Whether it's a threatening situation, or a shocking revelation, or - gasp! - Pauline hanging on the edge of a cliff, how do you feel about cliffhangers? Is leaving a plot thread unresolved at the end of a chapter - or a novel - a good writing strategy?
I hate them, because it drives me crazy not knowing what happens next, if the cliffhanger ends the novel. Chapter by chapter wise, though, it's fun as heck, and makes me turn the page! However, I heard something relating to shows rather than a novel, but I think it has the same idea with novels: It's a great way to get people to talk about your novel. People start conversations, theories, and the like, which can be a great way to advertise the stories. The comic you used as an example reminds me of how some stories have open endings for the sake of creating a conversation, and to treat the audience as intelligent people. As an author, I can't do this whatsoever, because of just how long it would take to write the next one! In conclusion, I believe it's a great writing strategy to get people to get more of your books.
I want to read the next chapter, NOW! I will take your novel and put it through a shredder. I will take the shreddings and compost them in the deepest pit of hell until they form coal. I will then mine the coal, buy myself a barge with a stove, put the coal in the stove on a pile of kindling, light the kindling then sign a deal with a failed State that allows me to catapult the barge into the sky and nuke the fucking thing.
If I recall correctly, Diana Gabaldon used cliffhangers to end her Outlander novels, and I did not like it. But chapters - yes!
This, along with this: "Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana" Is really freaking funny, and I love it. The way you described the amount of hate for cliff hangers at the end of a novel is the best
They can definitely be frustrating, as others have said, but when an author gets it right, a good cliffhanger can be a thing of beauty. The Waste Lands, book 3 of Stephen King's Dark Tower series, ends with Roland and his friends in a classic cliffhanger, about to start a major battle against a formidable opponent. I had to wait a good year or two after I read it for the next book to come out, but the resolution was completely worth it. I started reading lying down in bed, but as the situation got dire and the more and more intense, I sat up, then kneeled - and by the climax I was literally standing on my bed, hopping up and down and cheering at the completely unexpected but absolutely perfect way our heroes (of course) triumphed. That was a good 25 years ago, and it remains one of my favorite reading experiences of my life. I'm sure I would have still enjoyed it as the ending of book 3 rather than the start of book 4 (it's a great scene), but the anticipation definitely heightened the experience in a major way.
Try waiting a decade or so if you read it when it came out. I loathed Wizards in Glass because of that. Like, I waited 10 years for this?
Yeah, timing is definitely a huge issue with a cliffhanger; you* gotta deliver. That's also why the technique loses some of its power once all of the parts are published and a reader can just grab the next book right away. Then it turns into more of a chapter-ending cliffhanger. * Lookin' at you, Patrick Rothfuss. Not you, George R. R. Martin - that ship has sailed.
As mentioned above timing everything with cliffhangers. I think there are stages of anticipation people go through with cliffhangers and if you wait to long you blow it. 1. Wait what?! What happens next 2. Oh man I can't wait until the next part comes 3. This wait is unbearable, I am sure this is gonna be great 4. Oh come on already let's see how this end 5. Oh for the love of God just tell us how it ends. 6. Screw this, the writer has no idea what they're doing. I hate them! 7. Ah well, it was good while it lasted but it's time move on. In my opinion you want to release the next part of the story no later than right after #3 but well before #4. A cliffhanger is a good way to keep people's attention but if you take that for granted fans turn on you and hard. The creators of South Park famously ended one season on a cliffhanger and when they came back they had a "joke" episode that had nothing to do with the cliffhanger they ended on. As South Park is known for making fun of people they thought it would be funny to basically play a prank on their own fans... the fans did not find it funny, and were outraged, they had to rush to make a proper resolution to the end of the cliffhanger storyline.
Mine, too. Cliffhangers always seem manipulative to me. If you want me to read your second book (/movie), make sure I enjoy the first one.
then you have fans of Sue Grafton.... who died on book/letter "Y" in her alphabet series... the world will forever wait or "Z", the conclusion to her series
I believe her son said something along the lines of, "From now on, the alphabet will forever end in Y."
David Brin's Sundiver series (whatever it was called, that was the first novel), from the second book onwards, reliably ended every chapter with a cliff hanger and every book with a cliff hanger. It was masterfully done all through the second book. Not only that but the *next* chapter didn't resolve the cliff hanger, it skipped forward in time, you had to wait for resolution later, in a conversation or the like. I've never been as glued to a book and I've been glued to a few. But by the third, fourth, fifth... it had become transparent, obviously manipulative, irritating... And the less said about the series finale the better. But it still worked just as well in getting me to turn the page and buy the next one. There's a difference between good techniques that improve a story and clever techniques that still work on you even when you can see right through them and start to resent them. The difference is probably that the latter pays the bills more reliably.
I actually do not like them. I feel like they're a cheap tactic to bait people into reading the next story. It's okay to leave certain threads of the plot unresolved, but to leave absolutely everything unresolved is not particularly enjoyable in my opinion.
I've always liked the writing advice to arrive late and leave early. I would say most of my stories end with somewhat of a cliffhanger. They are also always stand alone stories. But I would like to think I create satisfying endings even without a full conclusion.
Once upon a time, there was a tv show with a rising star who wanted more money. So they "killed" him off while negotiations continued. They wound up paying him less than he wanted but more than they wanted. Sort of a win-win. That popularized the concept with tv shows. The more mature folks know of whom I speak. EDIT: I guess I should explain further. This particular instance became a trope/meme (before memes existed).
I'm about as mature as one can get without undergoing actual spoilage, and I have no idea to whom you refer.
Ohhhhhhhh. I heard about the program if not the reason for the plot twist. From my trivial mind comes the information that Bing Crosby's daughter did it. Can that be right? Full disclosure: no TV at my house and I never actually saw an episode of the show. If I recall correctly, I saw the answer to the burning question of "Who Killed JR?" on the cover of a magazine when I was in the checkout line in the grocery store.
Wait, who is JR, why is he dead and who killed him? (Okay, don't answer that. I'll just look it up in this great internet age...)
