Undefined

Literature is not concrete; it is liquid. In Margaret Atwood’s “Happy Endings”, and

Archibald MacLeish’s “Ars Poetica”, the authors border the line of a precisely structured literary
piece and the fluidity of emotional appeal, by describing the unique characteristics of poetry and
stories. Through the execution of clever ideas, knit together using sentiment and descriptive
language, the authors bring to light how literature should exist in a transcendent form undefined
by conventional interpretations.

Traditionally a story is taught in a very uniform manner: introduction, inciting incident,

rising action, climax, falling action, denouement. Similarly, in a story “the endings are the same
however you slice it,” yet further interpretation into narrative reveals the real ambiguity comes
from how the writer formulates the plot (Atwood 3). In her story, Atwood displays the Freytag
pyramid almost comically too well. As she creates multiple exaggerated plotlines that are
immediately juxtaposed by mundane conclusions, it is evident that plot isn’t really just “one thing
after another” (Atwood 3). Plot is defined by the creative liberties you take with it; for at that
point a story can take on almost any connotation the reader assigns. Likewise, attitudes of
creativity are exhibited in regards to poetry. Poems are supposed to be mysterious, thought
provoking, and “wordless” (MacLeish 7). No one ever reads a poem and immediately
understands what it means without delving deeper into the metaphors and abstract language.
This effect on the reader is completely dependent on the poet’s ability to command literary
fluidity within the confines of poetic structures. Ultimately, the structures of literature are simply
the walls in which one has the freedom to roam around in.

The main goal of literature should be to evoke emotion from the reader. Without a valued
response literature is just another piece of paper with words on it. Sentiment is what suddenly
gives that writing substance. A story may tap into this vault immediately leading the reader to
“Mary” and a tragic end of “sleeping pills and aspirins” followed by a forlorn note she leaves for
John (Atwood 1). As such, due to the loss of life and the loss of love, sorrow and empathy
encompass the reader. With that said, the emotion felt through literature should not only be for
the reader, but for the writer as well. Poetry is as a “flight of birds,” passionate and purposeful
(MacLeish 8). Therefore, literature is often used as an outlet to expel inner turmoil within the
writer. Literature allows moments and emotions to “be motionless in time,” untouched by human
intervention (MacLeish 9). In brief, the true meaning of literature is not the conventions and
devices, but the connotations between the lines.

To conclude, although literature is taught through conventional means, to have true

command of its impact, one must channel creative liberty and emotional control. Atwood and
MacLeish demonstrate this seamless balance of expository and emotional writing that leaves
the reader mystified by their influence; hence, conveying the importance of individuality within
literature. Beyond attaining to the structures that are drilled into every student during school,
one must always remember to write using not only their mind, but also their soul; for, literature is
the human condition in its most tangible form. Otherwise, what significance does the writing
really have if it is not an authentic representation of the author’s sentiment?