In his instuctions to “Afternoon,” Michael Joyce describes closure as a “suspect quality,” something that his text supposedly avoids. Not only is that claim false, there is nothing suspect about the concept or quality of closure in text.
All literature is fantasy. The point of literature is to present the reader with a reality that is different from the one he lives in. Even in Non-Fiction represents a different reality than most readers, and in being published after its events, it contains a different perspective than even the people who’s events it covers. At the same time, literature must connect to our lives in some fashion, or we won’t relate to it.
This is why closure is present in literature – because while true closure doesn’t happen in life, even our written works fall victim to an end. When a book ends in, “and then they lived happily ever-after,” that is our way of transforming reality through art. It is false in the sense that it is not an accurate representation of our reality, but that is precisely the point of art in the first place: it is false. But while the art may convey a sense of eternity, it ends. This is how literature connects back into our lives: it ends just as we do, and events that happen after its in must go on without its knowledge.
Furthermore, the idea that afternoon does not contain closure is false. As with any other work of art, it is finite. It dies. While it can be viewed forever, it eventually becomes a corpse – lifeless and without any new creation. That is the closure of “Afternoon”: finishing every single word of the text. Once it is read in this fashion, it becomes like every other piece of literature.