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.
In Atwood’s piece “Happy Endings”, the author’s contrasting samples of text highlight the importance of purpose and style in writing instead of tangible events. Simple sentence structure, a predictable story line, and dull explanations were all evident in her examples despite the inclusion of events that could make a good piece of writing. Throughout the examples, the importance of inclusion of personal voice, portraying a unique idea, and highlighting it through a creative way showed to differentiate those two opposites.
ReplyDeleteIn “In the Lake in the Woods”, the author’s way of depicting the story line highlighted the importance of those ideas. Throughout the novel, many characters’ views on John’s life are shown instead of a singular first-person view. This depiction creates an inquisitive view on explaining the plot and makes the reader think beyond the physical events that occur instead of merely stating facts of the plot. Especially in the depiction of John’s experiences and recollections of Vietnam, the inclusion of contextual inferences, emotional attributes, and multiple perspectives helps the reader get a better picture of what the situation was like. Finally, the resolution (or lack of one) added to make the text unique. Instead of a predictable plot with a predictable moral, the unknown disappearance of John’s wife Kathy added to the mystery pertinent throughout the text. Personally, I think this made for an extremely effective ending as it gave the reader more to think about rather than drawing an expected conclusion for them.
Oliver, I like how you highlighted Atwood's use of purpose and style, in contrast to the plot. I also found it intriguing how she was almost arguing her own work within the text which made it comical and thought-provoking to read.
DeleteYou bring up a good point. The contrasting views were definitely a unique trait which added a lot to the book's style. It was definitely interesting as most authors don't take that approach to describing characters.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA reader may feel betrayed by an ending left open like "Unaccustomed Earth." In each story, whether a character is in great despair or comfort, the final pages only give you a simple moment in time. It is not a concrete end but it does not give much way to a new beginning either. “Endings are the same however you slice it.” The end is not the purpose. As Atwood says, “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.” You enter each story with hope, and within the core of the text you begin to understand the characters, their lives, and try to formulate their movements into a reasonable conclusion. Yet, the end is not predictable, because it is not significant. It is only a moment in time, following a story far to impressive to match.
ReplyDeleteUpon hearing the cat speak Zebraic, “The zebra storyteller wasn't fit to be tied at bearing a cat speaking his language, because he'd been thinking about that very thing.” The zebra’s lack of surprise is the product of an imagination meant to be shared with the world. In order to protect or inform others, novelists can tell stories that prepare readers for real life or even just the end of a story. "Unaccustomed Earth" prepares the reader for the inconclusiveness of life's events up until the point of death. The stories are open to interpretation in this novel similar to how the truth is presented in "The Lake of the Woods." I agree with Oliver’s thoughts on how "The Lake of the Woods" is framed in a complex way and believe this also relates to the simple statement on the purpose of storytelling in “The Zebra Storyteller.” The confusing and sometimes unrelated parts of "The Lake of the Woods" prepared the reader for an open ending that stuck with the novel’s themes of mystery and uncertainty.
I completely agree with you Audrey about the negligible impact of endings on the plot. "The end is not the purpose" summarized this very well and your examples help reinforce that. Also I agree with you that I think the authors of these texts intended for an open-ended plot structure, yet still created seemingly simple concrete events which created a unique yet immersive story.
DeleteIn her short story “Happy Endings” Margaret Atwood criticizes the desire people have for happiness and closure in stories. She argues that giving people the happy endings they crave for causes the story to become bland and unrealistic. Atwood’s cynical attitude towards happy endings is similar to the way Tim O’Brien crafted his novel In the Lake of the Woods. O’Brien purposefully made the book so that readers would have to draw their own conclusions about whether John killed his wife rather than giving them a concrete ending. Atwood argues that this kind of endings have more literary value because they focus on the “How and Why” of the story as opposed to plots that “are just one thing after another.”
ReplyDeleteI agree with Audrey’s interpretation of “The Zebra Storyteller” and how the role of an author is to prepare readers while telling a story for the ending and the harsh reality of life. This idea can be applied to In the Lake of the Woods because of its depiction of human nature. O’Brien depicts human nature in a negative light by characterizing John Wade as ordinary yet making him commit terrible acts. O’Brien is trying to introduce the unsettling reality of human nature to his readers in the way that, according to Holst, is “the function of the storyteller.”
I agree with Sarah in her point that what these authors are saying is about more then just story telling they are trying to say something about human nature as well, especially O'Brien. He really goes into the depth with the character of John, it makes me think about all the layers to a person which we often times let go unnoticed. But because he explored the character so deeply it doesn't leave room for a clear cut judgement, there is too much to the character. As real humans the character wasn't good or bad.
DeleteBoth Holst and Atwood emphasize that in order for the storyteller to fulfill their purpose in preparing readers for unexpected, their writing must incorporate some kind of search for truth. Holst’s Siamese cat engages in “boasting,” deception, and lies. He promises the zebra a “pleasant day” in a “lovely place to live.” Then he murders them. Holst’s use of irony models the nature of the unexpected in literature and in life—it is the opposite of what is predicted or perceived to be true. In fact, the “perfectly pronounced Zebraic” used by the cat is “inappropriate,” meaning in this context, the cat’s words are inaccurate and inconsistent with his actions. Atwood states this more straightforwardly, warning the reader not to 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.” Her statement characterizes the author as the deceiver, but for good reason—to lead the reader on a search for truth, and prepare them to unravel the complexities of their own mysteries.
ReplyDeleteAn author who follows the pattern of the storyteller is Michael Cunningham in The Hours. The book is full of deception and misleading characters. The reader is in a constant state of investigation, seeking to understand the relationship between each of the characters. For me, the outcome was not what I had predicted—the truth was unexpected. I agree with Audrey that the open ending of a novel like In the Lake of the Woods can be a form of the unexpected, and can lead the reader down an entirely separate search for truth.
In Atwood’s “Happy Endings”, the most important part of the story comes from the actions in the middle. Atwood mocks the “fairytale ending” that authors end up writing, the classic ending of the death of the main character(s). This relates to Cunningham’s “The Hours” when Richard dies. This parallels part C of Atwood’s work in which John finds his lover cheating on him and “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.” I agree with Audrey’s idea that the story begins pleasantly and is more about the actions and development of characters that is significant rather than the ending.” Although both endings result in death, they are so different due to the importance of the events leading up to them rather than the end itself.
ReplyDeleteA story’s events, however, depend on perspective. In both Cunningham’s “The Hours” and Holst’s “The Zebra Storyteller”, the author plays with the idea of different viewpoints to interest their readers. In “The Hours”, with each chapter being a new character and situation, the characters react similarly to different events. For example, both Mrs. Brown and Virginia Woolf are contemplating suicide even though they have very different life experiences, one being a writer struggling with mental health and the other feeling trapped and struggling with perfectionism in a seemingly ideal life of a pregnant housewife. In Holst’s work the cat shocks the zebras and takes advantage of their vulnerability, seeing himself as a lion. The storyteller, however, detects the cat’s manipulation and kills him. This change in perspective entirely shifts your understanding of the characters and shapes their own actions.
The storyteller “...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.” This shows an abrupt ending but ultimately reflect the point of Atwood’s “Happy Endings” in which the main character dies. Not only does this ending show a shock in the sotry, but it tells the reader what the “function of the storyteller” is. It gives the author complete control over the characters and plot, so as a reader it can be frustrating but even if you think you know what will happen, it is ultimately not up to you as the reader.
Delete“This is the function of the storyteller” Holst says, The Zebra storyteller is given the power to do whatever he pleases with the cat as any actual author has the ability to do so with their characters. If he doesn’t like something he can simply discard of it or decide on an ending that pleases his own opinions. Just as the Zebra storyteller does when he kills off the Zebraic speaking cat with no explanation to offer to even himself. The writer holds all the power. As readers we like to think every choice is meticulous, well thought out with the intentions of what is best for the story at heart. But that’s just what we tell ourselves as a means of closure.
ReplyDeleteIn Lake of the Woods proves as an example that a affirmative conclusion is not a necessary part of any story. As Audrey and Kathleen touched on, literature is not about an exciting plot or a conclusion that makes everything fall into place. Atwood introduced this idea in her conclusion stating, “That’s about all that can be said for plots, which anyway are just one thing after another.” A reader's understanding will be much greater if they realize the true importance of a good piece of writing is in the thematic connect and the connection between characters and readers. Those are the parts of literature that can truly teach us something. The rest of it is relatively meaning less as you can find the same story line over and over again.
I don’t necessarily agree with Margaret Atwood’s extremely cynical views on endings,“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.” If you do an extreme break down of a characters life it will end in death, as does anything. But I think there is more to it, there is power in a fairytale ending like nothing else. It may not be reality but sometimes it’s what people need to hear.
You bring up a really good point Kathryn that the author holds a lot of power in creating a text, yet the ultimate interpretation lies within the reader's hands. As you said, understanding the impact of the text beyond just the plot line helps readers truly appreciate the meaning behind the piece. Also, while I don't hold the same view, your view on Atwood's interpretation of endings brings up good ideas. Personally, I still think that on a physical level, Atwood is correct that all endings are the same, but as you mentioned, they definitely differ from what precedes it. In a way, our interpretations of reality shape what we experience beyond what is physically there.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA message I’ve gathered from each of the story stories, as well as Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri, is that the path of life and what it consists of is unpredictable. However, it is inevitable that everyones stories result in the same ending. Happy Endings creates a sense of familiarity we can all relate to, as she depicts the cookie cutter lifestyles many of us experience. Her dry, comedic tone, allows the reader to notice the sarcasm she’s directing at her own genre of work. By reiterating Mary and John’s “stimulating and challenging” activities, Atwood mimics the expectations of the reader. By nature, we want that perfect ending. Realistically, we know that this template for life is a rare occurrence.
ReplyDeleteHema and Kausik exhibit this factor of unexpectedness perfectly. Jhumpa Lahiri crafts a class fairytale, creating characters who grow up as childhood friends, then miraculously reconnect and fall for each other. Time and distance seperate them once again, and Kausik is spontaneously killed in a tsunami passing through Thailand. The story ends without closure of whether Hema ever learns this as she says to herself, “I did not know where you were in Thailand, only that you were on a beach”. This ending frustrated me as I anxiously waited to here about their paths reconnecting, later learning that would never occur. As Holst suggests in The Zebra Storyteller, it is the author’s job to supply this spark of surprise, as he does with the siamese cat. His story progresses so fluently, until the last line, “he kicked him with a hoof and killed him.” The power suddenly shifts from the boastful cat to the zebra, leaving the reader in awe.
I agree with Sarah’s point as she reflected, “The role of an author is to prepare readers while telling a story for the ending and the harsh reality of life.” Literature has shown, the harsh reality of life each author describes, is sadly more realistic than Margaret Atwood’s “Story A”. This spontaneity is what makes each day of life exciting, as readers begin to understand through experiencing the shock or unsettledness of these stories.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAtwood’s “Happy Endings” can be hard to read, but not for lack of clarity. Its message is concise and depressing; “Eventually they die. This is the end of the story.” However, the other texts we have read have all failed to depict Atwood’s universal and absolute ending. In the Lake of the Woods comes closest, but it is never confirmed that either Kathy or John die, and the entire premise of the text is to leave the reader with more unresolved questions than before. In The Hours, one of Richard’s criticism of his own book was the ending; a suicide that brought a quick and absolute ending to the novel. This is a perfect example of Atwood’s ending, but for an award winning writer such as Richard, it is one of his last regrets. None of the texts directly violate Atwood’s rule, it is always assumed every character depicted will die, yet all of the texts skirted around this outcome.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is possible that the authors had secretly made their characters immortal, this could also be their way of observing one of Atwood’s other points, that “True connoisseurs, however, are known to favor the stretch in between, since it's the hardest to do anything with.” It is obvious that if “The Zebra Storyteller” had included another two pages about the Zebra Storyteller settling down, finding a nice patch of grass, telling his grandkids about the ghost lion that was really a multilingual housecat, and eventually choking on a piece of grass, the story would not have been nearly as striking. In Unaccustomed Earth, Lahiri mirrors this beautifully by ending “Hell-Heaven” with Usha’s mother on the brink of burning herself into the sunset, simultaneously so close to death, but so far from dying, and the text is infinitely more gut wrenching because of it. Echoing what Jessica, Kathryn, Kathleen, Audrey said, the middle is this part of the story that is interesting, not the end. However, the one exception continues to be Atwood’s “Happy Endings”. In the first four paragraphs there are four births and four tragic deaths, but in this case it is three words at the end that are greater; “ John and Mary die.”
In “The Zebra Storyteller,” Holst uses the talking siamese cat and the storytelling zebra to explain that stories have to make sense for readers to enjoy it. When I first read the passage, I thought of the talking cat more like an idea, rather than an actual physical cat. When the idea first came into the brain of the storyteller’s head, he loved it, and thought that the other zebras would also love it. Then when the cat actually appeared, he kicked him out because he wasn't “fit to be tied at bearing a cat speaking his language.” In reality, I think that Holst’s idea was that the zebra didn't actually kill a cat, he just killed his own idea of the cat. I think this passage can be most strongly connected to Unaccustomed Earth, because the author leads the reader to believe that the stories might be connected, but only at the end do they fit together. The short story touches on the fact that the purpose of stories and novels is to prepare for the unexpected. I agreed with Jessica, in the fact that I was waiting for the stories to come back and connect to one another, and when I realized that they did not, I was surprised.We look for an ending, and we look for everything to close just as we imagine it in our minds, but in reality, authors have a very different idea of what needs to be done, in order for the plot and the characters to successfully end.
ReplyDeleteMargaret Atwood points out a “flaw” in literature, that many people often overlook. There may be infinite amount of stories that can be told, be there are very limited amounts of ending. In the Lake of the Woods is a good example of no matter how you look at what happened, Kathy Wade is gone. O’Brien uses the hypothesis chapters to bring this to light for the readers. Even if she got lost on the lake, if she ran away, if she drowned, or even if John had killed her, she was gone now, and nobody could do anything about it. Atwood mocks the fact that people can look past the ending, if there is a good story leading up to it.
Grace, this is a really interesting point you make here. I didn't really connect the idea of the death of the characters in "Happy Endings" and Kathy Wade. It's true: she's gone regardless. So why does it make us feel THAT much more incomplete just because we don't know how.
DeleteIn both short stories, one can see how dishonest authors make their endings so that they will appeal more to the reader, supplying them with reassurance. Because these stories relate so closely to reality, there must be some added fiction in it to keep the reader optimistic--even if it doesn’t relate to the plot. For example, the passage where John "shoots the two of them and himself" becomes hauntingly realistic. So, in order to give the reader some hope for their lives, it finishes with a sudden, incredibly out-of-place ending. Though this might be what we're looking for--some cheery closure to our lives--this is not always what the author wants in their works. Overall, we should be looking for an ending that relates to the rest of the story. For instance, the transition from "he hopes he'll discover her...but this fails to happen and she dies" to "John marries Madge and everything continues as in A" acts as an abrupt shift in tone. This also applies to "The Zebra Storyteller", where the conflict is quickly resolved as the storyteller "kicked him (the cat) with a hoof and killed him." Again, the author is almost forced into doing this to please their readers. However, what they want to convey is that, as Atwood mentions, "the only authentic ending is...John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." This shows that the only true ending in life is death. Seeing that that idea could disappoint readers, leaving no closure or reassurance, no story tends to "end" that way. While we're constantly looking for comfort in books, we should instead be looking for this sense of truth. Not everything will suddenly resolve itself.
ReplyDeleteContrary to these short stories, In the Lake of the Woods strays from its readers’ needs. As Audrey mentioned, the book ends with little closure or reassurance. O’Brien did this to emphasize how books are not made solely for comfort or hope. They are allowed to end without a resolution, even if that disappoints the reader. If the novel were to finish happily, it would almost be ignoring all of the hints at John being evil, as well as its cryptic and menacing tone.
In both “The Zebra Storyteller” and “Unaccustomed Earth”, perspective of a situation plays a large role into what happens at the end of the story. In Holst’s story, the reason why the storyteller of the zebras does not get killed by the siamese cat is because the zebra and cat both had different perspectives on the situation. A character’s assessment on a situation can be so different from another’s that it will either help or hurt them. In the case of the Zebra Storyteller, when the cat came up to him and spoke in zebraic, “the zebra storyteller wasn't fit to be tied at bearing a cat speaking his language, because he'd been thinking about that very thing”. This helped him because the zebra wasn’t surprised by the cat, but the cat thought the zebra would be, which resulted in the cat being killed instead of the zebra being killed. However, in “Unaccustomed Earth”, this issue with perspective is what hurt Sang. Sang believed only what she has experienced and didn’t listen to Paul when Paul was trying to tell her something. Sang pushes Paul out her life and tells him “‘it’s one thing for you to have a crush. But to make up a story like that -’ She topped, her mouth now straining into something that was not a smile. ‘It’s pathetic, really. Pathetic’”. She then ends up getting hurt because she didn’t listen to Paul. Perspective is a key role in what will happen in a story, because everyone can assess a situation differently, which effects how the ending plays out.
ReplyDeleteAs Audrey said, “the final pages only give you a simple moment in time. It is not a concrete end but it does not give much way to a new beginning either”. This is the purpose of Atwood’s short story “Happy Endings”. Atwood creates many different endings to a similar story in order to give multiple different perspectives on how a story may end. In Tim O'brien's book, “The Lake in the Woods”, he leaves the ending as a mystery in order for the readers to use what they gathered from the book and create their own endings similar to how Atwood had so many different endings.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMargaret Atwood uses her piece “Happy Endings” to convey the idea that audiences often crave for a satisfying ending to a plot. Her piece captures the lives of John and Mary, who have the traditional lives many of us have, and incorporates various backgrounds in each story. However, Atwood demonstrates that each of these come to the same ending by concluding each one with “everything continues as in A”. Using an almost mocking tone, she shows how fiction works inevitably come to a similar ending, and plays around with the expectations of the reader. By ending her piece with the statement, “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”, she goes on to show that the best ending isn’t quite often the one that readers want.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kathryn's interpretation of “The Zebra Storyteller”. With every novel, the author has the ultimate power at the end to make decisions regarding the plot. In Holst’s piece, the Zebra Storyteller “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”. Although it was his intention to incorporate the Siamese cat in the plot, he decided to simply kill off the character.
The ending of The Lake of the Woods directly correlates to both Atwood’s and Holst’s works. A reader might have found the ending to the novel to be rather disappointing as it did not bring complete closure to the novel and the “Happy Ending” we often desire. Instead it brought upon further mystery with the sudden disappearance of Kathy, and made the reader question and analyze what they previously read. The author made the deliberate choice to incorporate this ending, which ties in with “The Zebra Storyteller” as at the end, the author makes the final call as to what is best for the plot rather than what the audience desires.
From “The Zebra Storyteller” by Spencer Holst, I was able to take away the idea that while plots crafted by authors may seem implausible, they often have a certain depth and realness to them. Authors have perspectives on life that can be incredibly different than their readers. These perspectives are then prevalent in their writing. When the Zebra storyteller encounters the zebriac-speaking cat, he is able to kill the cat and save his fellow zebras because he could sense something was off. Holst writes that “the zebra storyteller wasn’t fit to be tied at hearing a cat speaking his language, because he’d been thinking about that very thing.” The creative mind of the zebra storyteller was able to conceive an out-there idea that had truth behind it. Holst ends the short story with the statement, “that is the function of the storyteller.”. I believed that this line was expressing the idea that authors (storytellers) have the task of keeping the minds of readers on their toes, believing that more situations are possible than not. This theme tied in to “In the Lake of the Woods” because O’brien provided readers with multiple possible endings. O’brien’s job while writing the book was to provoke thoughts from the readers and to keep their minds open. O’brien’s perspective and life add to the story and help to create multiple hypotheses that may have never crossed the minds of the audience; much like how the idea of a zebriac-speaking cat was unfathomable for the other zebras.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Margaret Atwood's’ “Happy Endings”, as many others above me have stated, I agree that she dismisses the need for a concrete ending and insead, wishes that works would be appreciated in their entirety. However, I believe she also wants people to slow down when they read and think about the decisions being made. Atwood states that “[plots] anyway are just one thing after another, a what and a what and a what. Now try how and why”. Decisions made in stories by the author are methodical and serve a purpose. Atwood is pleading with readers to take a minute and think about what those decisions mean and how they add to work as a whole. Author’s make decisions to force the reader to ask questions and to try and gain a deeper understanding of the work. Once again, this ties in the “In the Lake of the Woods” because the readers were asking themselves questions while reading the evidence chapters.They prompted the reader to make connections and ask questions. While reading, I often found myself asking “why did O’brien include this?” or “how does this piece of evidence tie in to Kathy’s disappearance?”. In both stories, the authors want the reader to stop chasing the what happens next and instead, focus on why did this happen and how did this happen.
I really love your commentary, Anna. I had similar thoughts on The Zebra Storyteller; I completely agree that the idea of perspective and viewpoint is incredibly prevalent in the piece as well as in In the Lake of the Woods. As for Happy Endings, I love your point about how Atwood wants us to truly consider the decisions being made. As readers, it is important that we focus on the here and now and attempt to find a deeper meaning in everything we read.
DeleteIn Spencer Holst’s “The Zebra Storyteller” the author makes a point that it can be important for fiction to present more realistic aspects and endings, and give the reader a sense of what happens in real life. In the story, “the zebra storyteller wasn’t fit to be tied at bearing a cat speak his language because he’d just been thinking about that very thing.” The storyteller was prepared for what he encountered in life, so the challenge he faced did not hurt him. In his novel, “In the Lake of the Woods,” Tim O’Brien follows Holst’s advice for the storyteller and prepares the reader for one of life’s important truths- mystery and the unknown are a fact of life and not everything will have a definitive ending. The reader desperately seeks an ending to the story but, as O’Brien says, “What if it were proved—absolutely and purely—that Lizzie Borden took an ax? That Oswald acted alone? That Judge Carter fell into Sicilian hands? Nothing more would beckon, nothing would tantalize.” O’Brien knows that some readers will be disappointed to not have a definite answer as to what became of John and Kathy, but in this quote he addresses that many mysteries do not have answers. In fact, what makes life so interesting is that there aren’t definite solutions or answers to most things.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, in “Happy Endings,” Margaret Atwood emphasizes that having closure at the end of a piece is not necessarily important. “So much for endings,” she says, “Beginnings are always more fun.” Most endings tend to be exactly the same and the real importance of the story lies in the “how and the why,” or the parts that make the reader think the most. I found that in “In the Lake of the Woods” the most important parts were the hypothesis and the evidence chapters because those were the parts that made me question the novel the most and think the hardest about what was going on. Having a definitive ending would have taken away from all of the thinking that I ended up having to do in order to try and piece together for myself what I thought had happened.
Margaret Atwood’s “Happy Endings” is a sarcastic elucidation of the anatomy of a story. Atwood concludes, and rightfully so, that in the end “John and Mary die. … die. … die.” This final commonality, laid against the meandering landscape of Atwood’s plot twists, is reminiscent of the parallelism between Michael Cunningham‘s tales in The Hours. Despite desperately searching for meaning in their unfulfilled lives, Virginia Woolf, Clarissa Vaughan and Laura Brown, ultimately “die,” whether literally or figuratively. While Cunningham craftily strings together “a what and a what and a what,” it is in his three stunning descriptions of the “How and Why” that the reader truly gets a glimpse into the characters’ struggles to give their lives substance and depth.
ReplyDeleteRian is correct in that Atwood’s conclusion is “universal and absolute,” and although not every story we have read plainly depicts that ending for the reader, Atwood’s point is that ultimately “(t)his is the end of the story.” That sad reality is obvious, and I agree with Atwood that “(b)eginnings are always more fun.” I also believe that Atwood’s absurd list emphasizes how fundamentally important it is to convey more than “just one thing after another,” but rather to paint a picture with the underlying “How and Why.” Otherwise, as Oliver so aptly states, the text is simply “predictable storyline, and dull explanations.”
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn Margaret Atwood’s piece Happy Endings she explores the concept of storytelling and endings in particular with a metafictional lense. Atwood through this piece tries to get the reader to think about what the essence of any story is. In Happy Endings Atwood is using metafiction as a way to write about writing. She does it when she includes lines such as “this is the thin part of the plot, but it can be dealt with later” and takes a stab at the reader saying “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.” Each miniature story by Atwood leaves the reader with the same sense of dissatisfaction. Wondering “so what?” and “what next?”. Just like Atwood played with the idea of happy endings, so did O’brien in In the Lake of the Woods, but took it on from a different perspective. O’brien attempts to explain to the reader, who may be frustrated with the open-ended ending given why it had to be that way saying:
ReplyDelete“My heart tells me to stop right here, to offer quiet benediction and call it the end. But the truth won't allow it. Because there is no end, happy or otherwise. Nothing is fixed, nothing solved. the facts, such as they are, finally spin off into the void of things missing, the inconclusiveness of us. Who are we? Where do we go? The ambiguity may be dissatisfying, even irritating, but this is a love story. There is no tidiness. Blame it on the human heart. One way or another, it seems, we all perform vanishing tricks, effacing history, locking up our lives and slipping day by day into the graying shadows. Our whereabouts are uncertain. All secrets lead to the dark, and beyond the dark there is only maybe.” [301]
Both authors talk directly to their reader about their writing, in an attempts to explain a notion regarding happy endings, and endings in general. They both touch on the fact that there is no such thing as happy endings. And poke at the reader and their need for closure, rather than just coming to peace with as O’brien states “ambiguity” because it may be satisfying or irritating.
While reading The Zebra Storyteller, my interpretation of the message Holst was trying to convey changed a couple times throughout the story, and even again after re-reading it. Overall, what I feel like Holst was trying to get across in this short story was that the storyteller has a very important role, which is to prepare the audience of readers for anything that could come. In other words, “to expect the unexpected”. The zebra, with the thought of the story still fresh in his mind was prepared for situation, and could deal with it appropriately. The zebra lives, and perhaps that is the hope for us as the reader, to respond and act accordingly to a difficult situation with thanks to the storyteller. I think this idea expressed by Holst, relates to unaccustomed earth. Jhumpa Lahiri, at the end of the novel, all a sudden the reader finds out that Kaushik dies in a Tsunami. It’s unexpected, and striking. But in a way, it was what Lahiri as a storyteller was trying to prepare us for.
Regarding your point about Happy Endings and In the Lake of the Woods, I really like how you explained both the authors "poke fun" at the reader for wanting a happy ending, rather than being satisfied with the ambiguity purposefully given to them to drive home a much deeper point. Happy Endings touches deeper upon the structure of a book itself, while In the Lake of the Woods provides insight into truth behind falsified appearances. Both of these works use ambiguity to accomplish a greater means, which may not always be a perfect "happy ending" for the reader, but is sometimes necessary
DeleteAn idea that spreads across both Holst and Atwood’s stories along with Cunningham’s novel, The Hours, is the impact of truth. In Spencer Holst’s short story “The Zebra Storyteller”, the cat is hiding from the truth by pretending to be something it isn’t. Although the cat has a short time where it feels superior, the result is not in the cat’s favor. In Atwood’s story, the author shows a variety of different truths, each resulting in the same ending. The way Atwood portrays each story sort of makes fun of her audience for wanting that “happy ending” but not being satisfied when it simply is just happy. The audience thinks they want the truth but really just wants a good story that mixes fact and fiction. In Cunningham’s novel, The Hours, the reader is constantly trying to figure out each piece of the story and trying to discover the truth as it continues.
ReplyDeleteAs readers we like to think that within each piece we read, the author deliberately set it up in a way that the way we interpret said piece is the way it was meant to be seen. The more I discover different works and see other people’s perspectives I have realized how unique each book is to us. Holst, Atwood, and Cunningham all use the power of the truth to throw the reader off and allow us to come up with our own ideas of what the truth really means to us and how we see it within these stories.
In both short stories, Holst and Atwood have expressed the responsibility of a storyteller and their limits to what is produced to allow readers to understand the incalculable endings that reflect may reality. Their limits are explained by Atwood that, “True connoisseurs… are known to favor the stretch in between, since it's the hardest to do anything with”, but authors, specifically fiction story writers, have the ability to warp storylines and formulate ending(s) that leaves us ambivalent.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Zebra Storyteller”, the plot is framed for us to follow a Siamese cat which is expected to be the entire storyline but the ending is consisted of a storyteller who wanted to write about the Siamese cat that “kicked him with a hoof and killed him”. This can show Holst’s logic in two different ways: readers should never expect a predictable ultimate ending and that the storyteller holds the power to how the story progresses.
Similarly to “The Lake in the Woods”, the story is parallel with Holst and Atwood’s ideas. In the ending, John’s disappearance only brought up more unsolved mysteries and dissatisfaction to what ultimately happened to Kathy. This proves to what Jill has pointed out, what Atwood said, "the only authentic ending is...John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." The reader has to reflect what could have happened and what realistically happens as well, not everything has an ultimate ending and their could be endless possibilities, we can’t always be satisfied with the results.
An interesting component that both The Zebra Storyteller and Happy Endings employ is humor. For the Zebra Storyteller, the author conveys humor by making the zebra storyteller tell a funny ‘story’ about a cat that speaks Zebraic, which ends up being reality. In Happy Endings, while humor is present, it is in a different manner. Contrary to that of the Zebra Storyteller, humor can be found in the way the story is presented, not necessarily the content itself. In both works, the same biting and blunt sense of humor is developed, using widely varying approaches. This is vital to both works, as the blunt humor further extends the meta and self-referential style of both. While the purpose of both works could easily be viewed as slightly demeaning towards readers as the writers blatantly air their grievances towards the common pitfalls or wrongdoings of readers, they are not viewed as offensive. By creating multi-dimensional content, the readers feel ‘in on the joke,’ due to the humor crafted just for them.
ReplyDeleteThe way works of fiction are framed greatly shape interpretation. A purpose of writing can be easily interpreted as condescending or insightful depending on tone, and whether or not a feeling of team is created with the reader. The Zebra Storyteller and Happy Endings both establish this through blunt humor. In The Lake of the Woods represents this concept through a different scope, by allowing readers to interact with the reading through chapters of “Evidence” and “Hypotheses.” This particularly unusual framework helps to progress what would be an otherwise one-dimensional novel by letting the readers in behind the scenes. The ambiguous ending of In The Lake of the Woods is successful in large part due to the readers feeling as if they have more information than others in the story. A sense of control is given, as readers are able and even encouraged to make their own conclusions.
A large part about how works of fiction are viewed boil down to whether or not they flatter the readers by allowing them to feel like a part of the writing itself. This notion is viewed through all three pieces demonstrated above.
-Alexandra Keenan
You make some incredible points in your analysis, Alexandra. I did not even give a second thought to the humor and 'behind the scenes' aspect of the three works, yet all of your points ring true to me. In addition to your thoughts on In the Lake of the Woods, I also feel as though the freedom that O'Brien gives the reader to decide their own ending to the story connects itself to the 'function of a storyteller' as Holst rightly mentioned in his story; a true storyteller is able to decide their own path, which O'Brien uniquely gifts to the reader in his work.
DeleteIn The Zebra Storyteller, Holst makes it a point to allude to the abstract idea of a storyteller; someone who is able to see every aspect of a situation, even if everyone around them fails to. While the short story contains several overarching ideas and themes, the idea of perspective really stuck out to me. Much like O’Brien’s narration in In the Lake of the Woods, Holst chooses to play with differing viewpoints, storytelling techniques, and ‘hypotheses’, if you will. He starts out his piece with “Once upon a time”, immediately giving way to the fairytale esque story of the Zebraic-speaking Siamese cat. Once he transitioned into the superstitious and doubtful zebras’ perspective, I immediately thought of how O’Brien often transitioned in between John Wade’s past experiences, the investigation of Kathy’s disappearance, and the multiple hypotheses of what truly happened; both delve into how different perspectives completely transform a story’s mood. In addition to this, O’Brien and the zebra storyteller himself both possess the power of controlling the entire story, essentially; the zebra storyteller “decided there was something about [the cat’s] looks he didn't like,” and proceeded to completely alter the anticipated course of the story’s events. In O’Brien’s case, his “function” is moreso allowing the reader themselves to choose the path of the story, as he never gives us a definitive answer as to what happened, rather giving us all the tools to decide for ourselves which theory we subscribe to.
ReplyDeleteIn Happy Endings, Atwood insightfully points out that “the stretch in between” is the most important and interesting part of any story. Much like Lahiri in Unaccustomed Earth, the authors actively choose to create endings that are realistic. This may be frustrating to the average reader. However, they are gifting the audience with genuinity and authenticity that is difficult to come across in many stories, as they often contain, “deliberately fake [endings],” in an attempt to satisfy the reader; the story is not about how John and Mary die, it is about their tumultuous relationship; the story is not about Ruma discovering her father’s relationship, it is about their reconnection and the learning that ensues. Atwood and Lahiri prove to be incredibly aware of how stories work best, with Atwood hitting the nail on the head with her satirical commentary on what audience’s really desire in a piece of writing.
Kristy, I love the points you made about "Happy Endings". I agree completely that far too often authors present readers with wildly unrealistic endings. And while these endings may appeal to readers, they are not what should appeal to us. I too believe that we need to focus much more on the plot between the beginning and the end. As Ernest Hemingway said "It is good to have an end to journey toward; but it is the journey that matters, in the end".
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Zebra Storyteller” by Spencer Holst, it reviews the idea that is in every story which is the purpose of the story teller. Holst states the purpose of the storyteller directly at the end of his story, after a repetition of events there is a change and “the storyteller of the zebras” decides that he would “[kick] him with a hoof and [kill] him. That is the function of the storyteller.” Holst uses his power to do what every storyteller does, he plays God. This idea is also present in “Happy Endings” when she mocks the reader, she emphasizes her power in every new version of the story. You are fully aware that she has complete control when often times this power could go completely unnoticed.
ReplyDeleteIn novels like The Hours, the purpose of the storyteller is danced around with their never being a direct statement but in everything you read, you feel the power of the storyteller. It can be scary to know that at any second one of the characters may die and this is all at the will of the storyteller and you feel this in the seconds before Richard’s suicide. Cunningham uses his power as the storyteller to choose exactly how it happens and how well Clarissa is able to convince Richard to get down. As everyone who read The Hours knows, Clarissa was unable to convince him to get down from his window, which he eventually jumps from, but Cunningham leaves you dangling wondering what will happen next. In many novels there are situations like this, where you aren't quite sure what will happen next and the function of the storyteller is to control exactly what does. You can see the power of the story highlighted in this piece as Virginia Woolf is the true storyteller, having written the novel Mrs. Dalloway she in turn controls Clarissa’s day. For those who had not read Mrs. Dalloway before reading The Hours could easily believe that the power seemed to be in Cunningham’s hands alone.
-Elissa Lonie
In Margaret Atwood’s “Happy Ending”, she gives us a series of ending and concludes by saying, “You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it.” I appreciated the way that Grace Dunn connected this message to “In the Lake of the Woods” in a way that I didn’t pick up on before. However, I found that personally, despite the presence of the evidence chapters, I still found myself focused more on the mystery and the ending than the meat of the story.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that Atwood does differentely is mentioning the role of the reader as well. She says, “So much for endings. Beginnings are always more fun… 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”. I think Atwood is trying to say that the ‘what’ is up to the author. After that, it is the readers job to find the how and why. They must dig through the real substance of the story and look at the details. They must analyze the story as a whole rather than focusing solely on the ending.
In “The Zebra Storyteller” by Spencer Holst, the author shares his perspective on storytelling by creating a shocking- but also realistic- ending. He says, “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.” Holst and Atwood both use their endings to get across an overall message. In “The Zebra Storyteller”, we learn the true power of an author and how they are capable of either writing what’s expected of throwing the reader for a loop. This can be seen in “In the Lake of Woods” when we realize that the author’s intention is to provide us with an amazing storyline rather than solving the mystery. The whole book is formatted in a way that causes us to expect some sort of grand, fulfulling ending. Atwood and Holst both make us question the definition of an ‘appropriate ending’. In my opinion, it is dependent on the story itself. In some cases, I would prefer for the story to have an obvious ending, because as a reader I want my suspicions throughout the book to be correct. However, I appreciated how in “In the Lake of the Woods”, the author didn’t give us any closure. The way it was written gives the reader the ability to be happy with his/her own ending since one is not given.
Holst and Atwood discuss this idea of a false reality in their pieces, giving the reader examples of how there is always more to the story than what is seen on the surface. This concept of deception ties into Tim O’Brien’s In the Lake of the Woods, John Wade being the master of manipulation himself. I agree with Oliver’s idea about how each character in the novel only sees one side of John, illuminating the depth of the character himself along with thickening the plot. It highlights how powerful a lie can be, influencing everyone differently. This point connects to Atwood’s piece in which the story grows more complex with the added point of views, even if they all end the same. She writes about false hope in this piece as well to further her argument, “she [Mary] 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.” This concept circles back to In the Lake of the Woods because whether John killed Kathy or not, the story was going to end how it did because that’s how the story goes.
ReplyDeleteThe art of deception fits well with the Siamese cat who posed as a lion. He preys on the vulnerable to get his way, but eventually the zebra storyteller sees through his act, “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.” John Wade elucidated a series of mixed reactions to the people who knew him, many believing that he did kill Kathy, while others felt it was impossible, almost as impossible as a cat who posed as a lion who spoke perfect Zebraic. John by default lied to get what he wanted and to save his reputation, but inevitably his lies lead him to no such happy ending.