Would it not be a point to end on "he tried to fight against what is wrong with the world he lives in, but failed?" That there are forces that are stronger sometimes, that can't always be defeated by even the strongest instinct or need for freedom? That one person can't always change things? Think 1984 - it's this type of ending I have currently. I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud. Would you personally prefer to read an ending where the MC returns home (after almost ten years away), sees the changes there have been, perhaps gets to see his elderly parents again, or daughter for the first time? So he'll be back where he started, location-wise at least. Yet he has 'conformed' to what he fought against. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for the kind offer. I'm still working on it right now, but if it's ok I will keep it in mind for once I'm done. You also write in this genre then?
I am very comfortable with what you have there. Perhaps ten years earlier, he was a touch militant? Too moved by things at a distance but not sufficiently moved by things close? Perhaps some lessons have been learned? Either way, the suggestion that warm and meaningful human relationships will be maintained, in spite of the unabating cold blasts from above, should provide sufficient relief from the ostensible bleakness of the ending. More broadly, the idea that unrelenting tragedy is more 'true to life' than unrelenting happiness is a nonsense. Both represent extremes rarely lived. Likewise, the idea that tragedy necessarily confers depth and sophistication on a piece is also a nonsense.
I think that does work. I'm a fan of good maybe not "happy" endings and I think you've left enough room to make a reader feel story resolved. From what you've said, it appears that your MC has had a long emotional journey and the ending provides some closure yet apprehensions of his changing world are still present.
Fun fact about 1984: The reason he writes "2+2=" at the end and gives us a shimmer of hope for his future was actually a mistake on the publisher's side. It was supposed to say "2+2=5". Harsh.
Most editions do print the 5. I think there was only one edition where the error was made (although I believe there was another editing error in one edition where the 5 was replaced by a 4, effectively undoing the entire novel).
Oh. Well, I read the original once, the one without the 5, because I found and bought it cheaply on a yard sale. Have not read it since. It was extremely depressing, and I was 13 at the time.
For me an ending does not need to be happy - it needs to be satisfactory. At this moment I can't think of any examples.
When I read a book I expect the ending to either provide a resolution to the conflict and action that happens in the story, or to help convey the theme or message of the plot. I can't imagine there is any rule that says a "serious" work of a fiction needs an arbitrarily created unhappy ending to make it seem less "childish" or vice versa. Tacking on a tragic resolution that serves no absolutely no purpose except to entertain the writer's own pessimism is as equally asinine as reading a gripping story only to be let down when it ends with a silly deus ex machina to produce an unrealistic happy ending. Maybe its just my personal preferences in what I read or the movies I watch.
Yes I agree with you. Good points. I hadn't deliberately gone too far in either direction, but thought an 'open' ending might help convey the theme of the plot, as you word it. But from some brainstorming I did, I've now started a new chapter which seems to be going ok. I can see writing two or three possibly to round off the book and resolve some loose ends. I'll see how that goes. So far, so good.
I think that happy endings can be exciting if you put a good action twist on them. For instance. Sad ending: "I do this for freedom," the old man said. Then the floor opened beneath him and he fell. The only thing that kept him from hitting the bottom was the rope that was grasped around his neck like God's hand. An example of a happy ending would be: "I do this for freedom," the old man said. Then, just as a man was about to throw the switch for him to be hanged, the door flew open. Five men dressed in snow white uniforms bellowed, "Untie him!" Two soldiers ran forward and began to untie the old man. He muttered thanks happily as his neck was freed from the rough rope. Guns were fired. Men were killed. The rebellion had begun.
Tricky question. Sometimes I like a happy ending, but I'd prefer it to not be cheezy. I'm not always game for a happy ending, however. If I'm reading a piece, and am expecting a happy ending, it usually leads me into wanting a different ending.
Tragedy: The hero dies, but the story lives on forever. Comedy: Everything is well and life goes on. (Bleh)
When I was submitting my novel to agents, I received a letter back from one saying that they liked the book but wanted the ending to be much happier. I thanked them for their honest feedback but it really frustrated me because I felt the ending fit my story perfectly. Sometimes the happy-ever-after endings are what we want, and sometimes they fit perfectly in some novels. However in my book, it wouldn't work. I wouldn't say my ending was unhappy, just that bad things happened and good things happened. What is wrong with that? It is the way of life, is it not? Things aren't always perfect, and I don't mind being honest and reflecting that in my writing. As long as a book is a good read, with a gripping beginning, middle and end, I will be open minded to how things end up as long as the author does a good job with it.
I like happy endings. But I do the think the best kind is where the characters really had to go through hell to get to it. The best example for me comes from this video game Heavy Rain. The main character Ethan Mars loses his eldest son Jason in a car accident. His youngest son Shaun is kidnapped by a serial killer, who gives Ethan trials to go through to get his son back. Ethan has to drive on the wrong side of the highway for five miles, crawl through a narrow tunnel filled with glass, jump through electric generators, cut off his own finger, and a bunch of other stuff. All the while his ex-wife accuses him of being the serial killer, the cops are on his tail and his own psychological problems start acting up as well. Controlling the character as he went through this kind of hell made me completely sympathize with him and made want to work my ass off to get him to that happy ending. (There were multiple endings, including one where he and his son die) So I think if you throw every horrible thing you can at your characters and they somehow manage to work through it, conquer it and find peace readers will appreciate the happy ending even more. In fact I'm sure they'll think your character would deserve some peace and happiness, at that's how I see it.
