Not so Happy Endings

When it is told that Mary "sleeps with him even though she's not in love with him," it presents the social stereotypical character that is involved within each story. While having such dull characters in each of the differing mock scenarios, but still coming back with "everything continues as in A," Atwood emphasizes the point: it is not the end that is of importance, because everyone will eventually get there, but it is the road traveled along the way.

In literature, many authors love for throw an unexpected twist as the end. Shirley Jackson is no exception. In the short stories “The Lottery” and “The Possibility of Evil” by Shirley Jackson both take twist that the reader doesn’t expect. In “The Lottery” a small town gathers to draw a winner; however Tessie Hutchinson is not delighted to be the winner. Also in “The Possibility of Evil” another small town has an unexpected villain who resides on Pleasant St. Shirley Jackson uses literary devices to depict twist at the end of her short stories because she used literary devices such as syntax, irony and mood.

In comparison to scene A, John and Mary have a “stimulating and challenging sex life” (paragraph 3). While in scene B, the sex life of the characters is more descriptive, as Atwood states that John “fucks her [Mary] and after that he falls asleep” (paragraph 5). There is a shift in tone between these two scenarios. For example, in scenario A, the tone appears to be so optimistic and positive that it is almost impossible to believe that everything is going well with a smooth ending. With this over-positive tone, Atwood inserts an instance of hyperbole where she repeats John and Mary’s lives being “worthwhile” and “stimulating and challenging” to suggest a fairy-tale like story. Within this optimistic tone, a positive diction is also witnessed, throughout the story, when Atwood mentions words like “remunerative,” “worthwhile,” “charming,” “well,” and “fun,” to give the audience a sense of perfect life. At the end, both eventually

There are three principal sources of interest in narratives: suspense, mystery, and irony. In the narratives “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner and “Lamb to the Slaughter” by Ronald Dahl, irony is a primary source of interest. Irony is defined as a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result. In both of these cases, the use of irony by the authors greatens the impact the pieces have on their audience. In both “A Rose for Emily” and “Lamb to the Slaughter”, the authors have numerous pieces of irony throughout their respective stories; this use of irony creates a better reading experience for the reader.

In the opening paragraphs, the author's description of the characters creates an easy, inevitable story for the ready to understand. For example, Jackson describes how at first the young boy is entering the house like any other child would do before his imagination goes grim, saying: “He came running home the same way, the front door slamming open, his cap on the floor, and the voice suddenly become raucous shouting…” By describing how Laurie comes home, Jackson gives the readers a clear understanding of how Laurie is actually going to act. Furthermore, Laurie acts as if Charles is indeed another kid instead of admitting to all his wrongdoings saying, “Charles yelled so in school they sent a boy in from first grade to tell the teacher she had to make Charles keep quiet, and so Charles had to stay after school. And so all the children stayed to watch him.” Jackson uses Charles to hid the fact it is Laurie doing all these things and that is why Laurie was late for lunch that day. When the innocent boy becomes an alternate character, Jackson simultaneously shows the innocent and the evil in the grim reality of human nature, marrying the normal with the abnormal and joining the usual with the unusual to describe how Laurie was trying to get out of trouble. Indeed, Jackson manipulates characters to more forcefully promote the underlying message of inherent evil through lying which exists in all

The three main characters are not from the town, which coincides with a lack of having a witness to narrate the events in Rosewood at the time of the massacre. Using individuals from outside the town provides a new dimension to the story, because their presence in the town allows the audience to get an idea of what occurred, but it is not an accurate illustration of the events (D’Orso, 74). The variations highlight the lack of actual evidence, and the use of

The undefined characters of the story only seem to help accelerate the action of the story.

There are many ways that a reader can be prepared for the ending of a story, “The Lottery” and “A Rose for Emily” are two very grueling short stories with a long suspense and a similar plot. The narrator’s stance in “A Rose for Emily” was first-person observer, which is defined as a single character point of view in which the narrator was is not involved with the story and the narrator’s stance in “The Lottery” was third-person anonymous which is involves a narrator that does not enter any minds. Both stances conceal the endings and both the stories use imagery and foreshadowing to prepare the reader for the

Happy Endings by author Margaret Atwood is a prime example of the literary device known as “a story within a story”. This short story has six different stories within itself. Due to the broadness of each story within the main story, Happy Endings can be classified as flash fiction. The two main characters, Mary and John have six different scenarios which are labeled A-F.

This is by far the most striking aspect of Happy Endings, and even if her opinion goes unnoticed, one can not ignore the framework of this story. There are no paragraphs. There is no beginning, middle end. There is no grand introduction or stunning finale. The lack of form in this work stems from the lack of structure and depth of romantic fiction. Atwood feels this type of writing lacks emotion and conviction and can be easily thrown together and kept together by a few clichés and stereotypes. A hodgepodge of cheesy ideas that are malleable and easily interchangeable. She shakes things up by not organizing the text in sequential order, and events are not connected or presented in a straightforward, chronological order. This is a short story that lacks all the common characteristics of a short story.

In the story “Happy Endings” the author Margaret Atwood gives 6 scenarios in alphabetical order from A to F of how a couples life could play out over the span of their lives. In these six scenarios Atwood uses satire to emphasize how interchangeable and simple each couples life is. In this story Atwood uses character, style, and point of view to chastise the desire for the everyday common life and the concern for only the “whats” in life and not “how or why”.

In Atwood’s short story, the regular use of “you” and “we” includes the reader in the story and ensures they are involved. The story also includes many questions throughout the narration that send a subliminal message encouraging to privileged people to not take what they have for granted. The lack of dialogue gives leaves place for descriptions, which are necessary for the reader to imagine the different scenes. It also permits the author to go straight to the point and not waste time developing the characters. Silvera’s writing style is very different to Atwood’s. She uses short sentences without verbs, metaphors, and rhythm to create images in the reader’s mind. For example, the words “Bedbug. Bedridden. Bedlam. Bedpan. Bedraggled. Bedfast” (Silvera 2) are used to describe the old man’s situation without actually using verbs or full sentences. The repetition of the letter “b” gives a rhythmical tone to the short story. Dialogues are also missing in “Old Habits Die Hard”; however, the characters do speak: “We love him, they say” (Silvera 12). The author does not use quotation marks or change paragraphs to add this remark in order to not break the rhythm of the

The idea of a happy ending, to the common person, is the cliche ending of a story in which the protagonist gets the damsel, saves the world, and survives near death. However, this is a very simple way to look at the concept of a “happy ending” and neglects the grand scheme of things, just as there are more complicated equations in mathematics as one progresses in school, there are more complicated elements in a story as we look to dig deeper into literature. A story that has a complex happy ending is Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the story of a man seeking revenge on his family that has caused him much despair. If we look at this play in a simple manner, we will probably not look at the ending as happy ending as our beloved characters die,

The writing style is very action-oriented. “When she talked English the maid’s face tightened. ‘Come, Signora,’ she said. ‘We must get back inside. You will be wet.’” It is also very colloquial, the sentences are paratactic and short. There is a complete lack of subordinate clauses, which makes the story seem very “staccato” and broken up. Hemmingway uses “The Iceberg Technique;” we only see the tip of the iceberg, the rest we have to interpret.

I like to read stories that have good endings, but some of the finest lessons we can learn come from stories with unhappy endings.