Showing posts with label happiness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label happiness. Show all posts

Happy Endings, by Margaret Atwood


 Audiobook

Analysis (video)

Themes in ths story

Written by Glòria Torner

BIOGRAPHY

Margaret Atwood was born in 1939, in Ottawa, Ontario (Canada). When she was seven years old, her family moved to Toronto, but she still spent much of her childhood in the northern Ontario and Quebec wilderness, where her father, an entomologist, conducted research in forests. Her love for nature influenced her writing. She became a voracious reader of literature: pocketbook mysteries, Canadian animal stories and comic books. She did not attend school full-time until she was twelve years old.
Atwood realised she wanted to write professionally when she was sixteen. She studied and received her undergraduate degree from Victoria College at the University of Toronto in 1961, where she published poems and articles in the college literary journal. Later, she studied and obtained a master’s degree in English literature from Radcliffe College in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1962.
Atwood married Jim Polk, an American writer, in 1968, but they divorced in 1973. She had a long-term relationship with the Canadian novelist Graeme Gibson, living together in Toronto until his death in 2019. She wrote about her lover, Gibson, in the poetry book, Dearly.
She is a prolific writer. Since 1961 she has published eighteen novels, eighteen books of poetry, eleven books of non-fiction, nine collections of short fiction, eight children’s books, two graphic novels and a number of small press editions of both poetry and fiction. Her autobiography, called Book of Lives: A Memoir, was published in 2025.
In addition to writing, she taught English literature at several Canadian and American universities.

The main themes in her literature are:
Dystopian and speculative and science fiction.
Alias Grace and The Blind Assassin are historical novels, and the MaddAddam trilogy engages themes of genetic modification, pharmaceutical and corporate control, and man-made disaster.
She published her dystopian masterpiece, The Handmaid’s Tale, in 1985. This novel tells the story of Offred, a woman living in a sexual slavery, in a repressive Christian theocracy in the future. She recounts her daily experiences of her life as a “Handmaid”, forced to bear children for the higher-ranking members of Gilead society. As most women cannot conceive children, Offred and some other young women, who live without freedom and under oppression, provide children for influential families.
This book, criticised as immoral in Christian societies, was adapted into a film in 1990, and an acclaimed TV series based on the novel was co-written by the author in 2017. In 2019 she wrote a sequel, The Testaments.
Afterwards, in The Heart Goes Last, the writer imagines a dystopian America in which a couple is compelled to join a community that functions like a prison.
The theory of Canadian identity and memory. This theory has garnered attention both in Canada and internationally in her principal work of literary criticism, Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature. She postulates that Canadian literature, and by extension Canadian identity, is characterised by the symbol of survival.
Gender, identity and feminism. Her first novel, The Edible Woman, published in1969, is an early example of feminism, a topic found in many of her works.
Animal rights. Surfacing is an exploration of the relationship between nature and culture, and in Cat’s Eye, the narrator recognises the similarity between a turkey and a baby survivor.
She writes about other themes: religion and myth, climate change, power politics. Sometimes, several themes are interconnected within a single novel.
She has won, among other prices, the Prince of Asturias Award for Literature in 2008, the Pen Pinter Prize, in 2016, and two Booker Prizes, in 2000 and 2019.
 
HAPPY ENDINGS
This short story was first published in 1983 in the Canadian collection Murder in the Dark, and in1994 it was available in the United States in Good Bones and Simple Murders.
It is a short story structured into eight sections: six varying, interlocked narratives and two brief sections, one at the beginning of the story, and the other one at the end.
In the first section (I think), Margaret Atwood decides to use the interrogative pronouns “Who” and “What,” following “The 5Ws”: Who? What? When? Where? Why? and one more, “H” How?” Many journalists use this framework to communicate the most relevant information of the story in a newspaper article. And these three sentences are used as an introduction by the narrator who addresses readers directly as you, and comments on the craft of storytelling during and after the narratives.
The six variations are written using these five plot elements. I’ll use this structure in the first one, but I think it is not necessary in the other ones.
Exposition: John and Mary fall in love and get married.
Rising action: they have good jobs, buy a beautiful house, and have two children.
Climax: they have some friends and a stimulating sex life.
Falling action: they retire and enjoy their hobbies.
Resolution: they die.
In this second storyline, Mary falls in love with John, who doesn’t love her, he only uses her for sex, but she hopes that he will come to love her. One day, John is in a restaurant with another woman, Madge. When Mary’s friends tell her he is cheating with Madge, Mary collects all the sleeping pills and aspirins she can find and takes them with half a bottle of sherry. She leaves a note for John, but she thinks he’ll discover her, take her to the hospital, and later marry her. But this fails to happen. Mary dies and John marries Madge.
Now, in the third structure, John, an old man, who has a steady respectable job, is married to Madge. He is having an affair with Mary, a young girl. She has sexual relations with him, but she doesn’t love him because she prefers James, who is the same age as her, has a motorcycle and a fabulous record collection. One day, James discovers John and Mary in the bed. James shoots the two of them and commits suicide. At the end, Madge marries Fred. It is a love triangle.
In this fourth storyline, Fred and Madge are happy together. They have a nice house near the seashore. One day, a tidal wave approaches their home. Despite the loss of their home, they are grateful to have survived the calamity that killed thousands. They remain together. This ending is very similar to the first one.
In the fifth storyline, Fred has a bad heart and he dies. Afterwards, Madge devotes herself to charity work. However, the narrator address directly to the reader in 2n person, and tells them that these details can be changed. You can choose: Madge could have different endings: cancer…
In the last storyline the narrator suggests that the story can be changed again, making John a revolutionary, and Mary a secret agent who starts a relationship with him in order to spy on him. This story is very similar to the first story.
The last section has two brief remarks: the narrator observes that the endings of different plots are the same: death is the only true ending that comes to all of us, and therefore to all characters. But the beginnings are more fun. Plot is fundamentally, just one thing happening after another. Intentionally, she forgets “where”, “how” and “why”.
Conclusion
Margaret Atwood writes a story about writing stories with six different scenarios, always with a relationship between a man and a woman. Plain stories without poetry and sensibility. Too much pessimism! And with an unreal title!
QUESTIONS
-Do you think plot is only “one thing after another”? What do you know of Todorov’s Five Stages of Plot?
-According to a theory, girls usually prefer bad boys to goody-goody ones. Do you think it is a real fact or it is something conjuntural?
-What is happiness? What is for you the best/most original definition of happiness? How do you know if you're happy or you aren't? How do you know when other people are or arent happy? Is happiness an invention of the consumer society?
VOCABULARY
live-in, tepid, run-down, higher, underwater, stoned, brawling

The Ones Who Walk away from Omelas, by Ursula K. Le Guin

 

Video analysis

Video summary

Audiobook

The story on the BBC (audio)

By Glòria Torner

Biography

Ursula Kroeber Le Guin was born in 1929 and grew up in Berkeley, California. Her parents were the celebrated anthropologist Alfred Kroeber and the writer Theodora Kroeber, who chronicled the life of the last member of the Yahi tribe, Ishi. The Kroeber family had a large collection of books, and they received a big number of visitors, as members of the Native-American community, or well-known academics such as Robert Oppenheimer. Though she was brought up in a non-religious household, she took her personal spiritual beliefs from Taoist and Buddhist traditions.

Le Guin attended Berkeley High School. From 1947 to 1951 she took a Bachelor of Arts degree in French Renaissance and Italian literature at Radcliffe College, and later, undertook graduate studies at Columbia University. From 1953 to 1954, she won a Fulbright grant to continue her studies in France. While travelling to France, she met the historian Charles A. Le Guin, and they married in Paris in 1953. She began doctoral studies, but abandoned them after her marriage. From 1957, they settled in Portland, Oregon, had three children, and she began writing full-time, publishing for nearly sixty years. She died in 2018.

Her oeuvre includes twenty novels, twelve volumes of short stories, eleven volumes of poetry, thirteen children’s books, five collections of essays and four works of translation.

There are two main topics in her novels: science fiction, following the literature of Arthur C. Clarke, Philip K. Dick, or Isaac Asimov, and fantasy works following the steps of J. R. R. Tolkien.

Le Guin wrote a cycle of books of science fiction about the Hainish universe, beginning with World (1966). The Left Hand of Darkness (1969) is considered one of the most acclaimed books of science fiction. The Word for World is Forest (1973) was the source of inspiration to James Cameron to create the film Avatar. The Dispossessed (1974) is an anarchist utopian novel. The book Always Coming Home (1985) redefined the scope and style of utopian fiction.

She published her masterpiece of fantasy, A Wizard of Earthsea, in1968, and during thirty years, she went on writing this popular fictional world, a cycle of five books called the Books of Earthsea.

She translated Tao Te Ching from Lao Tzu. And Selected Poems of Gabriela Mistral, the Chilean poet. Her final publications included non-fiction books, as Dreams Must Explain Themselves and Ursula K. Le Guin: Conversations on Writing, and her last collection of poems, So Far So Good, all of which were released after her death.

She became one of the most well-known writers in the USA for her speculative fiction, winning, among many other honours, the National Book Award, six Nebula Awards and the Kafka Prize. In 2016, she joined the short list of authors to be published in their lifetimes by the Library of America. Three of Le Guin’s books have been finalists for the Pulitzer Prize.

 

The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas

It’s a philosophical science fiction short story, first published in the anthology New Dimensions 3, in 1973, and later as an independent publication, in 1993. It is one of the author’s best-known short stories.

The story, written by a single narrator who is not a character in the story itself, can be divided into two parts:


First part: The happiness

The story begins with a long description with many details of the first day of summer in the utopian city of Omelas, a town by the sea. The arrival of the summer solstice is celebrated with a glorious festival: processions, music, full of horse races, old people, smiling children, mothers with babes… They are going to the north side of the city, called “Green Fields”.

Suddenly, the narrator breaks the telling and speaks directly to the reader using a second person addressing him as a participant, creating thus a sense of intimacy. He wonders how is possible to describe such joy and happiness in this community.

The story follows with a second, longer description about the life of the citizens. Now, the reader discovers that this isn’t a traditional tale, but an irreal allegory or a thought experiment. And the writer, second shifting to a more philosophical and direct address, changes the style using not only the third person, also the first person, singular or plural. The citizens of Omelas don’t have monarchy, police, soldiers, the bomb, priests, or slavery, and they don’t need a stock exchange or advertisements in Omelas, but they are not barbarians, they are intelligent, sophisticated, and cultured.

On the last day before the festival, people from other towns are arriving by train or trams to Omelas to join its inhabitants. The magic atmosphere of orgy, with beautiful nude people, nude priests and priestesses already half in ecstasy and ready to copulate with any man or woman…, and a little of “drooz” (drug), is the demonstration of the contentment of all the people.

The processions have arrived to the Green Fields, and suddenly a child of nine or ten plays on a flute, a trumpet sounds, the young riders form a line, the crown waits for the horse racing, they announce that the Festival of Summer has begun. Everything appears perfect but…


2n part. The sadness, the horror, the suffering child

With the sentence “Then let me describe one more thing”, the narrator introduces the horrific truth: the antagonist. He is an unnamed ten-years-old child, who is imprisoned in a small, putrefied broom closet or disused tool room. He is covered in festering sores. He suffers horribly because he is hungry, dirty, and always alone.

All the inhabitants of Omelas know that the child is there. Some would like to help the child, but they know that, in that case, the prosperity of the town would be destroyed. Nobody wants to rescue this child.

If everything has appeared perfect, the happiness of the population depends on the eternal suffering of this single child. The inhabitants of Omelas prefer happiness to guilt, accepting the child’s misery as a necessary sacrifice for their joy.

But, at the end, some inhabitants of Omelas decide to walk away. They leave the city to feel free from culpability, because they can’t accept happiness based on a child’s suffering. The narrator says that the place where they go is possible that doesn’t exist, but this people know where they are going.

The narrator reflects that “Omelas sound in my words like a city in a fairy tale, long ago and far away, once upon a time”.

And Ursula Le Guin has written a great dystopia!


QUESTIONS

-Do you think that free copulation with anyone can be a part of general happiness?

-Is a society with fewer rules happier?

-What does these sentences suggest to you: "Happiness is something rather stupid" and "Only pain is intellectual, only evil interesting"?

-Is technology an obstacle to happiness?

-What do you imagine it will happen when the poor boy in the tool room dies?


VOCABULARY

rigging, shimmering, dodged, halter, bit, manes, pranced, dulcet, pedants, goody-goody, godhead, manned, sticky, seeps, second-hand, wither, snivelling


Physics and Chemistry, by Jackie Kay

 

Review

Another review

Analysis

A BIT OF BIOGRAPHY
Jackie Kay was born in Edinburgh in 1961. Her biological mother was Scottish, and her biological father, Nigerian. She was adopted soon after being born by a politically activist couple, John and Helen Kay from Glasgow. This couple had previously adopter her brother.
As a curiosity, Jackie worked for some months as a cleaning woman for John Le Carré, the spy novels writer.
She wanted to be an actress, but after reading the stories by Alasdair Gray, she decided to be a writer. She studied English at the University of Sterling.
She writes poetry, novels, short stories and plays. Her topics are adoption, gender, sexuality, activism and family relationships.
Her most famous book is Trumpet, about a jazz musician who, once dead, they discovered he was a woman.
Our short story appeared in a book called Why don’t you stop talking?
Now she works as a professor of Creative Writing at Newcastle University.
About her private life, we can say she had a son with another writer, then she had a long relationship with a poetess who had a daughter with a poet. So, a life full of books and writers.

 

SUMMARY

This is a story about two middle-aged female teachers. In the story, they don’t have names, they are referred only by the subject they teach, Physics and Chemistry. A part of being workmates, they’ve been living together for a long time, and they know each other very well. Physics is serious and introvert, and Chemistry is more open and doesn’t have problems expressing her emotions.

They are good teachers and in general are respected by their colleagues. Perhaps somebody can think they are a typical pair of spinsters, but if somebody does, they keep their opinion by themselves.

One day, after being in a concert they liked very much, they make love for the first time. For both of them it was a very satisfying experience, and it even changed a bit of Physics character: from this day on, she was less shy and maybe a bit daring. However, they go on being cautious about this new twist in their relationship. Moreover, they are modest and avoid talking to each other openly about their physical encounters.

But some time after this new path in their lives, a pupil’s parent comes to the school accusing the two teachers of being lesbians. Of course, the headmaster has to talk to them and explain the resolution he has decided to take.

 

QUESTIONS

-According to you, what is the best way to share the domestics tasks?

-How do you feel talking about sex? Why do you think people are usually shy about this topic?

-When you introduce yourself, do you think you have to define your sexual orientation? What aspects of your life do you think you must communicate to your boss or to your workmates?

-Can someone be fired because of their sexual orientation?

-What do you know about these new terms/concepts: gender versus sex, binary/nonbinary, gender-fluid…?

-In the story, something causal has chanced the life of our protagonists. In your opinion, what is more decisive in our lives, chance or will? Why do you think so?

 

VOCABULARY

poaching, shade of emulsion, serviced the car, seeped, glee, blissfully, put my foot in, wallop, fumed, gaffes, lemon grass, wee jug, marking, shoogle, had…round, bubbling, has been up, giving…notice, bobbles, plain/purl


Wonders Will Never Cease, by Graham Swift


WONDERS WILL NEVER CEASE,
by Begoña Devis 

The story is about the friendship between two men, who both did the same PE course at college. This is a metaphor about seeing life as a race, like athletes or behind women. In both cases, the trophy is the goal.
The narrator is fascinated by his friend Aaron, who according to him gets the best women, while he must conform to those he rejects. In fact, he ends up marrying one he rejected, Patti.
But after the years his friend calls to ask him, along with his partner, to witness his wedding. Then he sees that his friend isn’t so attractive as he expected, and that his future wife isn’t either. In fact, he now believes that his wife is more beautiful than Aaron’s.
In addition, he also likes the relationship he has with his wife more than the one his friend has with his, which seems much more childish to him.
Is it possible that he has done things better than his admired friend? It could be: Wonders will never cease.
 In my opinion, it means that sometimes we believe ourselves inferior to other people, just because they seem to have chosen a more interesting path, while we have chosen a more ordinary accommodating one. But then it turns out that everything is deceiving, and that we have been wasting our time ascribing virtues to other people that they did not have.
On the other hand, the story is terribly sexist, although it must be understood according to the way of thinking of the other times, hopefully forgotten by now (I hope).

QUESTIONS

-Talk about the characters

The narrator

Aaron

Patti

-The narrator says about himself: “I’m the type who sees the life like a book, with chapters.” How do you see life? Like a novel, like a river, like a circle? Why?

-The protagonist has to content himself with the girls Aaron rejected. There are big novels about being the “second one”. Do you remember any?

-The wedding in the story is a very simple ceremony, with only the narrator and his wife invited. Why didn’t he invite more people?

-Talking about weddings: have you ever had to make a speech in one? What do you have to say in a like speech? Do you remember famous speeches in films? Prepare a speech for a friend/son/daughter wedding and tell us in our meeting.

-What is the pun with “Wanda will never cease”? Do you know other puns in English?

-In the story there are two different kinds of love: Aaron and his wife, Patti and her husband. Can you describe them?

-What do you think it’s the morality of the story? Who are the happiest? Why?


VOCABULARY

hurdles, hang out, letting the side down, count me out, hankering, out of the blue, cagey, wound up, arm-twisted, spell it out, shacked, pared-down, locked up, twigged, glint, going places, kid myself, goosing, sorting ourselves out, head start, crashing, peep, upended, mucking around, stopwatch, handicap, real deal, missis, chuckling, yanked