I had written a story for the short story contest and before I entered it I had a few family members look it over. All three said the same thing: "Are you going to finish it?" So obviously I had an open ending which all three didn't like, they said they got into the story and I stopped just as it was getting good, and wanted to know what was going to happen next after the "cliffhanger". That wasn't what I wanted to hear, so I didn't enter the story in the contest because "finishing" it would have made it way too long for the contest. However I also don't really want to "finish" it, because the open ending was sort of the point, but because no one was satisfied with the ending, I don't think I did a good job with the story and have to either finish it or fix the open end so it's more satisfying, which I don't know how to do properly. What makes a good open ended story? Also, what is the difference between a cliffhanger and an open ending? I couldn't think of any book examples, but two tv shows came to mind. Are there any books with open endings I can look at? First was ALF - the series ends on a major cliffhanger which was supposed to have been resolved the next season, but the show was cancelled. So now it's an open ended series and the viewer is left to wonder what happened, and it's not a satisfying ending. Next was Stargate: Universe - the series ends on a cliffhanger, leaving the viewer to wonder about the future of the people on the ship. Personally I think the series did end just as it was getting good and would have liked to see more episodes, but I'm also very happy they didn't give it a Star Trek: Voyager ending, which I think was a cop out. So even though I wondered "what happens next?", I'm also satisfied with the way it ended. Both the tv shows have "cliffhanger" endings, leaving the heroes in a dangerous and life threatening situation, yet one is disappointing and the other satisfying. So, how do I write a satisfying open ended story? How can I show that it's the end and leave the readers thoughtful but satisfied?
For me at least, a good open ending is when a story reaches a natural conclusion but I'm left wondering about what could happen next. The key being that what happens next would really be a NEW story. (I think the TV series Black Mirror does this very well. Most episodes are somewhat left open ended, leaving me wondering what could happen next, but I feel satisfied with the conclusion).
I like open-ended endings, particularly where there are a few conflicting clues littered about that could suggest alternate endings. It gives people something to argue about at bookclub.
In my view, open endings are where the central plot has been resolved enough to give the reader a sense of closure, but it is clear that there is more that could be told. A cliffhanger is where you end the story without resolving the main story arc, especially if you leave right after ramping up the tension. Cliffhangers are well and good for chapters or (non-finale) episodes in a series, but to end your story on a cliffhanger is a big turnoff for me. If it's the actual end of the story I feel like I wasted my time, and if it's the end of book or season (with promise for more) then I feel like its a cheap attempt to keep the audience interested until the next installment, and I lose respect for the writers because it's honestly a little insulting to me when they do that.
Don't like cliffhangers, even in obviously episodic works. That was one of the reasons I stopped watching Sons of Anarchy; honestly the only thing I remember about it (other than being Hamlet on a Harley) was that every damn episode ended with a "But wait! What's going to happen if....." Be sure to tune in next week, kids!) But take Star Wars as a counter-example. The first one. The one called Star Wars. The one that opens with "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away..." [/rant] But anyway, that movie ends with the Death Star destroyed and Darth Vader defeated. There's a victory ceremony, everybody but Chewbacca gets a medal, and had things gone differently at the box office, the whole thing could have satisfyingly ended there. Generations of nerds on Usenet would have argued and leaked the script(s) for unmade sequels, but the world would have kept turning and TNT would have run the film every few weeks when their DVD of The Breakfast Club was out getting polished. However, by having Vader's ship spin off into space rather than explode, Lucas left the ending open. The film did well, we found out that the rebels celebration was premature, and the battle had room to continue. The Empire Strikes Back, on the other hand, ends on a masterful cliffhanger. Had the series not continued, half the world would have ended up arguing about the how the Skywalker/Vader relationship should have played out. For generations. But Lucas was secure enough in his craft at that point that he knew that there would be a third movie to wrap things up, and the cliffhanger helped ensure that. And that's where it all ended and everyone lived happily ever after.
I feel like many readers fail to understand that there are fundamental differences between short stories and novels / tv shows / movies. Short stories intentionally function differently than longer narratives. However, they do need to feel resolute on their own, even with all of the unanswered questions you are bound to have no matter what. In order to really give you a response on the quality of your ending, I'd need to read the original story and determine if the ending is in fact weak, or if it was just the victim to this misconception.
The danger with a cliffhanger, especially with a movie that might take years to produce the next episode (like the follow-up to The Empire Strikes Back) is that people go away and start thinking up what MIGHT happen next. Sometimes what the fans think up is actually a lot better than what eventually happens. So when the big event finally does come around, fans go away slightly (or very) disappointed. I lived through the Star Wars saga, movie to movie, and had to wait three years to find out what the final movie in the trilogy would bring. I had friends who were just as into it as I was, and we used to get together an cook up all sorts of endings. One we devised was that Luke would save the world from the Empire, but in order to do that, he would need to turn to the Dark Side. So he would become, eventually, another Vader. (While we, the audience would see this happening, the other characters (Leia, Han, etc) wouldn't know. So he'd be hailed as a big hero at the end of the film...but we'd KNOW there was that bad seed growing. (Shiver....) So what did we get, in The Return of the Jedi? Ewoks. Jabba the Hut and Leia in a bikini. And, eventually, an Emperor who was such a silly old fart—with his cloaky costume, witchy cackle and twiddly fingers—that it was really hard to take him seriously. I wanted to fill his jack-o-lantern collecting pail with candy corn and chocolate, and send him on his way. I found that final film quite disappointing, tbh. Cliffhangers can do that.
Yeah, I was six when the first one came out. Just old enough to have my mind blown, probably almost exactly Lucas's target audience, but I didn't have the attention span to worry about what was going to happen next. I like your ending though. I remember hearing that there were originally nine movies planned, but the final three were not what The Rat is bringing to the screen these days. And Emperor Snoke? What a waste. I swore off the series, but then caught Han Solo on cable when I was pinned to the sofa by a six-pack of tall cans. It'll take something stronger to get me to watch any more of them, and I ain't paying.
Thanks, lots of helpful advice. I think I'm getting the idea of where my story went wrong for an open end, looks like finishing it would be best. Does anyone have any books in mind that have good open endings?
I may at some point put it in the workshop, but not until I've worked on it a bit more. Based on the replies I'm beginning to see it may be more of a cliffhanger than an open end. But I'd still like to read up on the differences more to help learn how to write a good, satisfying open ended story, it seems to be a lot more difficult than I first expected when I began writing the story.
Generally I like a story with an open ending, but it depends on the type of story you are writing. In my case, where the stories are usually quite dark, resolutions are usually isolated to a particular incident more than the overarching reason the story is dark - so in that sense the story remains open. I do thinks this I quite a popular trope in story telling for two reasons. 1) This most closely resembles real life, so the suspension of disbelief is not as necessary here. Life is not a fairy tail, and 'happily ever after' simply stretches credulity. For instance, what does 'happily ever after' mean in the middle of an apocalyptic scenario. 2) Because real life is open ended, and problem solving is usually isolated to a specific event or sequence of events. For this reason the lives of the characters becomes more real, and more relate-able. No doubt there is a great deal of personal taste in this sentiment, I am sure there are others who love a sound resolution. But to me it makes a story more realistic. Ending a story in what seems like a lull more than an ending is also a great way to setup a sequel. Leaving open plot points and threads that can be used to launch into the next book, while also leaving the reader satisfied that the characters they have become invested in have future possibilities.
Cliffhangers in standalone books are a sure fire way to get me to abandon an author entirely. For series that is fine, but not singular works. Then after reading The Conquerors Trilogy, the last book first, it worked as a standalone, and I didn't know until I finished it that it was the end of the trilogy. So I was surprised how well each book was crafted to be able to have the ability to be read as standalone's and still be able to follow the story (without reading the entire story arc of the trilogy). And even the first book didn't really hint, at too much that it would continue the story, but just open enough (definitely not a cliffhanger by my recollection), that I would have been satisfied with it had it been a standalone. I will fall in the camp that cliffhangers work better for ending chapters than books (unless you can't help yourself or are a sadist to your readers). I have no problem with a good well earned open ending to ponder the events to follow, even if there isn't any next installment to continue where the first left off. Even the first novel I wrote ends open, and can fall into the readers mind to speculate what happens where the story cuts off. (Spoiler those who don't hang out here don't know there is a sequel). So unless you really seduce me with your work, you best not be ending on no cliffhangers, cause that is just asinine (unless there is a guaranteed continuation, and said cliffhanger isn't too obnoxious._
As Simple As Snow, by Gregory Galloway. This is the exact type of book I stay well clear of. It has nothing of what I usually look for in a good read and is targeted at an audience who's decades younger than I. But all the same, I enjoyed the hell out of it! As Simple As Snow is one of the best examples of how to use the "Unreliable Narrator", and "Open Endings" that I've ever read.
Thank you everyone for the advice, it was very helpful and I have a much better understanding of the differences between the two types of endings, as well as when it's appropriate or not to use them. I had put my unfinished story out of my mind because I couldn't reconcile how to finish it in a believable, non-rushed way. But the other day a new idea came to me and I quickly jotted down a few notes and think I have it figured out, hopefully! Maybe someday my writing will have improved to the point where I can write a satisfying open ended story, but my skills aren't there yet. But at least this story is salvageable.
I do love those 'new Idea' moments. I call them 'Eureka moments.' It's when writing suddenly becomes a lot of fun.
Open endings are my preference, yet I still like non-open endings. I'll explain why each is good in its own way. Open endings are nice because, even though they may hint at a certain conclusion, it's still open to interpretation, a great example would be The Lobster, if you've seen it then you know what I'm talking about, if not, watch it. Non-open endings are good because they can leave you more satisfied with a solid end and you don't have to think about it any longer. But sometimes it's nice to think about it longer because ones with open endings are the ones you remember and ones without are usually the forgettable ones, which is why I voted for open endings
I enjoy writing stories intended to have sequels so cliffhanger works well when I have an unfinished narrative, however open-ended can be useful when I'm jumping forward in time from one trilogy or quadrilogy to another and when characters who have survived throughout no longer had a purpose or antagonist to rally against. Open-ended in this instance gives me chance to finish their stories with a little easter egg in the next sequence of stories. But really, I don't prefer one or the other, I prefer that the story is good and ends where it should, as one too many chapters can ruin a great read. My debut novel could have been twice the length was going to be, but one particular chapter just ended in such a way... and it was the perfect cliff-hanger.
I like the question, and I agree with much of the advice you’ve been given. In my mind, short stories and novels alike need endings. Chapters can tease the reader to continue reading by ending with a cliffhanger — much as streaming serial shows often end with a cliffhanger so that we click on the next segment. One thing I learned the hard way about storytelling, though: Know the ending before you begin the story. Don’t weave a masterful story, then struggle for a “believable” ending. If you don’t have an ending, don’t waste your time telling the story. Readers feel ripped off by poor endings!
Inception had a cliffhanger ending. Note: My ENTIRE post is a spoiler. If you haven't seen Inception and would like it, don't read this post. You're not sure if Cob remained in a dream or if his happy ending was reality, but I guess that's part of the point - it doesn't matter, not to him, anyway. Which itself is ironic, considering the length to which he went to get himself and Mal out of limbo despite an otherwise charmed "life". You could interpret it as his own descent into the same insanity Mal had, or coming to terms with his new reality and being at peace. As one of the viewers, I remember desperately thinking, even as the spinning top was still spinning, "Don't end here. Don't end here. Don't end here!" And then the screen blacked out and I shouted out loud, "Oh C'MON!!!" I couldn't believe Nolan would end it there! GAH! But I freaking loved the film. The open-ended ending had deeper meaning - it made you ruminate and the message you could interpret from it ties right back into the story. The main arc of Cob manipulating someone else's dream as well as his own personal arc of being reunited with his family were both resolved. It simply left you with a question: Is this dream or reality? Which is the very core theme of the entire movie. But story-wise, the whole thing had been resolved. So I guess I'd say that makes a good open-ended ending. There's resolution that comes with a final question that is relevant to the story you've just experienced.
Cliffhangers are narrow if you know what I mean. In the sense they address a narrow aspect only. For instance two people are trapped in a room with a bomb ticking down and you end there. That is a cliffhanger. But beyond addressing what happened to those two characters it doesn' leave much room for the interpretation of the plot. Open endings leave the resolution of a larger plot open to interpretation. In the sense that you are given info that causes you to re-think what you have assumed for a given so far in the story, and gives you reason to think that what you assumed was happening wasn't happening, but maybe something else was happening, but doesn't tilt either way and leaves it to the viewers to decide, what was what. In a cliffhanger you are wonding about the end, in an open ending, you are wondering about the whole story once the story is finished.
I hate cliffhangers, but don't mind open-endedness. The central plot to the story should be resolved, but there can remain main unresolved problems out there in the greater world. I think Star Wars is a good example: Luke was introduced to the force and used it to blow up the death star and help the rebels win their battle. Meanwhile, the empire goes on. This is usually the case with movies involving worlds that are much bigger than the core plot. Think about Independence Day. It ended with the humans of earth decisively beating the alien invaders. It cares little that there are likely millions of more ships out there in the vast emptiness of space.
I don't do cliffhangers but I will often include a plot thread or two at the end of a book so that if I decide to go on with a series, I can. The story has been satisfactorily concluded and if it never continues, no one will mind, but there is something there to continue on with if I decide to do it.
One piece of advice that's always given to short story writers is to arrive late and leave early. Every short story I've sold has what you could call an open ending. As far as my experience goes, these are the stories that sell. So, before you go changing everything why not try submitting it to some journals or magazines. You don't need a contest to try and get published. Personally, I've pretty much given up on contests. Submitting your work to places is pretty much a contest anyway, but it won't cost you as much. I say this as a professional short story writer. Can I call myself a professional? I guess that's a whole different debate. I'm super poor, but this is what I do for a living.
Some stories do just show a snap shot of the nature of this or that, but of popular open endings, I’d be curious if the inner arc of the character completes. Imagine a swordsman who must make peace with his father in order to find the courage to fight a duel. So, he makes peace and the story ends before the duel. Does he live? Who cares! The story ended when he made peace, so the duel doesn’t matter.
I think a lot of times when short stories have these so-called open endings it's quite clear how things will end for the characters and/or the situation without the writer having to spell it out. That's how most short stories tend to end, at least when it comes to literary fiction.
