Is it just me, or do eucatastrophic*, Hollywood or happy endings always seem like we are wrapping things up in a tiny little bow. I know there is a time and a place for this but I’ve found that life is not neatly wrapped up, so why do it in books or movies. I’m a big fan of noir and books like Wuthering Heights, Anna Karenina & Frankenstein, so maybe my opinion is biased. But I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately (especially in the aspect of movie adaptations changing the ending to make the story come together) and while I think there are many decent books with a happy ending (To Kill a Mockingbird, Shipping News or The Lord of the Rings) they just don’t sit well with me.
So why do I prefer a book with a more realistic ending? Apart from the fact that I like dark/gothic imagery, I think the fact that a book that ends on a less than happy note often has a more lasting effect on the reader, giving the reader something to ponder, talk about and even make them feel more superior than the protagonist. Sure, happy endings leave their audiences happy; if only for a little while. For a lot of people, happiness is hard to come by and they like to escape at any chance. I think my major issue with happy endings is this simple fact; happy endings tend to be too predictable, and I like to be thrown off guard with an unexpected twist or plot turn.
I know there is a time and a place for a happy, sad or realistic ending. I would like to know what you think in regards to the advantages and disadvantages of happy endings.
*Eucatastrophe is a term coined by J. R. R. Tolkien which refers to the sudden turn of events at the end of a story which result in the protagonist’s well-being.
Many people read to escape, they want to believe happiness is possible in spite of everything. I guess it depends on what you read for. I don’t like overly sad or depressing books that have nothing else to offer. I can do sad all by myself 😉 If you’re reading to gain some understanding of the human condition, sappy romances that always end with a wedding are definitely not what you want. Some people have enough tragedy in their lives and need a little uplift to keep on slogging through. Escapism isn’t all bad. Hollywood churned out lots of silly movies during the Depression of the 1930s because people NEEDED a break from the worry and anxiety of daily life. They wanted to see rich people cavorting in movies to believe something better still existed out there somewhere.
I don’t know why you think happy endings are so unrealistic, because I think you’ve happened to lived part of an epic story with a happy ending. And i don’t think happy endings always have to be predictable. Sometimes non-happy endings can be predictable. Like if its been written by my sister.
But there is the point that Hollywood seems to adapt things to give them that happy ending when the original book may not have had that. But i guess they are adapting it for a certain target audience.
I get the escape reasoning, but I don’t like the idea of ending a story happily when it doesn’t fit the story (I think Hollywood do this all the time). I guess I just don’t like predictability (I better not read much romance then)
I don’t care if an ending is happy, sad, or somewhere in between, as long as it fits. The ending should never jar. Someone said, “Not all happy endings are copouts and not all tragic endings are deep.” I agree with that wholeheartedly.
Also, unless the characters die at the end, their lives go on. Stories just close at certain chapters in their lives.
When I was in Jr. High, we watched some tv film about a teenage boy who became a father. At first he tried to do the right thing, then the pressure became too much for him, and finally at the end, he came back to the girl apologising and saying he was ready to fully accept responsibility and wanted to help her raise their baby.
It ended there. A student yelled, “That’s it? That’s the end?”
My teacher shot back, “How long do you want the movie to be? Do you want it to show their entire lives?”
I never forgot that, because my teacher made an excellent point. It didn’t matter what happened later in their lives. Maybe their marriage lasted forever. Maybe they divorced two years later or twenty years later. But that was not the point of the film. The film was about a young man coming to terms with the reality of becoming of an unexpected father.
That’s how I deal with my endings. I never think, “Oh, I want a happy ending. Or a sad ending. Or whatnot. I simply think, when is the best place/time to finish talking about THIS part or problem of their lives?
some great points been put forward.
What drives me nuts about a Hollywood Happy Ending is that it is driven my nothing more than what will sell more tickets. If a story has a happy ending in a way that fits the story and its characters, then fine. If a story goes through all kinds of contortions in order to make everything okay at the end, then I feel the author/director has thrown any character development under the bus simply to sell more tickets. And that makes me sad.
Give me a ring of truth over ‘… and they all lived happily ever after’ any day.
I would be interested in hearing why you think tragic endings are more “realistic” as opposed to happy ones. Have you had people die tragically, through malice, accident or disease, at a dramatically poignant time in your life? Do you have a secretive nemesis that thwarts you in career and life, spreading vicious rumors and planting false evidence to make it seem like you are responsible for things you are not? Perhaps, you, yourself, are involved with “noirish” activities: bank heists, blackmail, illegal gambling, even murder, most of which never turn out well.
Like a couple of voices above, if the ending fits in with the arc of the storyline, then more than likely I will like it. Endings, however, are notoriously difficult to do and even many accomplished literary types have struck the wrong note on certain occasions.