Truth, Justice, and the Happy Ending

Parthenon from west

Parthenon from west (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

My brother says the main difference between “great” literature and the rest of it is that great literature isn’t allowed to have a happy ending.

If there’s a happy ending to it, it automatically isn’t great.

Of course he’s being a little facetious, but not much. There does seem to be some truth in the notion. If one goes back to the ancient Greeks, for example, (always a good place to start for western culture), those folks wrote just two kinds of plays – comedies and tragedies. There was no “drama” category. A “comedy” was light entertainment, not to be taken seriously. Anything that was serious was a “tragedy.” The distinction still seems to be with us when we get to Shakespeare and it lingers with us today in that you still hear a happy ending described as too “easy” or too “trivial.” Happy endings aren’t “realistic,” people say. If the function of literature is to hold up a mirror to the world that reflects “truth,” then your story ought to be a downer since the real world can’t be counted on to deliver a happy ending.

Happy endings do, of course, occasionally happen in the real world, although arranging one often requires that one chose carefully where to end the story. One of my favorite movies is Apollo 13.  It’s such a great true story.  But that sublimely feel-good moment of homecoming is tempered by the voice-over epilogue that tells us about the subsequent lives of the three astronauts. It’s obvious that “they all lived happily ever after” can’t be literally true – because nobody lives forever. As Peter S. Beagle put it in The Last Unicorn, “There are no happy endings, because nothing ends.”  (That’s one of a number of profound observations made in that book – which I highly recommend.) Tolkien’s variant is better: “He lived happily ever after to the end of his days.” That, at least, is possible.

Cover of "The Last Unicorn"

Cover of The Last Unicorn

My brother’s rather cynical point is that there’s a certain smug, highbrow snobbishness to the rejection of the happy ending. Happy endings are popular, and if one is going to practice “high art” one mustn’t stoop to the level of appealing to the masses.

All of this got me to thinking about why happy endings are so popular. Obviously they make us feel good. We often identify with the protagonist, so a good outcome for the protagonist is, vicariously, a good outcome for us. On the other hand, some of us also take pleasure from reading about bad things happening to other people (generally the rich and famous), as shown by the popularity of the tabloid press. So what, exactly, is going on here?

There are probably various hypotheses one could offer, but the one I’m going with today is simply this:

Human beings crave justice. And justice, in the real world, all too often eludes us.

We want the world to be fair, and it isn’t. We enact laws in our societies in an effort to create justice in the world. We offer up prayers and make sacrifices to our gods in an effort to persuade them to give us – or those we care about – what we believe we each deserve. We join causes, we found nonprofit organizations. Some of us turn to vigilante-ism. If we have managed to come out on top in life, we may persuade ourselves that we have earned it, that those who are less successful must be less deserving. When all else fails, we tell ourselves that death is not the end and that it will all be made right in the hereafter.

Or, if we happen to be writers of fiction, we write stories with happy endings.

I think story-telling is a fundamental human trait, like bipedalism, complex language, tool use, and being a social animal. I previously wrote about the instructive nature of stories, and their entertainment value. But fiction also offers us a powerful opportunity to indulge our craving for justice. When, as a writer, you create a work of fiction, you are the god of your fictional universe, and the temptation inevitably presents itself to make the story turn out the way you know it ought to.  If someone works hard, he ought to be successful. If a person takes on an evil-doer, he should win. The sweet child who faces a life-threatening illness with faith and courage should pull through. Good deeds should be rewarded. Sacrifices should not be in vain.

We know that every story needs conflict in order to be interesting, and conflict implies that something has to go wrong for somebody. We happy-ending-lovers just want the story to turn out right in the end. Is that really too much to ask? I mean, if we want to see things turning out wrong, all be have to do is look around us. I, for one, get tired of all the injustice, the pain, the tears.

Turning out right can mean seeing bad people get their just deserts, as well as seeing good people get their just reward. A story that focuses entirely on a “bad” person could have a “bad” ending and still be “right.” (I just don’t personally enjoy focusing on bad people.) Endings that satisfy my desire for justice don’t have to have “happily ever after” endings.  They only have to make things right.

Two of my favorite movies are Gladiator and V for Vendetta. Neither is a happily-ever-after tale. Both revolve around men who have suffered great wrongs, who have essentially lost everything but their lives, and who are trying to change the world for the better before they die. Both are stories about setting things right.

My husband and I originally had a disagreement about the ending of the movie “Inception.” He thought the little top left spinning at the end was intentionally ambiguous, and he liked that ambiguity. I thought the fact that the top was beginning to wobble meant it would eventually fall. And I also said this was the “right” ending, because the other ending would not have been fair.  The main character had earned the right to the happy ending. (The filmmaker has since weighed in on the issue, and I was right.)

What about you? Where do you stand on truth, justice, and happy endings?

Leave a comment


  1. G M Barlean

     /  October 3, 2012

    Ah. I am a creature of conflict. My stories rarely end happily, although I require some kind of justice. I just like a haunting, worrisome type of justice. Gritty reality that leaves me pondering. When I read a happy ever after ending, I feel completely robbed, as though the author took the easy way out. BUT, I have found so many people who have criticized my work because of just this, that I’ve actually sat and thought about trying harder to write happy endings!!

    Truth is though, my stories write themselves. I just start writing and see what happens and sometimes, things go well and sometimes they don’t. For me, writing is the very best kind of reading, because I’m discovering the story as I write it. The characters and circumstances I put them in, end up dictating the outcomes. I try to outline to expedite my process, but it’s a real kill-joy for me. Although, when I allow myself to fly by the seat of my pants, I tend to wander and end up having to edit out so much. Eventually I’ll figure out the right formula for me.

    As always, a great, thought provoking post. Loved it.

    • Well, at least you did say you require some kind of justice in your endings. So you don’t completely blow my hypothesis. I don’t like a happily-ever-after ending that feels too contrived – too convenient. It depends a lot on the level of realism in the story, though. I really liked “Holes”, for example. There the entire story is contrived and you just accept that about it, and it all seems to work.

  2. I like happy endings. I like justice. But I’m willing to sacrifice both if the ending surprises me and takes me somewhere I didn’t expect. One of my favorite books for this reason is “Midwives” by Chris Bohjalian. That guy can tell a story ( a well-written one at that). Another one of my favorites is “A Fine Balance” by Rohinton Mistry. I won’t say more because I don’t want to spill the beans, but I highly recommend both of these reads. The second of those books is a literary feat as far as I’m concerned.

  3. G M Barlean

     /  October 4, 2012

    I will put those on my reading list, Carrie! I liked Holes, too.

  4. Kourtney Heintz

     /  October 4, 2012

    I think the story ending must be satisfying and organic to the story. It must bring everything together properly. Happy endings can do that as much as sad endings.

  5. We each bring our own desires into our reading. Some people love gritty, dark stories where justice is hard to find. Others read to escape the pain and dark of the real world and want lighter, happier fare. Neither is necessarily better or worse in itself.

    As you and other commenters say, what’s important is that the ending fits the story an doesn’t feel contrived or forced into a particular outcome.

    I really can’t handle dark, psychological thrillers or pure horror. I want some escape into a world where there is hope and happiness to be found.

  6. I love the idea that storytelling is a kind of biological necessity.

    As for endings, I think Kourtney is right that the ending must fit the story in an organic way. I happen to gravitate toward darker, even tragic tales. I love Joyce Carol Oates, for example. Luckily, the world is full of many different kinds of stories.

  7. I prefer the happy ending, specifically, the highly action-filled, dramatic ending.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: