/lit/ - Literature

Dickens is awesome and regarded as one of the greatest authors in the English language and most of his stuff had happy endings.
Also George Eliot has happy endings too and she was no slouch when it came to letters.
I was trying to think of others, but they're out there. Most of them are older works. It's hard to have happy endings and yet also depict the world with enough realism included to capture the reader's interest.

>>1962310

>does it all have to be like that?
>Why does nearly every work of literature have a depressing ending?
>nearly

You answered your question before you asked it

Writers are not happy people.

It's easier to pull off a sad ending seriously than it is to have everything turn out right.

because good writing reflects reality

Mostly true. There is a reason for it though. Happy endings imply all problems have been solved and everyone "lived happily ever after". The book ends there. Where as a more solemn ending keeps the narrative going. I am still surprised so many endings sort of end in a way where everyone the protagonist has ever loved or cared for is dead but at least he has "peace of mind". It implies not all is lost so the narrative continues on in the readers mind.

>>1962310

>Unless it's one of Shakespeare's comedies, any work of literature held in high esteem is bound to be terribly solemn.

Somebody hasn't seen Twelfth Night.

>>1962329

Is that the one where those bitches fuck with this guy and ruin his life for no good reason?

>>1962328

This, happy endings are shit and practically impossible. Well, not impossible, just very unlikely, and anyone that can write a good book knows this, besides they usually have some kind of brain, and smart people are usually more likely to be miserable than dumb people.

Best writing ends with both happy and sad. See: Paradise Lost.

It's a matter of time-span. Happy endings are just sad endings that haven't happened yet.

Pick a Disney movie.

Now move fifty years down the line and watch the characters die of old age and leave mementos to their children.

That's literature.

>>1962319
see: all the writers who killed themselves

I find most book endings bittersweet.

OP, whatever you do, don't read "Vile Bodies" by Waugh.

Because no one has the answer to the big question. Human beings do not like unanswered questions, they're scary. Happiness is the absence of fear. Fear is a natural result of contemplating nothingness. Nothingness is what awaits us if those who live dying lives continue to lead the way. Dying lives are those lived in sin, those lived for the self and not the good. Those lived to remove the self from existence and place it into objects. Do not remove yourself from your life. Do not escape. There is no need.

>>1962408
>Nothingness is what awaits us if those who live dying lives continue to lead the way. Dying lives are those lived in sin, those lived for the self and not the good.

Living lives end in nothingness too...

>>1962410
Some do. Others reach the eternal. They're remembered.

>>1962416
>implying being remembered when your dead means anything to you, because you're dead.

Every book i ever read
>Protagonist has optimistic outlook on life
>Everybody he ever knows and loves dies a tragic and unfortunate death
>Surprisingly optimistic by the end of the book
So it goes.

>>1962471
>has never heard of the afterlife

>>1962481

>>1962481
>afterlife
Oh, wait.
>Quentin

a good story is just supposed to end the plot not the characters.
they probably add shitty ending so that the struggle is implied to continue. but not really relevant to the plot.

>>1962471
>visit /lit/
>people still spell "you're" "your"

>kills myself

>>1962503
>>1962503

> kills myself

Hey, take that s out! It's not supposed to be there!

>>1962503
>kills myself

>>1962509
Actually, I think it should be:

>kill self

Greentext stories usually do away with me, my, I. Not that there are official rules, of course.

Why, OP?

Because what constitutes "literature" is defined by ivory-tower elitist fucks with their heads so far up their own ass they can lick their stomach lining. These are the same people who listen to NPR's latest update on Madagascar separatist party politics and honestly believe this makes them erudite geniuses, instead of pretentious fuckheads engaged in the most furious academic circle-jerk of all time.

Academia being what it is, these people consider the bitter, boring, drunk drug-sniffing dropout fucks like Hemmingway et al. to be the masters of literature, and sop up every bit of drivel those miserable shitbags ever squeezed out of their anus. These morons fellate existentialist drivel-sumps for the same reason 14 year-olds do: it's an inherently negative philosophy that allows them to criticize everybody who draws breath as these deluded fools who just don't get it, man.

>>1962542

In short it's the emo fucks you remember from high school all over again; "Nobody understands how dark and pointless the world is, but *I* do, so I'm special and edgy and shit." It's the exact same self-serving masturbatory conceit writ large, in academic circles, in the jizz of the lit professors who take relish in their inconsequential power because it's the only power they've got. If you doubt me for a second, for one god-damned second, then you get your ass to a library and you get down a copy of Beloved. Read that shit. Read it, and then turn to the front cover and STARE at that shiny medallion, then turn to the back and read the gushing quotes, and you have yourself a good think about that.

>>1962548

Any fuckstain can say "oh look, the world is shit." Big fucking deal, you found some suffering and you cried about it. Real fucking hard in this 'ol veil of tears we live in, right? What pathetic trash.

No, the REAL challenge is to stare into this shitty, degraded, imperfect world - nay, human soul - and find something of value. To look past the wars and the hate and find something of value, something to hope for. THAT takes effort, courage, and at least a little faith. Faith in humanity, faith in justice, and most basically faith in yourself. To find any hope in the hearts of men is to acknowledge a vast responsibility on yourself: if humanity has the potential to improve, and you know this, you would be morally bankrupt to piss on that hope and continue to wallow in the muck.

But if you hold the world to be total, utter shit that can never improve, you're not obligated to do a fucking thing, are you? You can just keep on drinking yourself to death in Mexican bars and masturbating to bullfights and sniggering at the fools who hope for something more then the life of a drunk waste of carbon.

Yes, what a fascinating exploration of human nature we find in those books. "We're all shit, boo-hoo."

>>1962542
>>1962548
>>1962553
Sounds like a fantasy/Sci-fi fan to me...

>>1962542
>>1962548
>>1962553
this is awesome

screencap'd for win

Would Crime and Punishment count as a happy ending?

>>1962542
>>1962548
>>1962553
>>1962560
>>1962564
>>1962569

samefagsamefaggoaway

>>1962542
>>1962548
>>1962553
U mad, bro. But I love you anyway. I don't think you're right to dismiss some of the literature you mention, but you're right about the "self-serving, masturbatory" attitude of academia and how that informs what we perceive as "classic" literature. You're a crazy motherfucker, but i give you 9/10 for this rage post. Well done, sir.

>>1962572

>oh no someone likes a thing you don't like. :[

I'd like some statistics about this OP. Also, a clear definition of a "sad ending", a clear definition of your protocol to determine it within stories, a clear definition of the corpus on which you're basing your study and how it is relevant and homogeneous enough to represent a fair share of literature. Also, a definition of what you consider "literature" within the cadre of your study.

OP should read Dickens.

>>1962542

> who listen to NPR's latest update on Madagascar separatist party politics and honestly believe this makes them erudite geniuses, instead of pretentious fuckheads engaged in the most furious academic circle-jerk of all time.

So, anything that happens outside the United States is only of masturbatory interest? I think that's horseshit.

every story is a tragedy if you follow it far enough. the trick is to stop telling the story before it becomes one.

>>1962760
I've met people who think they're "intellectual" because they pay some passing attention to foreign politics, even if they don't know shit about how their own country works. I also know a LOT of Americans who hate the United States because it's fashionable and turn their attentions elsewhere for that reason and that reason alone. I think that's the sort of person he's talking about. Pretentious twats.

>>1962789

No, that's bullshit. There are no such people.

>>1962794
I find your misplaced faith in humanity both amusing and inspiring.

>>1962542

True-ish, but A Portrait of the Artist, which is probably the best example of your theory, is still excellent.

And happy endings imply solutions, which in general authors don't do. They ask questions. Which brings me back to >>1962542