound to happen regardless of how [we] want it to end. In "Happy Endings", Margaret Atwood affirms that "[You'll] have to face it, the endings are the same, however [you] slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, either deliberately fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality...So much for endings. Beginnings are always more fun." as a way to assert that endings, no matter how they end, or the details they include, all stories are made of the "how and why"- the motivations, desires and the responses each character makes regarding the interruptions of ending A.
ReplyDeleteIn the same tone, in "The Zebra Storyteller", the need for a 'satisfying ending' expresses the need for closure. However, in the closing line(?) of "The Zebra Storyteller", the ending goes like this, "He took a good look at the cat, and he didn't know why, but there was something about his looks he didn't like, so he kicked him with a hoof and killed him. That is the function of the storyteller." and so it goes, in the same general manner of delivering closure as Margaret Atwood's "Happy Endings". By having the Siamese cat killed off by the Zebra, the audience is given the closure that is so desired by telling what happened to the main character, in a very explicit manner.