|
Post by ghulamcontractor on Sept 25, 2015 0:32:25 GMT
All stories choose one of two types of endings, either a denouement or a resolution. In the story, “The Interlopers”, the ending is a denouement. The reader is left with no resolution to the story, but with an opening to something else. George asks, “Who are they?” and Ulrich replies with “Wolves.” The story ends right after that word. Most would think that the story has finished, and they most likely got eaten by a pack of wolves. However, the story does not explicitly state this to the reader. Thus we are left with many questions. Some of which are, “What happens to the Ulrich and George?” and “Do their men get there on time?” Obviously the author Saki did not forget to write the rest of the story or just end it abruptly for no reason. There is no sequel being released for this poem either. So, what is the ending? I believe the author wanted the reader to predict what would happen next rather than to come to a conclusion with the final line. What do you guys think?
Also, it really reminds me of Inception. The ending scene in which Leonardo DiCaprio's top kept spinning but it looks like it's about to stop. However, the viewer cannot conclude whether it is dream or reality. That movie was great...
|
|
|
Post by maxstauff on Sept 25, 2015 1:06:28 GMT
I agree with your opinion that the open ended ending is completely done on purpose, a great example of a denouement, in terms of plot structure. I believe the ending is due to the author wishing to create some situational irony within the story. The ending is first supposed to be seen as good, as first the two men make amends while trapped, and instead start to bet on whose men will come and save them first. This is set up so that the reader believes that the resolution will come, when instead they are faced will an ending that has no resolution at all. Overall, this irony creates excellent symbolism (and also irony) in which the two men's conflict becomes the very same force that ends up killing them both. So, the purpose of the ending really becomes a way to reinforce the rest of the story's message and theme. What do you think could happen if the story was resolved? How could the author convey the same meaning to the overall plot as well as irony?
|
|
|
Post by g00dva1b5 on Sept 25, 2015 1:43:24 GMT
I also agree with Ghulam's opinion that the author wanted the reader to predict what would happen after the final scene. Along with creating situational irony, I think the ending is used to symbolize and further support the theme that nature is indifferent to the ways and conflicts of humans. As the reader initially thinks that the short story is about the conflict between Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym, the author immediately throws the scene with the log into the short story, expressing the theme that nature reigns supreme. Then, when the author shows Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym settling their differences and makes the reader believe the short story is about the two characters again, the author ends the short story with Ulrich telling Georg that he sees wolves. This ending solidifies the fact that a major theme in "The Interlopers" is nature is indifferent to the ways of humans. Do you guys think this is the reason that the author used denouement?
|
|
|
Post by g00dva1b5 on Sept 25, 2015 2:05:30 GMT
Also, Max, if the author decided to resolve the short story and not use denouement, the story may have lost its sense of irony, surprise, and maybe theme. If the author decided to provide a resolution to the story, then the reader would not have been left wondering what happened to the two characters. Also, if the author decided to end the story with Ulrich and Georg being saved by one of their parties, then the theme of nature being powerful would have lessened in strength, and there would be no situational irony. In order to convey the theme that nature is a supreme and indifferent force with a resolved ending, the ending could not end well for Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym.
|
|
|
Post by subhanikp on Sept 25, 2015 3:51:13 GMT
I agree with your ideas regarding the denouement of the short story, "The Interlopers". I believe Saki purposefully ended the story in this way in order to give the reader an opportunity to end the story himself. It is up to the reader to make a conjecture as to what ultimately occurs to the two men. In my opinion, the reader can respond in one of two main ways: either the men are able to free themselves and kill the wolves together or the wolves end the lives of the two men. This decision that must be made by the reader is predicated on the reader's outlook and perspective on life. By befriending one another and ending a violent feud, should the two men be freed of all sins and protected the hand of god? Or is their befriending too late and trivial in comparison to the power of nature? Saki is prodding the reader to answer these questions in order for the reader to make a profound thought regarding the power of nature.
|
|
|
Post by tatummcp on Sept 25, 2015 17:26:56 GMT
While I completely agree with all of your opinions on why the author chose to end the story with denouement rather than a resolution, I also believe she chose this in order to get the reader to really think about fate and humanity. With the open ended finish to the sentence the reader can choose that the two men were saved or that they were killed by the wolves. Through these choices we can reveal a lot about humanity because the two choices have a very different tone and would/could change the tone of the overall story. If we choose the ending of the two men being killed by the wolves it creates a depressing tone for the whole story because we think that once the two men become friends the story will have a good ending and happiness and peace are restored, but once they're killed by the wolves it changes everybody's perspective. However, if we choose the ending of the two men being saved (either by the wolves or by other men) it creates a hopeful tone because it is saying that even though we fight and should be punished for that, we can still be saved and/or helped. Because there are a few very different possible endings created by the denouement it shows that whatever ending we choose can reveal a lot about humanity.
|
|