Endings

            As I said in my last post, I am very interested in Stardust’s epilogue, “In Which Several Endings May Be Discerned.” With every fantasy text we have read, we have, at some point or another, discussed endings and closure. Personally, I like Stardust’s ending the most. Gaiman gives us closure in some areas, but not in the ways we might expect, and, like most of our other authors, he gives us the illusion of closure in other areas. The ending is bittersweet, “happy” without “happily ever after.” The monarchy is restored, but in a very roundabout way. Tristran, though fully able to take his “rightful place” at once, delays his ascendance for several years of adventure with Yvaine. When they do arrive at Stormhold for good, they “were happy together. Not forever-after, for Time, the thief, eventually takes all things into his dusty storehouse, but they were happy, as these things go, for a long while” (Gaiman 247). This is the most realistic, un-faerie, ending we have encountered. The narrator resists “ever after” and, therefore, frustrates our faerie-story expectations. (This is kind of off-topic, but it's interesting how the narrator uses the word "thief" to describe time, as if it was unnatural or evil. There's probably an essay in there somewhere...) But remember that we have “several endings” to our story. While the book could have ended at “a long while,” it goes on to describe Tristran’s death (his ending) and Yvaine’s rule over Stormhold. Again, just like in our other texts, the narrative continues beyond the last word on the page. However, since the last few paragraphs say Yvaine never aged and she remained Lady of Stormhold, they do indeed set up an “ever after” ending. Clearly, Yvaine and her kingdom aren’t part of those “several endings.” In fact, the narrator says, “She walks with a limp to this day...” (italics mine). Instead of tying up the ends with “happily ever after,” the narrator leaves us with myth, a great big gap ready for us to fill using our own “[discernment].”