Margaret Atwood - Essay Example

of The essay below is an analysis of the dis by Margaret Atwood. However, the work argues on the basis of how the author uses her writing to make valid dramatic explanations. Besides, the paper describes why the conceptualization of the text works rather than explaining the actual events in the work. The essay also creates a basis for the argument therein. Evidences are also inherent in an attempt to validate the arguments as per the discourse. Major ideas in the text have references, and a writing reference list is at the end of the document. The reason behind the fact is to ensure that the information provides valid conclusion for the argument that the paper argues for with reference to the work of art by Atwood. A Literary Analysis of the Treatise, ‘Happy Ending’ By Margaret Atwood ‘Happy Endings’ which is a short story that comprises of six different composite narratives creates the imagery that marriages have the same problems but in different ways. The author creates the impression that the end is the same. The only things that matter are the circumstances that lead to that end. The six plots of the story showcase different conclusions. The first plot, plot A, gives the most sought after ending. The marriage does not encounter any problems, and the stakeholders live happily ever after in their life. However, the narrative is too good to be true, and thus reality tends to be the core issue in the plot. In the successive plots, the same characters marry but experience various hindrances towards happiness. However, the primary factor is that the end of the plots is similar but not the same (Greene). The author, on the contrary, provides consolation in the report that the beginning of something is the most probable part of experiencing not only fun but also pleasure. Consequently, the statement that the beginning is fun but the end is the same due to death as the inevitable variable forms the backbone of the plot of the story. John, who is one of the main characters of the short narrative, showcases different qualities in the different appearances in the plots. In the plot A, John loves and treats her wife, Mary with respect and love. They marry and have children. The children develop good habits, and their marriage tends to work out. In plot B, the Author tends to shift the character of john be defining him as selfish and unfaithful to her wife. In plot C, john is older than Mary and is in love with her. In plot F, John lacks self-control, and his jealousness makes him kill marry and her boyfriend and consequently commits suicide. However, the character of john is significantly different from his character in plot A. The various attributes of john provide the driving factor that the author uses to show the differences that marriages have and the equality that standardizes them in the end. The author uses the characters also to illustrate that the activities that come between the start of a relationship and the end of a marriage are the ones that matter (Stein). The use of john as a name bearing different character traits is also a technique of the author of creating the contradiction that unions create. The proposition is true in that marriages have the same labels, similar coincidences but different outcomes. The author creates the same character and uses age differences to attempt and determine the various problems that the difference in time can affect the marriage institution. In the case of John, the character enjoys the marriage in the first plot whereby both of the spouses, John and Mary, are young. The instance where john is older than Mary tends to attribute different perceptions. John does not love Madge and is jealous of the love relationship that Mary is having with James the twenty-two youngster. The time relation is important to the story since it creates the different kinds of male characters in the same institution of marriage. All the characters are different, but all are husbands while others are wives. Margaret Atwood, who is the author, uses different dramatic tones in establishing the changing scenarios in the plots that constitute her narrative. The fact is evident in the plot B whereby she shifts the tone to a more harsh approach. She uses unimaginative words such a rat, a dog plus a pig to describe john in the second plot. The words show the author’s disgust of infidelity and the despise she attaches to such kind of character. In another instance, the author uses a softer touch in stating that in everything that an individual engages in, the endings are too much but in every perspective, the beginnings are much fun. The fact implies that no wonder the perils that relationship undergo through, the start of a relationship can keep the marriage alive. Thus, the author forms a healing and soothing tone in the mind of the reader. The most prolific idea as per the narrative is that the notion of marriages as fairytales is a very huge misconception of the marriage institution. The conflicting characters that have the same names also are useful in establishing the similarity and exposing the vast differences therein. The description also illustrates the idea that the happiness in courtship is not a determining factor of the resultant marriage. The story reveals that love can be the root of all problems. The narrative even depicts murder as one of the adverse impacts of love and relationship. The most probable aspect is that the end being death phases out the rights as well as the wrongs that the marriage institution conveys. The author thus puts forward that the development of a person’s life is dependent of the options available and the choices made. Therefore, every person should concentrate on the meaning of life and try to comprehend the constituent structures as a way of overcoming the challenges that accrue. The most realistic adventure as per the narrative is the plot B. One of the spouses in a relationship tends to deviate from the subtle marriage system. The most common experiences in life are that the many relationships are dependent on the first encounters. The dating part is the best, and it displays commitment, love and fun. Conversely, most relationships do not overcome the test of time. Mostly, misconceptions of the happiness tend to graduate into reality and the love circle starts to deteriorate. Adverse effects of the mistakes that are made by entering a marriage contract are the ones that stimulate the harmful acts. The purpose of life is also a definition that accrues the marriage institution and the knowledge of the fact that life is bigger than marriage justifies that the death is the ironical happy ending. In conclusion, the author uses the plot as the main vehicle of the display of the thematic issues. The narrative is one example of a metafiction in that the author leaves the reader thi9nking about the nature of the theory instead of creating meaning of the reality in the tale. Thus, the short story is one of a kind and exposes vast knowledge of the actuality. The examination of the marriage institution is also credible since the author leaves suspense in every scenario thus creating interest in the mind of the reader. The poem also creates argument in that death is not the necessary ending of the marriage. Most arguments escalate that any deviations from the social contract of marriage can lead to termination of the relationship through separation or divorce. However, the relationship of marriage repeats itself even after the termination of the prior one (JIANG). People still create other relationships that the narrative tends to focus in its relation of the middle-aged John, who falls in love with the twenty-two year old Mary. Works Cited Greene, E., Bodrumlu, T. and Knight, K. " Automatic analysis of rhythmic poetry with applications to generation and translation." (2010): 524--533. JIANG, L. and LUO, S. " The Examination of the Major Pieces of the English-Translated Tang Poetry in Their Primitive Propagation Stage. ." Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), 1, (2009): 22. Stein, D. Poetry into song. 1st ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2010. Read More