Do we have an obligation to be happy? Analyzing, you guessed it, “The Obligation to be Happy” by Linda Pastan
Syracuse University, 1949 Photo by Lisa Larsen
Link to the Poem: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/39788/the-obligation-to-be-happy
Do we have an obligation to be happy? Are we expected to put on a smile even if we are feeling anything but? Linda Pastan’s poem “The Obligation to be Happy” explores exactly that. Set within the context of a domestic space, the poem is an emotionally meaningful exploration of the speaker’s inner struggle to constantly remain “happy” masked behind a smiling facade. Through a deceptively simple free-verse structure – three evenly spaced stanzas of seven lines – Pastan offers a nuanced meditation on the speaker’s internal conflict between societal expectations and personal authenticity. This essay seeks to explore how Pastan uses vivid imagery to frame happiness as an imposed ideal, the critique of the moral binary constructed between happiness and sadness, and the use of mythical allusion to underscore the emotional dissonance between the speaker’s facade of happiness and her internal psyche.
First and foremost, happiness is constructed as a social expectation that is imposed upon the speaker – a constraint that she acutely recognises. This is immediately evident in the title of the poem, “The Obligation to be Happy”. This connotes that the occupied state of happiness by the speaker is performative and perfunctory, and is framed as a necessity rather than a choice. Simultaneously, the diction of “obligation” harbors connotations of a forced, exacted effort that must be performed in order to fulfil this state of being. This tension is further explored in the comparison: “more onerous / than the rites of beauty / or housework / harder than love.” Here, Pastan uses metaphor to align the burden of enforced happiness with other traditional expectations placed upon women. “The rites of beauty” and “housework” evoke patriarchal standards of appearance and domestic labor, which are both historically rooted in gendered obligation. By placing happiness above even these demands in difficulty, Pastan underscores the immense emotional labor required to maintain the facade of joy. The comparison reveals the speaker’s growing alienation from the very concept of happiness, exposing it as a form of social performance rather than genuine contentment. Furthermore, this idea is developed more cohesively in lines 4 to 5 through Pastan’s usage of imagery to draw a parallel between the obligation expected of the speaker and a fundamental axiom of the universe, “But you expect it of me casually / the way you expect the sun to come up / not in spite of rain or clouds but because of them”. The obligation to be happy imposed on the speaker is so prevalent that it is seen as not merely a mandate, but an unswerving truth baked into reality such that any deviance would be an impossibility – how could the sun not rise everyday? In keeping with this concept of natural imagery, we can understand “rain or clouds” to be a metaphor for sadness, and “the sun” to be happiness. Thus, happiness seems to be demanded precisely because of the existence of sadness – cyclical in nature – as though joy must always triumph fully over hardship as an act of resilience. Thus, authentic happiness is mischaracterized by the society in which the speaker lives in as an imposed constant, unchanging state – the preferred, best state of emotion – instead of the reality: the spontaneous everchanging nature of our emotional state. Thus, the speaker is denied the nuance and complexity of her own emotional mindspace and must subscribe to the imposed dialectics of society.
Beyond the mandated, artificial constraints of societal expectations imposed upon the speaker, Pastan utilizes irony to elucidate the subsequent “othering” of the speaker as a result of such expectations. This can be seen in lines 8 to 9, where she “(smiles)”, as if (her) own fidelity / to sadness were a hidden vice “. A vice, by its very nature, connotes a negative habit that is wicked or immoral. This is further emphasized by framing her frown – a “downward rug on (her) mouth” – as an impulse that she must control. Hence, by attributing her “fidelity / to sadness” as a “vice”, Pastan first highlights the prevailing societal perspective that sadness is to be seen in a negative, evil light. Secondly, she constructs an oppositional binary between “sadness” and “happiness” through the attribution of that of an immoral act to the former’s state. Since happiness is inherently the antithesis of sadness, it is hence portrayed here as natural: pure in state and essence. Thus, by occupying the state of the former, the speaker is seen to be excluded – at least psychologically – from the majority of society as her inner state of being does not truly align with the expectations of society. The use of irony continues in stanza lines 11 to 13, where the speaker dismisses “health and love” as “brief irrelevancies”. Naturally, we would associate such concepts with longevity and permanence. Yet, the speaker’s detached tone underscores her irreverent attitude towards happiness and reveals the speaker’s disillusionment not only with these ideals themselves, but with the societal narrative that binds them to happiness. The metaphor that follows, that happiness is “no more than laughter in the warm dark / strangled at dawn”, intensifies this feeling of futility. That the laughter is “strangled at dawn” introduces a jarring contrast: what should be lighthearted is violently shuttered. Thus, this inversion reinforces the speaker’s belief that happiness is fleeting, momentary and ultimately un-reconciliable with the speaker’s psyche.
Finally, the idea of happiness – or, the speaker’s aversion to it – reaches a conclusion in the last stanza as the speaker is seen to be continually attempting to reconcile with the idea of happiness despite the faults she finds with it in the earlier two stanzas. She attempts to “hoist” happiness “on (her) narrow shoulders again”. Worth noting is Pastan’s usage of “again”, the inclusion of which suggests that this concerted effort by the speaker has been one of repetition. Additionally, by using vivid imagery to portray the idea of happiness as a “knapsack heavy with gold coins”, Pastan suggests that happiness is not one-dimensional but nuanced in nature: it is desirable, it is valuable; yet, it is extremely burdensome to carry. This is evidenced by how the speaker “stumble(s) around the house” and “bump(s) into things”. The weighty difficulty of the task in which the speaker is unable to orient herself in a singular, fixed direction highlights the recurring theme throughout the three stanzas of the poem that the concept of happiness is seemingly incompatible with the speaker’s state of mind. However, her continued attempt at carrying it can be read as a result of the onerous expectations imposed upon her by the society in which she inhabits that forces her to continue to shoulder this burden. The diction of “try” exemplifies this further: it suggests that the act in itself is an active act of exertion. Lastly, Pastan ends the stanza with a mythical allusion to the Greek myth of Midas by stating that “only Midas himself would understand” her plight. I read this as embodying a doubled meaning: both Midas and the speaker shared a similar, inescapable plight that could only be truly understood by themselves, and simultaneously, the subversion of the riches promised by gold – and keeping with the earlier analysis – happiness. Hence, the allure of happiness is deconstructed and critiqued by Pastan: Why must happiness be what we must dogmatically chase?
In conclusion, Pastan challenges and subverts the idea of happiness as a fixed, universal ideal that must be relentlessly pursued. Through the use of literary and poetic devices such as imagery, metaphor and mythical allusion, she reveals the emotional strain of conforming to normative, societal expectations. To mourn, to cry, to hurt are all fundamental parts of the human experience: to singularly chase happiness and to view it as one above all is foolish.
Kinda enjoyed this poem! Rating: 3.3/5
