by Billy Collins
I ask them to take a poem
and hold it up to the light
like a color slide
or press an ear against its hive.
I say drop a mouse into a poem
and watch him probe his way out,
or walk inside the poem's room
and feel the walls for a light switch.
I want them to waterski
across the surface of a poem
waving at the author's name on the shore.
But all they want to do
is tie the poem to a chair with rope
and torture a confession out of it.
They begin beating it with a hose
to find out what it really means.
I ask them to take a poem
and hold it up to the light
like a color slide
or press an ear against its hive.
I say drop a mouse into a poem
and watch him probe his way out,
or walk inside the poem's room
and feel the walls for a light switch.
I want them to waterski
across the surface of a poem
waving at the author's name on the shore.
But all they want to do
is tie the poem to a chair with rope
and torture a confession out of it.
They begin beating it with a hose
to find out what it really means.
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.
Hello! Welcome!
ReplyDeleteHolst tells the story of a zebra who is able to save his own life with the foresight that a seemingly innocent cat is, in reality, a cruel, barbarous, lion. But wait, no it's really just a Siamese cat. What, then, causes this big, buff lion to murder a little cat in cold blood? This sure doesn't create the best optics for the zebra. Well, Holst claims that the zebra simply had a bad feeling about this little cat and that because he had been working on a comedy in which a cat adopts the Zebraic language, his senses for this type of foolery were heightened. However, would the Zebra have had the same almost magical view into the future had the folklore about the phantom lion not been making its rounds on the Zebra gossip chain? And without the unfortunately true story of the zebra who was fooled by the Zebraic-talking, lion-identifying cat, would a phantom lion rumor even be circulating? The details of that hunt are scaring, the cat “dining on filet mignon of zebra every night, and from the better hides he made bow neckties.” Yes, the ribbons that criss cross through this story are finally tied up in a neat knot with the villain cat dead and the zebra hero prevailing. However, it is really the complex, specific events of the story that ensure a tidy, satisfying ending. In Part Two of Jhumpa Lahari’s Unaccustomed Earth, she chronicles the life of Hema and Kaushik. Deaths, new lovers, and career changes interrupt their lives. It is not until the final story in which the reader is almost certain that this is it, this is fate. With moments like when “Hema stayed awake, listening to him breathing, craving his touch again”, it is hard not to project a fairytale-like sense of destiny onto the two. This was it, after pages of tempting the audience through decades of Hema and Kaushiks lives, their stories are certain to become one. But then Kaushik dies. Does that mean that the past three stories were simply a waste, that none of it mattered if the end was a sudden, unforgiving death, one of which no moral was born? There was no lesson to be learned by that ending, no human could have stopped “a massive surge of water moving so quickly moving so quickly that the tape seemed to be playing at an unnatural speed.” Holst claims that the objective of reading is to prepare us for the day when the readers themselves can defeat a villain in the same way the Zebra did. However, he perhaps unknowingly showed us the opposite, that the means by which the purpose of a story is reached is perhaps more important than the finale. Those tender moments in Hema and Kaushik’s childhood, even those when the two are navigating their own lives, create the story as much, if not more than the ending. In Atwoods, Happy Endings, the audience learns that John and Mary die. The lesson here stands that death will happen. But Atwood is not trying to convey that death is inevitable, that would do nothing but send readers into an inescapable anxiety. What she is telling us is the opposite, when she repeats “John and Mary die” she is mocking those who read solely to utilize the lessons learned, ignoring the path taken to get there. She understands that what makes a story is the uncertainty, the chase. Those who read just to reveal some predetermined lesson are doing what Billy Collins would call, “(tying) the poem to a chair with a rope and tourtur(ing) a confession out of it.” Part two of Unaccustomed Earth provides insight on the subtleties of the human condition, it doesn't serve us a moral on a silver platter.
ReplyDeleteThis is Leah Parrott
DeleteAn idea derived from the piece “A Zebra Storyteller” by Spenser Holst, is the idea that impersonations will always be seen through as well as to prepare for the unexpected. It tells the story of a cat impersonating a lion, however which ends up being killed by the storyteller of the Zebras because he was caught and the storyteller saw “there was something about his looks he didn’t like”. Both of the ideas that are being symbolized throughout the book are proven through the imagination of the storyteller, knowing the cat was trying to fool the other zebras, because it proved to be the most helpful as well as the most practical, which Holst was attempting to achieve. He also achieves his other goal, and the idea, of preparing us for the unexpected, as the storyteller killed him instantly because there was something off about him. This idea relates to one summer reading selection, In the Lake of the Woods by Tim O’Brien, because preparing for the unexpected was something the reader had to do throughout the entire novel. John Wade’s wife, Kathy, went missing and the readers were not learning of the background of her life until after the fact we knew she was missing - leading us to expect nothing but the unexpected. The other piece, “Happy Endings” by Margaret Atwood was one I had never read before. It consisted of a short summary of the beginning of a short story and gave a variety of different plots to go along with it before the given ending that both main characters end up dying. Each story usually consisted of the same characters, John and Mary, and with each new plot brought new characters, one including Marge or Fred. This piece demonstrated the idea that there are a variety of different plots that can be written in between the beginning and ending of a piece of writing. But, it is not necessary because the piece only needs closure. The reasoning behind this is because Atwood believes that the plots in between the beginning and end are simply, “just one thing after another” and are “the hardest to do anything with”. Atwood believes all she needs is the closure of the piece and the “how” and “why” behind it. She suggests this because she believes beginnings are “always more fun”, and doesn’t care about the plot in between. Therefore, she needs the ending to close the story altogether with how and why it happened - which brings the entirety of the piece together, even if there is no knowledge between the beginning and ending. A novel with a very similar idea is also In the Lake of the Woods by Tim O’Brien, where as I wrote above, the reader did not gain any knowledge of what John Wade and his wife, Kathy’s, life was like until knowing the fact that Kathy had gone missing. Starting the book, we had known the beginning of the story along with the ending. But, we did not know why she went missing or how - showing the exact idea Atwood believes in. In the piece, Atwood claims, “The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die”. This quote relates to In the Lake of the Woods a lot because the ending in that novel consists of the same. The reader is never actually told why Kathy disappeared, or even why, but all we were given were theories and hypotheses; which also corresponds with the variety of plots in “Happy Endings”, you do not know which is the actual plot of the piece.
ReplyDeleteEllie Pendleton
DeleteOliver:
ReplyDeleteDisagree with this: Death is the ultimate ending in all of the stories. You could say that all good protagonists die, or that literature is empty without the end of life. Yet, when we read these stories, we are not necessarily moved or satisfied by the end. We usually take away what happens before the end (often the development and change of the characters). We learn in “The Zebra Storyteller” that stories can prepare us for things that we don’t expect in the present state. We learn a lot of things in “Happy Endings,” for example, to deal with your feelings for other people and prevent yourself from an unhealthy emotional attachment that causes you to kill yourself or others. In “Unaccustomed Earth,” we learn in almost all of the stories that twists and turns in our lives can affect the way we act and feel toward other people. What we learn from all of those stories is that they don’t matter because we will only die in the end. I’m not saying that there is a point in speeding up the process, but that through reading, we are engaged to read more and sometimes brought down by the end. All stories would keep going if death did not exist, and many find a way to do so. I would say, in slight opposition to the first paragraph posted above, that the phrase “John and Mary die” mocks neither those who read solely to utilize the lessons learned or those who read to follow the path taken, but those who only read to finish the story. Saying that “he kicked him with a hoof and killed him,” and killing Kaushik on one of the last pages of the book are very blunt ways to end with death. Yes, all paths lead to the same place, but each one is different enough to make the journey worthwhile.
ikjbgijkhrgbn
DeleteIn the second story, Margaret Atwood explores many outcomes that come after Mary and John meet. However, out of the many outcomes her main argument is the only thing certain is that “John and Mary die”. What we really need to pay attention to is the beginning of a story which is what really matters. None of the endings are true but each offer a new idea into the world of John and Mary, ranging from a happy ending with marriage and successful home and jobs to murder and affairs. Similar to how Tim O’Brien offered many possibilities into the disappearance of Kathy what truly mattered was what their lives were truly like. Since we never found out the truth to what happened to Kathy it focused on the effects of war and the relationships between Kathy and John, and John and his father. In both these works, what is explored is the meaning of an ending and how much the middle matters. Like Atwood says, the “How and Why” is what should be the key point in a story and not just what happens. Like in the previous story, “The Zebra Salesman”, the ending is the death of the Siamese cat. Relating to how Atwood said only death is the outcome to any story, what happened before is what makes a story a story. If only focused on the outcome we lose the important parts of the story because the ending is the same for all books so what makes them different is what happened before. Therefore the beginning and middle is where readers and authors should place their attention.
ReplyDeleteAllecia Dodd-Noble
DeleteI agree your point saying that we often get caught up in the ending of a story and forget to pay attention to the plot which is what makes the story unique. I like how you related it to the "In the Lake of the Woods" by saying that there was never a happy ending and instead we need to pay attention to the the specific relationships and backgrounds of the individuals in the story.
DeleteIn “Happy Endings” Margaret Atwood says that all “endings are the same however you slice it” and that any other endings are “motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality.” Each of the endings in Atwood’s stories are ended with death. All other endings of optimism and happiness are not really the end. There is always more that follows. Life keeps going on until interrupted by death. In the book “The Hours” by Michael Cunningham this same idea is expressed. When Clarrissa Vaughn goes to check on Richard before her party, she finds him hanging out of his window. Richard does not want to attend the party, saying that he doesn’t know if he “can face” it. When Clarissa responds that Richard does not have to attend the party, he replies that “there are still the hours”, one after another that he would have to face. Richard believes that the only way to end his suffering is to die. Once again, the only true ending is death. Even if Richard had stepped down from the window, his story would continue. He would have another hour and another hour after that to face.
ReplyDeleteThe function of storytellers is to enlighten the world through their stories. In the story “The Zebra Storyteller” Holst conveys the idea that the function of the storyteller is to think of and share ideas that will help society. The storyteller zebra plans a seemingly absurd story about a Siamese cat that learns to speak the zebras’ language. Him thinking about this idea causes him to be unfazed when an actual Siamese cat starts speaking his language. This allowed him to further evaluate the situation, and decide that “there was something about his looks he didn’t like”. The zebra’s mistrust for the Siamese cat resulted in the zebra killing the cat, ultimately saving the community of zebras from a danger. Storytellers share ideas that may seem absurd, but can be beneficial for society to have heard of. They point out things that society should be aware of. In The Hours, Richard’s writing receives recognition because “literature itself” feels a need for Richard’s contribution to society. What he wrote taught a lesson that people needed to learn. This is why there are writers and storytellers. They share new ideas that will change the way a society thinks and views life.
Grace Wright
DeleteYou mentioned storytellers sharing ideas that "may seem absurd, but can be beneficial for society" and I could not agree more. Storytellers have always served this purpose and this is shown in fables. Fables are fictional stories that advise the reader against something, and have been beneficial for a long time.
DeleteHolst expresses the idea that the cat can overpower a zebra through the act of surprise and astonishment. The cat’s use of “Zebraic” took the zebra so off guard that he was able to kill him. But, when the storyteller zebra imagined the exact situation, he was prepared for when it happened to be reality. Final line, “That is the function of the storyteller.” really struck me because it shows how telling stories and being prepared for outcomes that haven’t even occurred yet can be vital. This has a correlation to In the Lake of the Woods. In the book, the narrator keeps proposing different hypotheses as to what happened to Kathy. This reminds me of the story because they both seem to come up with hypothetical outcomes which end up benefiting the characters. In Holst’s story it benefitted the storyteller zebra because he survived and in O’Brien’s it brings some peace to the narrator by understanding that nobody will really know true answer. In both instances, the storyteller comes out on top, they are in control.
ReplyDeleteAtwoods idea that everything will most likely end up the same, no matter the how and the why is similar to concepts present in Unaccustomed Earth. In Unaccustomed Earth each story starts out with a somewhat similar basis and ends kind of mediocrely- not a complete letdown, but also never a perfect happy ending. It is raw and shows the reality of life. Atwood’s idea is very similar to this. She shows different beginnings and possible twists and turns a relationship can take. But, despite all of the different occurrences, they all end up back at “A”. I think that this speaks to the big ideas of fate and order in the universe. It makes me wonder what my own life has in store for me and if I actually have any say in the outcome.
Emily Swenson
DeleteOkay real quick before I answer the blog response, I just wanna say how unsettled the stories made me feel at the end. There's something about the ends of both Atwood's and Holst's stories that made me want to curl up in a ball.
ReplyDeleteIn Atwood’s, Holst’s, and Cunningham’s pieces, they explore the subject of death. Atwood claims in the end of her piece, “John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die.” She repetitively affirms this statement to emphasize that though they die, the story still continued. Life goes on. This is similarly seen in The Hours. When Richard finds life too hard to continue, he jumps out the window. But the story was never from his perspective, but rather Clarrissa Vaughn. The story continues even after his death because life goes on. While his death might’ve made a suitable stopping point, it doesn’t always end with death. Holst’s piece explores death in a different way. When the cat talks, “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.” Holst doesn’t end the story with the deaths of the first few zebras either. He ends it with the lesson conveyed in the story. The deaths are used as a story-telling trick to be careful, much like Homer and other authors of ancient times. They used fables to teach lessons. Atwood’s and Cunningham’s pieces are examples of this. There is a lesson at the end of a story, even past death.
thats like facts tho. Both short stories especially the second one was very unnerving but like thats how Atwood wants us to feel so she has very much succeeded. I like how you connected Atwood's statement, "“John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die" to the hours and said how even after Richards death life goes on. Very nice job Allison DeanJealous
DeleteMe too! I was definitely not expecting the ending to either story. I agree that Richard's suicide in the ending of The Hours is not truly death, like Atwood would argue, because it is not the end of the story, just the end of that character's story. Also, I find it interesting that in The Hours, Laura Brown's story seems to be coming to an end, as she contemplates suicide. When we stop getting new chapters about her, we assume it was because she died, only to later discover that she lived. Therefore, the ending to her story is also not death, and life continues. -Becky Winters
DeleteAccording to Spencer Holst in “The Zebra Storyteller,” the function of a storyteller is to be aware of unexpected outcomes, and to spread that awareness. The zebra who makes up a story about a Zebraic-speaking Siamese cat turns out to be completely correct. When he comes across the cat who turns out to be real, “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.” Tim O’Brien is a storyteller who, like any good storyteller is trying to bring awareness to the world about how a person’s history can affect their view of the present. In In the Lake of the Woods, John Wade is a Vietnam war veteran. His PTSD causes him to have flashbacks, and his memories do not always line up. In the end, it is this combined with the mystery surrounding his wife, Kathy's disappearance that drives him away from society. O’Brien is warning us that a person’s memory, altered as it may be, can have strong consequences on that person's actions, which should be accounted for.
ReplyDeleteIn her short story, “Happy Endings,” Margaret Atwood discusses the possibility of an infinity of endings to the simple phrase “John and Mary meet.” Perhaps John and Mary live happily ever after. Perhaps one kills the other. Perhaps one kills themself. The story may vary, but “The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die.” Atwood’s point differs from Tim O’Brien’s in the ending of In the Lake of the Woods by Tim O’Brien. We never truly learn what happened to John and Kathy, only that they are both no longer anywhere to be found. In fact, as the narrator is an external party trying to fabricate a story from interviews and evidence, he ends the story with a hypothesis: “If all is supposition, if ending is air, then why not happiness? … More likely they drowned, or got lost, or lost themselves. But who will ever know? It’s all hypothesis, beginning to end” (300). Here, O’Brien points out that the story is much the same no matter how you view the facts, but that the ending is uncertain. Personally, I agree with Atwood’s point over O’Brien’s. Facts can be used for the sake of arguing a particular bias, and this can cause stories to vary. However, in most any case, the exact ending is undeniable from any viewpoint.
Becky Winters
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThese two stories present the idea that the ending for everything and everyone is the same. This said ending is death, which is a fairly depressing idea. Many different pieces of literature use this conclusiveness of death in their stories to build up a plot or do something of the like.
ReplyDeleteThis is most distinct in “Happy Endings” because of the outright statement that “the endings are the same no matter how you slice it”. The characters always die in the end, it’s just a matter of how they get there. In “The Zebra Storyteller”, the eventual ending of death doesn’t seem obvious until the end. In that story, the writer tells us the ending before we arrive there (death) and without us realizing it. The cat kills these zebras again and again because they can understand what he is saying, before being killed by a story-telling zebra who had already predicted the cat’s appearance. This repetition of parallel endings, involving death, does not only occur in these stories. I bet, if you dug deep, you could find it in a lot of literature because it is something that connects us all. Something no character can truly outrun. It reminds me of the Hema and Kaushik stories in Unaccustomed Earth because of their eventual endings. Kaushik’s mother’s sickness followed him throughout his life. There is mention of his mother hanging up photographs that he had taken. He becomes a photographer. When he is out in the world, he takes photographs of people in tragedy. This eventually leads him to somewhere in Asia (exact location has escaped me) where he dies because he goes swimming, as his mother loved to do. These influences of death told us what would happen to him by giving us clues throughout the story. It is a powerful technique and idea to include in literature because of its connection to all people and it is an eventual ending to a story that is both palpable and striking. No matter how often it is used. But, as Atwood says, stories are really the “stretch in between” and that’s what gives each of these stories their originality and charm.
Oh very good Sofia. I have also talked about the statement Atwood stated at the end of Happy endings, “the endings are the same no matter how you slice it”, but I did not connect it to "Unaccustomed earth" like you have done. very well thought out 👍🏼👍🏼
Delete“The Zebra Storyteller” is told in the form of a fable that results in the moral message, expect the unexpected. In this piece the storyteller uses his imagination to discover the truth and save the herd of zebras by killing the Siamese cat that was impersonating a lion. In this short story it ends with, “That is the function of a storyteller.” So what exactly is the point? The function? I simply think that the function of the storyteller is to be able to control the story with ease. The storyteller has the ability to control anything with the story by adding any unexpected twists or manipulating certain situations to modify the readers opinions to the author’s liking. You can undeniably relate this back to one of our summer readings, “In the lake of the woods.” As soon as Kathy went missing I for sure thought that she escaped on her own using the boat, but as soon as Tim O’Brien, the author, introduced the idea or theory that John Wade murdered Kathy I realized that he certainly did have the capacity for that. This shows us how storytellers can manipulate our thoughts in any possible way, so yes expect the unexpected.
ReplyDeleteIn “Happy Endings” Margaret Atwood states how all, “the endings are the same however you slice it.” She reminds us no matter how inventive this is the end of the stories ultimately end up the same. Relating it back to the same novel, “In the lake of the woods” Tim O’Brien gives us many different scenarios of how Kathy disappeared but no matter which one it was the novel still ended up with Kathy never being found and John disappearing as well.
I love that idea that storytellers manipulate the story to suit a certain purpose. Incredibly well thought out Talah.
DeleteI didn't think of tying the multiple endings of In The Lake of the Woods to the Atwood story. Just a brilliant observation. Great connections. The function of a storyteller is a complex thing and you handled it with grace and sufficient evidence.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Zebra Storyteller” by Spencer Holst, a Siamese cat is able to trick a herd of zebras by mimicking their language and pretending to be a lion. The zebras are so caught off guard by the fact that the cat can speak their language, that the cat is able to kill the zebras. The cat successfully gets away with this until he comes across a zebra storyteller who has a suspicion of a cat that pretends to be a lion and can speak “Zebraic.” When the Zebra storyteller is approached by the cat, he knows it’s not a lion, “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.” He then goes on to kill the cat. In this short story, Holst expresses how a storyteller user his or her imagination in order to get to the truth. This story relates to Tim O'Brien's In the Lake of the Woods. Both prompts inform the reader that the truth is a combination of one's imagination and fact. In the Lake of the Woods, John Wade performs magic during his childhood. In magic tricks, the truth behind the trick is partially hidden to make it more appealing to the audience. John then goes to war where things are portrayed to the public eye in a skewed manner, appearing to be something they’re not. When John chooses to become a politician, he is yet again taking part in something that is altered to fit a different reality. Both “The Zebra Storyteller” and In the Lake of the Woods show how facts we've been told are partially true and partially altered.
ReplyDelete“Happy Endings” by Margaret Atwood also correlates to In the Lake of the Woods. In both works, multiple scenarios are played out to give the reader different options to how the story could potentially go. In both, the ending is not what's important. It's the middle, and the beginning, and everything in between. In “Happy Endings” Atwood expresses that no matter what version of the story is chosen, the ending will always be the same stating, “The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die.” Since the ending is always going to be the same, the real dilemma is not the “what” but the “How and Why.” In comparison, in, In the Lake of the Woods, Kathy Wade’s cause of disappearance isn't the main aspect of the story. The main aspect is everything provoked along the way.
To be an effective story, no “happy ending” is required. In "The Zebra Storyteller" by Spencer Holst, the story is what saves the life of the Zebra. It prepares him for what to expect, and thus he is not surprised and killed. There is no happy ending to the story of the Siamese Cat that the storyteller recalls, he simply says “‘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!’”. In an attempt to make people laugh, he saves his life, and the lives of all the future Zebras. Likewise, in In The Lake of the Woods by Tim O’Brien, there is no happy ending, and yet that is what makes the story valuable. Through his exploration of John Wade, the narrator teaches the reader about themselves, allowing them to draw their own conclusions. Had he given the reader a concrete ending, especially a happy one, the experience would have been marred. Instead, he ends with a question: “Can we believe that he was not a monster but a man? That he was so innocent of everything except his life? Could the truth be so simple? So terrible?”(303). Instead of the emphasis on the conclusion, the emphasis is put upon the journey, and Tim O’Brien makes you contemplate it, and learn. Similarly, in "Happy Endings" by Margaret Atwood, the ending is up to the reader in a way. She offers up a multitude of different options, yet after all of them she draws her own conclusion, stating that “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”. Again, the ending of the story is minimalized, and the actual essence is what is emphasized. In The Hours by Michael Cunningham, the reader knows from the start that Virginia Woolf ends up dead. It is the journey that is important, as well as what the parallel journey of Richard and Clarissa. While the ending will often serve to tie a piece of fiction together, it serves more of a purpose as a way to illuminate the earliest pieces of the book. The true body of the story is the experience of it, not the finishing of it.
ReplyDeleteIn Margaret Atwood’s “Happy Endings” multiple possibilities are described to hypothesize the “in-between” of multiple people’s lives. Atwood claims that all endings are the same no matter how varied the middle or beginning is. In this case “John and Mary die” is the only possible outcome, yet there are six possible ways to get to the same ending. I believe this is a prime example of fiction being the most real form of storytelling. Atwood is commenting on the harsh reality that death is inevitable so we must make our own beginnings and middles because that is what truly matters. In Tim O’Brien’s “In The Lake of The Woods,” many theories are proposed as to how and why Kathy disappeared. The reader is informed of Kathy’s disappearance very early on in the story but the real questions are never truly answered. In both “Happy Endings” and “In The Lake of The Woods,” time is molded to alter the progression of beginning to end. This emphasizes that no matter how you shape it or, in Atwood’s words, “slice it,” everything comes to an end, everyone eventually dies. Spenser Holst provides another example of fiction being the most real form of storytelling in “A Zebra Storyteller.” The only reason the storyteller of the zebras was not killed by the Siamese cat claiming to be a lion was because he thought of a possible outcome through storytelling. This prepared him to not be shocked when the cat spoke his language and therefore save his life. Fiction can prepare us for even the most unpredictable circumstances in life. The cat was killed in the end just as Atwood claims all endings happen which emphasizes Atwood’s idea that the beginning and middle are the only important parts of a story.
ReplyDeleteErin Mullen
DeleteI like how you connected fiction and storytelling and no matter how the story begins, it will always end in death, which is demonstrated in both short stories and "In the Lake of the Woods" as well as "The Hours"
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe two stories, as well as In the Lake of the Woods, by Tim O’Brien, prompt the reader to think of happy endings. All of these stories ending in death went against the reader’s hopes, forcing them to consider whether their hopes were actually reasonable. As mentioned in the story, “Happy Endings” by Margaret Atwood, all stories ultimately end in death. In this way, the authors were able to create an intriguing story, ss the reader did not know how it would end. This element of suspense was key in creating the effect that these stories had. They allow one to temporarily believe in an alternate ending, before the first is decided. This also gives the stories the flexibility to contain more variety in the mood and language. A story with a happy ending may be stuck using positive, non-violent language, whereas a story with a different ending can induce a range of feelings in a single story. Both “Happy Endings” and In the Lake of the Woods are able to make the reader feel different things. This is done through blunt explanations of the events in the first, and through a sense of mystery and unknowing in the second. The story, “The Zebra Storyteller” by Spencer Holst is also able to create feeling by surprising the reader with an unexpected ending. While happy endings may feel good to the reader, the stories with emotion that make the reader think and question the events in it are often better.
ReplyDeleteSome writers choose not to use happy endings in their stories in order to teach their readers a lesson that may be uncomfortable to hear but ultimately beneficial.
DeleteI like the idea of having the perspective of the reader having hope. I agree with the concept of temporary belief to create a more flexible story line.
DeleteI like the point you made that happy endings can be bland where as ones with multiple scenarios can be more eventful.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThroughout both stories there is a common theme that everyone ends up in the same place in the end, dead. It is clear in both "The Zebra Storyteller," by Spenser Holst and in "Happy Endings," Margaret Atwood that we are all the same no matter what happens, there can be a bunch of different scenarios but they all end up the same, just like in real life people have all different things in their lives but sadly we all end up in the same way in the end. A common theme I have personally noticed while reading the fiction so far is to expect the unexpected because the way you would normally think isn’t always the correct outcome. In Tim O'Brien's story “The Lake of the Woods”, O’Brien makes you think about all the different possibilities to what can happen next. Authors manipulate the way we think throughout stories in order for us to think outside the box and be creative, and that is exactly what these stories have made me do.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I would use the word manipulate to describe what the authors are doing, they give you many options to so you view the story or try to make it your own, thats how I Like to see it. Like in the lake of the woods Tim O'Brien gives you multiple hypotheses to give you options on what happens.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I like your point that in the end everyone dies, does this have to apply to stories all the time if the character isn't placed in a life or death scenario?
DeleteAll these works are constantly keeping you on your toes. In “The Zebra Storyteller” you do not expect a small cat to take down a whole zebra, if he's hunting that is. The cat used trickery and distracted the zebra just enough to strike. It is told in a very blunt way, no further explanation leading up to the kill, no details on how it was done. One point the cat was just having a normal conversation, then next he is butchering a zebra. Also, in “Happy Endings” the vary nature on how its written is constantly keeping you guessing. Not only on how the story will proceed but how its all connected. Margaret Atwood also uses that blunt way of telling what is happening, she doesn't sugar coat anything. I think this all connects to In the Lake of the Woods because Tim O’Brien is also constantly keeping you on your toes and trying to guess what will happen next. The way he set up his novel is that he goes back and forth through time, much like “Happy Endings”. He also gives you bits of evidence and hypotheses without telling you what really happened so you can come to your own conclusions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with use of theorizing that all the authors use. I also agree with your connection to In The Lake of The Woods.
DeleteThis is Johanna btw
DeleteJohanna:
ReplyDeleteIn Holst’s The Zebra Storyteller there is a focus on the power of creativity and control over a story line. The role of the narrator is to guide the reader through an imaginary world, developing it as continue throughout the book. There is always a sense of uncertainty and mystery as the story continues. With such a repetition of the astonishment of the peculiarity of a Siamese talking cat to the Zebras, that we become familiar with a routine, the suggestion that the narrator has made. But just as quickly, “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”. The role of a narrator is to interrupt the familiar thought process, create a new path, and keep the reader theorizing and out of their comfort zone.
It’s inevitable that we die in the end, and in Magaret Atwood’s Happy endings it becomes clear that we all want to know how a book ends, when the ending is the same, we all die. Evidently only one of her plausibly endings cou;d be described as “Happy”, while the others seems to be the less ‘wanted’ option. It is clear that we all face things in life that are uncomfortable and unknown. Though such a reality is not wished upon any person, we cannot control which way life goes. In reference to storytelling Margaret Atwood discusses the idea of the journey and story, the anticipation of where we all end up is not as important as how we get there. We must understand, "The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die”. This shows the reality of fiction; whatever happens in the end, the journey is more interesting.
Connecting to the summer reading, In The Lake of The Woods by Tim O’Brien, the concept of a true ending is challenged. O’Brien constructs his books by means of theories, keeping the truth unknown. The point of such is that as a narrator the story line has to be unpredictable to the reader. In relation to the stories by Holst and Atwood, the idea of an unknown plot and the practicality of someones life becomes far more interesting than where everyone ends up.
I completely agree with Jayden. The reason being how not only does A Lake on the Woods leave us wondering what happened to John's wife, it makes us question how we genuinely feel about other characters in the literary work. What I mean by this is the lack of a proper ending makes US fill in the blanks. When the reader is the one to fill in these blanks it give one the power to change the story and make it what we want it to be. In my situation I considered that due to some sort of “madness” John killed his wife, however someone might disagree and what’s the beauty of it all is that we are both correct. This beauty is evident in the piece by Atwood because it allows the reader to not only chose what the outcome of the story is and see how it plays out but also it gives us the chance to see other endings which we might not have seen. This beauty is present in the Zebra Storyteller since it demonstrates how when the ending is known or the essence of the plot is known the thrill and suspense which can be represented by the cat. As soon as the zebra knew or had the story of his Siamese cat when the truth came out he wasn’t surprised. In the work it states”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.”, where the “fit to be tied” part can be interpreted as how he loses interest.This can somewhat relate to how when we are reading a book or watching a movie if someone were to spoil the ending it would greatly upset us. Thus I think in both literary works and in the Lake of the woods the lack of a proper definite ending brings greater depth to the text.
ReplyDeleteIn “Happy Endings”, Margaret Atwood creates multiple endings for the same story. But no matter what endings are read, the story always ends up the same. John and Mary meet, John and Mary die. What happens in between, according to Atwood, is “the hardest to do anything with”. The in between is for the storytellers. But Holst regards storytellers in a different way in “The Zebra Storyteller”. He tells the story of a cat who pretends to be a lion and tricks zebra’s by speaking to them in their language which then allows him to kill them. One day the zebra storyteller thinks up a story of a cat who learned to speak in zebra with the hopes of making his friends laugh. So when the storyteller comes across this cat speaking in zebra and kicked him with his hoof, killing the cat. Holst ends the story by concluding “that is the function of a storyteller”. A storytellers purpose is to get rid of the fake. In the novel, “In the Lake of the Woods”, Tim O’Brien tells the story of a married couple who run off to live in a rural village on a lake after the husband devastatingly loses an election. The story is about the disappearance of the wife, which we learn about fairly early in the story. The plot is made up of bits and pieces of evidence and retelling and accounts of what happened the night of her disappearance and the reader is left with coming up with their own ending and their own reasoning for the disappearance. This story is unique because it has no ending. The reader is not left satisfied with an understanding of what truly happened. The story is like a puzzle that the reader has to put together in order to make sense of the events and create their own ending.
ReplyDeleteI like your idea that there isn't always a satisfying ending through each of these stories. Very well put Sara!
DeletePerhaps one of the most captivating elements in fiction, endings provides readers with a sense of structure. Resolutions are but a response to human’s need to give and have meaning, it is in our very nature to interpret the world around us, to perceive connotations and nuances. We so desperately search for meaning we often fabricate our own, and that is fiction. However, in Margaret Atwood’s piece “Happy Endings” the author becomes aware of the impracticality of that need, according to the writer, there are no true endings, there is no closure or secret significance. Our actions create a continuous trajectory of events, one’s ending could be someone else’s beginning, or be as insignificant as the flap of a butterfly’s wing. Atwood makes a point that meaning lies not within closure, but within how and why we got there. She’d rather discuss the reasons behind our actions, than the actions themselves. The author’s nihilism toward endings heavily crashes with Michael Cunningham’s vision in The Hours, the Virginia Wolf connoisseur relies on Richard’s ending to bring his characters together, providing the long awaited explanation as to how their stories are intertwined.
ReplyDeleteFollowing Holst ideas however, Cunningham’s version of Virginia Wolf writes stories as convoluted and complex as the women who read it, indecisively foreshadowing the later character’s attitude towards the world and those around them. Wolf’s function as a storyteller, as fitted by Cunningham’s narrative, warns the readers, in this case Laura, about the potential of life, and the danger of creative confinement. Her pledges towards the capacity of women grow so strong inside of Laura, the unhappy housewife decides to take action, and with renewed strength, she sets out to discover and be discovered, making her ending a work in progress, rather than a fixed set of predetermined goals.
To distinguish a good story from a bad story, although in the end determined by the individual reader, relies on the predictability of the story and the ability to at all points keep the reader interested. Although each author has techniques unique to them, the two aforementioned skills make for the basic premonitions of a good story. Both Spencer Holst and Margret Atwood, two renowned authors, understand these principals, and therefore utilize them to create memorable, wonderful stories. In Holst’s The Zebra Storyteller, he utilizes fiction to create an example of unpredictability throughout the story. Although the story may be simple and without much detail, throughout the whole of it Holst succeeds in surprising the reader at every turn. And along with an interesting plot, each surprise only works to capture the reader’s attention further, hook after hook sinking within the fleeting wisp of mind we pay in due to the author. Such can also be observed in Tim O’Brien’s In the Lake of the Woods, where O’Brien (famous for his unique ordering of chapters and events within his novel) uses chapters for evidence and hypothesis to integrate new idea plots to the story. Whether that be Kathy “growing tired of tricks and trapdoors, a husband she had never known” (23) and fleeing with another man or on a boat to the wilds of the lake, or Wade murdered her, boiling her, “puffs of steam [rising] from the sockets of her eyes,” (272) before “she jerked once and shuddered and curled up and hugged herself and lay still” (273). Each and every way is unlike what a reader would ever expect. Murder is meant to be done by a knife or a gun, not boiling water. Escaping is running into the woods, not fleeing on a boat into a great big lake to only disappear and presumably die. Nothing is what is expected, but therefore everything is wonderfully mysterious.
ReplyDeleteEven more spectacular is the lack of ending that O’Brien finishes In the Lake of the Woods with. As Margret Atwood says in Happy Endings, the only good ending is the one that is unexpected. Unexpectedly sad, unexpectedly odd, unexpectedly confusing, something unexpected to throw off the reader and leave them, eventually, in awe. O’Brien never gives In the Lake of the Woods an ending simply because it’s a book that never was meant to be ended, but instead linger within the frames of your mind for weeks and months after having finished the novel. At some points the ending is seen as disappointing, at others its seen as creative, and whatever it may be considered- its the ending that the book deserves.