World, Writing, Wealth discussion

I think the key to gaining a readership for a series is to have interesting characters that the reader wants to see again. What will they be up to in the next book? You can still provide a satisfying ending to each book in the series.

Scout wrote: "Right. And sometimes you invest your time and your attention, and then the ending is one of those that "leaves it open to interpretation." In my opinion, that's a cop out. One of the functions of f..."

I disagree. One could write a series about the last week of Christ's life by telling the story from the view point of a different character in each book. (Peter, Judas, Caiaphas, and Pilate for example) The timeline would remain the same in each book, but the different perspectives would yield different opinions about Christ and his divinity. I believe that it would be better to leave the series at that, and intentionally force the reader to decide for themselves. If you write a book from Christ's point of view you gain nothing, but you discount the earlier books.

I am firmly against cliff-hangers as a reader. It is fine to leave a clue that there is more to come but as a reader, unless the story has an ending that makes sense and settles something, I am upset. The nearest I have come to a cliff-hanger in my own writing is where I had MC, a Roman commander in the invasion of Britain, simply disappear from history. He had succeeded in winning a major battle and had Caractacus fleeing to Wales, so the story was over in a sense, but he got abducted by aliens, which changed what had been a historical novel and flagged the next one would be SF. But that is the nearest I have come to a "non-ending".

Interestingly, I have written others where I have hinted that more could follow, but because that was a good place to stop, more has not followed.

As the old saying goes "Leave them wanting more" is good advice. Cliffhangers can be a good ending to one book and an opening to the next. However, a cliffhanger can really be a lousy ending. I think it all depends if it moves the story along in a natural way. I am not so sure it either the best or worst way to go.

More common than in books is the TV series manipulation i.e. 3/4 of way through series ratings are good enough the network buys another series then last episodes are manipulation away and change of pace to leave a cliffhanger

What annoys me more is the tendency of some writers deciding their idea needs a series but being shorter on inspiration they adopt this TV writing structure. I( admit to having written series, but each book is a different story - merely having the same characters, and their history is sort of relevant.

Ian wrote: "What annoys me more is the tendency of some writers deciding their idea needs a series but being shorter on inspiration they adopt this TV writing structure. I( admit to having written series, but ..."

Ian, you description is what I look for. I like books that are independent reads but have the same characters and worlds. Bujold did this with her Vorsakigan series. Elizabeth Moon did it with her Vatta series. I like more stories about characters and worlds that I have fallen for. I don't like cliffhangers.

Considering most of the former type were done when books were all published on paper and it was a longer time between book publications. I doubt readers would have been willing to support authors if we had to wait a year or more for a cliffhanger.

Yes, in my opinion, the reader is most likely to be satisfied if the ending at least ends something. I don't mind if there is obviously some other problem to be addressed, but I think every book should have an ending where something is achieved, and while the reader should be tempted to read the next one, it is at least satisfactory to stop. Particularly since the next one may still be a year away if the writing and editing is any good.

My spy trilogy did not start off to be a trilogy. After book 1 I wrote 2 other books which were not connected before I decided to pick up the tale. Book 2 also finished although by the time it was I new I had an idea for a 3rd part. I have had people just read the 3rd part and comment positively

My space opera was always meant to be a series although I have only 2 parts out and the 3rd remains WIP and has been for a while. I don't think this can be read as individual stories even with the 2 parts but that is clear from the titles and each book does have an ending

Post is beginning to read like Spam so I'll stop

I like your style, Ian.

Can an ending ruin a few hundred pages of joy?

It can when it is not an ending. In particular, a cliff-hanger annoys me.

I don't like a bad ending in books or movies...I usually reimagine the finish and donate any book/DVD that disappointed me LOL.

Life can be full of stress and disappointments, I like my books/movies to show good and great triumph...just a thing with me...

Personally, I like cliffhangers...although, a cliffhanger can be annoying if I won't be able to locate the next part for some reason...

The moral climax of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is the moment that Huck turns his back on everything he was raised to believe and decides to save Jim. The ending that followed made me want to strangle Tom Sawyer with my bare hands.

Langenscheidt's Merriam-Webster English Dictionary provides the following definitions.

end n 1 : a point which marks the extent or limit of something or at which something ceases to exist 2 : a ceasing of a course (as of action or activity).

ending n : something that forms an end: esp : SUFFIX

If an author, for whatever reason, does not wish the last chapter of his book to meet the requirements of the above definitions, then, technically, the story has not actually ended, at least not yet. Perhaps one should not allow oneself to be disappointed in something that has not actually happened....yet.

Vance wrote: "I don't see how I can write a series without some element of cliffhanger. After all, the story isn't finished, because if it is a series it has a storyline that spreads from beginning to end.
Some series are a set of single stories that use the same characters, but I can't do that (I have trouble cramming a story into three books.)"

Episodic storytelling. My Depot-14 series did it - each story was a fully-contained adventure. And I've been working on one under another pen name on and off for about 5 years now. Every story is a new bit of family drama that gets resolved at the end. Sure time moves forward. Elements and themes do cross volumes, but episodic series let readers pick up which ever volume intrigues them the most and dive in without having to understand what came before it.

Nik wrote: "Can an ending ruin a few hundred pages of joy?"

Yes it can. I have more than one book I loved and then got to the end it was just awful. I either kept thinking or saying out loud how much I liked the book, but the ending ruined it.

I personally prefer a novel's storyline to be realistic and believable. Real life includes occasional disappointments. One's own life does not always end as one would have preferred. That does not mean that the life was not worth living.

With the exception of fairytales, there are few situations in which one lives "happily everafter". If a novel's ending disappoints, one should just accept it. A disappointing ending should not negate all the enjoyable, entertaining, things that preceded it.

To me a poor ending is not that I need it to be an ending I prefer. It means nothing more to me than it is well written and makes sense.

Nik wrote: "Can an ending ruin a few hundred pages of joy?"

My son is and has always been a voracious reader. When he was seven or eight, he read "Old Yeller." I still remember the day when he stormed into the kitchen with tears in his eyes and threw the book across the floor. :)

G.R. wrote: "Nik wrote: "Can an ending ruin a few hundred pages of joy?"

My son is and has always been a voracious reader. When he was seven or eight, he read "Old Yeller." I still remember the day when he stormed into the kitchen with tears in his eyes and threw the book across the floor. :)."

G.R., I know you were replying to Nik, but your comment made me laugh...to this day that pretty much sums up my response if I dare watch or read anything sad. LOL...

I don't know, personally (for my own writing I mean) I feel that it is my job as a storyteller to either weave a lesson into my story, try to uplift and give courage with my story, or offer a kind of safe haven for my reader...a break from their real world stress. I don't know if I will always be able to incorporate (or if I have been successful at working) these things into my stories...yet I do try. I just feel that giving a bad conclusion derails my efforts towards these storyline construction goals.

Ann wrote: "G.R., I know you were replying to Nik, but your comment made me laugh..."

I was taking some liberty with the thread. I know Nik is really referring to an ending that is unrealistic, contrived (i.e, too "Hollywood movie"), poorly written, rushed, or unresolved, but I just immediately thought of my son's reaction when I read Nik's question. The word "ruin" just stood out. And a sad ending is not necessarily a bad ending. In fact, it can be a very real, very powerful ending.

But to go back to the subject, when an ending is disappointing, as a reader it can feel very, well...disappointing. But what is disappointing to some may not be disappointing to others. I recently read the Books of Babel quartet by Josiah Bancroft. I loved everything about the story, its characters, its imagination, but I was left very unfulfilled by the ending, and not because it was open-ended. In fact, I wish certain aspects had been left more open, more mysterious, but, oh well. It was still enormously fun and entertaining to read.

I think also that our tolerance threshold for a story's ending may depend on the genre as well. A YA romance almost certainly needs to have a happy, resolved ending but horror not so much. Science fiction can end with some sort of speculative quality but we like our fantasy to come full circle (life is good - then evil takes over - then good wins in the end), unless it's grimdark fantasy which is a whole other enchilada.

G.R. wrote: "Ann wrote: "G.R., I know you were replying to Nik, but your comment made me laugh..."

I was taking some liberty with the thread. I know Nik is really referring to an ending that is unrealistic, co..."

Interesting. I've read that some readers look for the tearful stories (endings). The way some look for love stories, ghost stories, and such. Don't know if that's true...

Speaking to the original question - at this point, as a long time reader, if I were reading something that was going to go on for a few thousand pages, I would know early on that it was going to be a disappointment and probably wouldn't make it to the end.
Lately, I have picked up books in the psychological suspense and mystery category and many of them have been a big disappointment - the last one, I didn't even bother to read to the end. And I figure if the story is letting me down 2 or 12 or 20 chapters in, the ending is going to be a disappointment for sure.
With TV series - and I haven't watched a lot - it seems that the "ending", the wrap-up is always in the next to the last episode and all the last episode of the season does is set you up for the next season. Which might be okay if they are 100% sure there's going to be a next season.

Barbara, I've started a few like that lately and stopped reading when I realized I didn't care how things turned out. Keep my interest, or you'll lose me as a reader.

And I really dislike reading an entire book that's great and coming to the end where I have to come up with the resolution. What the heck? If you present a problem, at least have the guts to resolve it.

I was never a fan of the TV Show "Sherlock" (big fan of Conan Doyle and the tales, even some of the new fiction) but I watched for a while until they did an episode called "Reichenbach Fall", their take on when Sherlock "dies." The problem was, there was no possible way, having set up the conditions of his death, that he could be resurrected. Maybe they could have fudged it before CCTV, DNA, etc, but not in the 21st century. And the way they tried to worm their way out of it was just bad writing. So gave up and never went back.
I know people love the series and love Cumberbatch, but you have to play fair with your viewer and reader - don't underestimate them or try to pull the wool over their eyes, because there are just too many books out there, too much to watch to put up with mediocrity.

There was something about the CBS Sherlock show that was so calming. I don't know if it was the music or the voices, but I would watch it around 10:00 and be ready to hit the sack :-) I agree it wasn't the greatest. I did enjoy the PBS one with Cumberbatch and especially enjoyed Dr. Watson. I really didn't like the Robert Downey, Jr. movie. I liked reading Doyle's stories the best.

I'm also a big fan of the Doyle stories and drop into the GR group Baker Street Irregulars on an irregular basis.
Back when I was able to attend some book and writers conferences one writer (among my favorites for writing insights and her books) said something about endings, something like "The ending starts with the beginning." Meaning that the end has to be a satisfying and believable finale to what was set up from the beginning, not a big surprise with characters and information dropped in the last 10 pages.
On another group there was a discussion about vintage TV and I mentioned an old show called "Banacek" (you can watch it online) - the main character was an insurance investigator who had to solve "impossible crimes" like the disappearance of something valuable in plain sight, etc. At the end, he always explained the solution and it was pretty ingenious - sometimes strained believability, but always tied together the beginning with the end.

I watched a movie with Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson, one of my favorite actors. It was called The Banshees of Inisherin. I had high hopes for this one, and I watched the whole thing. At the end, my TV got a good talking to :-) There was no resolution. Zilch. I hate when writers do this, whether in a movie or book. That old excuse that writers use - that you should write your own ending - is just poppycock! :-) And lazy! And passive-aggressive! Aargh!

Scout, while I am not familiar with that movie...I know what you mean. My mom and I both have the habit of talking to our TV (as if the TV itself is to blame LOL).

If a movie/series has a bad or disappointing ending, we're quiet with the disappointment after telling off our TV. If it is a good or impressive ending, we're excited about it and can't stop talking about the storyline.

Of course, I grew up with the tradition of making up endings to replace disappointing ones...LOL

Yet I have always kept this in mind, with the way a good ending defines the mood of my family members. It can uplift us, gift inspiration, make us reflect...etc.

A bad ending is usually cast aside, and never bothered with again...at least in my family.

I know true stories and history can't alway have good endings (and I don't mean these). But I like to keep this as a rule for my own writing.

Hope you find something else to watch to replace the disappointment.

I have had the same experience lately with a lot of modern commercial fiction in the suspense category - often has a great setup, establishes a decent pace but somewhere around the midpoint or so, it starts to fall apart.
I had the same experience as Barbara described with the "Sherlock" TV show and the same reaction to the Reichenbach Fall cliffhanger and resolution. It was such a cheat that I felt like I was being played for stupid. To be fair, I was never such a fan of the show and probably wouldn't have continued watching anyway, but this was the episode where we parted ways.
I think the best endings are when all you need to know is right there in front of your eyes and then the reveal is just a shift in perspective, as with the film The Sixth Sense. I also thought that Richard Addams' "The Girl in a Swing" had a good surprise ending - I realized I should have seen it coming, but never did until the last page.

A well written novel or screenplay should have a definitive ending. That said; some readers and viewers often associate a sad or disappointing ending as being a bad ending.

As in real life, a story does not always have to include a "...and they lived happily ever after! ending to be a good ending. I perfer keeping it real to a feel good ending.

I can deal with sad or disappointing, but no resolution at all pisses me off.