The Cliffhanger

[MystiqueRain]

1) Do you like cliffhangers?
2) How much is too much?
3) What about cliffhangers at the end of a novel with a sequel?

 

[TWErvin2]

No, I do not care for cliffhangers.

For me an novel should have a complete story arc, unless it is established as a trilogy, and even then what I would call a cliffhanger (something huge built up to by the end of the novel, but the novel ended just before resolving it) should not be how a novel I would choose to read would end.

If an author wrote a cliffhanger, I would not pick up the second novel to discover how it ended. Why would I, because I'd expect the next novel to end as a cliffhanger. For me it's a tactic to get me to buy the next novel. Further, I would not recommend the novel to others. Why would I recommend a novel that, at the end, is unresolved?

I guess it might work if the novels were released in quick succession or all at once. Most publishers don't do this, but if someone self-published, this could be accomplished pretty easily.

While that's my two cents, I'm sure there are varying opinions.

 

[Penpilot]

Depends on what you mean by cliffhanger. If you do it from chapter to chapter. I don't mind. But if it's from book to book, I generally hate it. Now if I know for a fact that the second book, is coming out, I may tolerate it but I think the main arc of a book should be finished within that book. If the author wants to leave subplots open, I'm fine with that, but if I don't get a satisfying ending, I'm not picking up another book until I know the series has been completed.

It's happened to me more with TV shows than books but I hate it when things get left on a cliffhanger and the tv series or book series gets cancelled.

 

[Androxine Vortex]

I like cliffhangers as long as the ending is somewhat satisfying. Like the ending of the Fellowship of the Ring, that to me was a fine cliffhanger ending. I can't remember what novel it was that I read but at the end of it the main character walked through a hallways and it said he saw a bright light and then "he saw it." That was the end. I was so disappointed.

I am writting a series and the ending of the first novel, it has the main character being banished by his comrades because he is using forbidden magic (but in his view it is necessary to use it) and he accidentaly killed one of his close friends in an experiment. They are all trying to acomplish a single goal but he believes he can do so with this kind of forbidden magic. He vows to avenge his fallen friend and to acomplish his goal. There are a lot of other things that happen prior in the novel and the ending changes certain alliances and sets up the stage for the next installment. I don't believe that that would be a bad cliffhanger ending. I know a lot of people think that the first novel in a series should be standalone but for this project it just wouldn't work.

Sorry if it seems I am hijacking the thread here but what do you think about my idea? I know I am being vague but i'm trying not to spoil anything and I really don't have all the details set in stone yet. The second novel actually takes place in an undecided amount of time after the first novel. This way the MC has had time to strengthen his powers.

 

[ShortHair]

To be honest, I see cliffhangers as nothing more than a marketing gimmick. Why would I buy a book, with the expectation of a complete story and a satisfying escapist experience, if I knew I had to buy another book or two to see how it all turns out? If it says on the cover that it's the first volume of a trilogy, then I can make my decision based on that. If there's no warning, then you have what Spider Robinson called a sneaquel.

 

[MystiqueRain]

Hmm...so what would you constitute as a "complete cliffhanger"? Like...if a book is part of a series, obviously there'll be untied ends to the plot and plenty more to discover (or there wouldn't be a point the next books)--so wouldn't each book in the series technically end in a "cliffhanger" that makes readers come back to see what happens next? At least it would be an ending left unsatisfied until all the questions are answered, right?

What would be a good ending to such books? I know in Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling ends each book with Harry going home for the summer, but there are plenty of mysteries to be solved that brings readers back for more. I guess the question would be, how "cliffhangy" is good enough without it being unsatisfying?

 

[Marlyn Almyr]

I think the main story arc of a book needs to be finished in one book because otherwise I feel like the author is trying to force me to buy two books instead of one. I don't think there is any reason to end a book before the main story arc is finished. But with that said, sometimes a cliff hanger could work. If the author finished their first book with a complete story arc, but ended it in way that introduced the next book's story arc. Like if the beginning of the next story arc made for a better ending than opening and if the author wanted to start the next book with action, but without having to go back and tell a backstory.

Like after Dumbledore died at the end of the sixth Harry Potter book. It completed the main story arc of that book and made for a great ending but later Harry discovered the locket was a fake, so it was a cliffhanger which left so many questions unanswered. However the story in that book felt finished....to me atleast. Any how thats my two cents.



.…And also I just have to say, Doesn't the endings of the first six harry potter technically qualify as a cliff hanger of some kind?

 

[Kit]

I see cliffhangers as nothing more than a marketing gimmick.

This. I am disappointed and annoyed to have to wait months or years to find out what happened.

If there are sequels, it's fine to not tie up all the loose ends in the 1st book- you can leave some MINOR PLOT cliffhangers to keep me interested- but don't cheat me out of the ending to the main plot.

 

[FireBird]

If you end your main plot with a cliffhanger I will not buy your next book no matter what and I will hate you forever.

 

[Saigonnus]

I prefer the ending that leaves it open to interpretation (like the ending of Inception) where it's up to the watcher/reader to decide which way they prefer. I think a cliffhanger is only ggod if you plan a sequel within a fairly short period of time so people don't get too upset or think you aren't making one.

 

[Zero Angel]

It depends on how often they are used. Sometimes you just want some satisfaction!

George R. R. Martin began to annoy me terribly in Book 4--so much so that I have no intention of picking up Book 5. I can't imagine the legions of faithful fans that loved his series ten years ago and waited five years to be told "screw you" only to wait another SIX years to finish his next follow-up. In Book 4, it got to the point that I was skipping chapters to be able to find out what happened to a particular character and would go back to find out what would happen to the next particular character. Getting to the end of the book and being told that he only covered half the characters and wouldn't cover the half in THAT book until at least two books later...goodbye Song of Ice and Fire, you've annoyed me for the last time.

Also, it depends on the type of cliffhanger. If the cliffhanger provides satisfaction and merely sets up the next chapter or book, then that doesn't bother me. To me, that is called a transition.


Edit: I have a worse example, although it didn't sour me on the author because the books were already out and they didn't skip characters (AND THE AUTHOR ONLY TOOK A YEAR TO PUT OUT THE SEQUEL!). John Ringo's When the Devil Dances ended in what felt like midstride. It was a completely unexpected cliffhanger, and he wrote an apology afterword saying that the book got too long so he split it in two. I actually already had borrowed the sequel in the library so it ended up feeling more like a chapter break than a book break.

In fact, I felt the same way with "the Golden Compass" movie (although I haven't read the books).

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

It depends on how often they are used. Sometimes you just want some satisfaction!

George R. R. Martin began to annoy me terribly in Book 4--so much so that I have no intention of picking up Book 5. I can't imagine the legions of faithful fans that loved his series ten years ago and waited five years to be told "screw you" only to wait another SIX years to finish his next follow-up. In Book 4, it got to the point that I was skipping chapters to be able to find out what happened to a particular character and would go back to find out what would happen to the next particular character. Getting to the end of the book and being told that he only covered half the characters and wouldn't cover the half in THAT book until at least two books later...goodbye Song of Ice and Fire, you've annoyed me for the last time.

I am also annoyed by this (although not as much as you; I read book 5 and am still willing to see how it ends). The individual stories he tells are good, but to me it's a pretty clear failure as an author if you can't wrangle your book into shape and have to radically alter the storytelling mechanism (that is, missing several major characters for an entire book) to deal with it.

What Martin does write is excellent, but he's let ASOIAF get away from him. He may be an excellent author, but he's coming up short as a storyteller. I'm trying to imagine Scheherazade getting away with a six-month delay between one part of her story and the next.

I'm interested to see how ASOIAF ends, but I also have come to realize that if I never read books 6 and 7, I probably wouldn't mind much. Books 1-3 were an excellent ride, books 4 and 5 were enjoyable if a bit of a slog; and knowing the characters' ultimate fate actually doesn't matter to me much—like they say, it's the journey, not the destination.

 

[TWErvin2]

Hmm...so what would you constitute as a "complete cliffhanger"? Like...if a book is part of a series, obviously there'll be untied ends to the plot and plenty more to discover (or there wouldn't be a point the next books)--so wouldn't each book in the series technically end in a "cliffhanger" that makes readers come back to see what happens next? At least it would be an ending left unsatisfied until all the questions are answered, right?

What would be a good ending to such books? I know in Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling ends each book with Harry going home for the summer, but there are plenty of mysteries to be solved that brings readers back for more. I guess the question would be, how "cliffhangy" is good enough without it being unsatisfying?

While it can be explained, up to a point, each novel/story is a bit different. More like you'd recognize it when you see (or read it).

Take a look at novels that have been published as a series, and that you've enjoyed. Examine the story arc of each, yet how the stories with the characters and setting are connected and continue. Use those as example to guide you.

I used Steven Brust (Vald Taltos Series), Roger Zelazny (Amber Chronicles), Michael Moorcock (Elric Saga) and a couple others and read, reread and studied while preparing for and writing my series.

If you haven't read a fantasy series, then it would benefit you to pick up one or two and give them a read, paying close attention, MystiqueRain, before attempting it with your novels/series. You can learn not only about what works as a proper ending for a series novel, leading to the next, but much more, like effective dialogue, pacing, characterization, how to write action scenes, which POV is best for what story, etc. What you learn can be modified to your writing sytle and applied to your novels.

What works in Television, such as cliffhangers, I don't think works as well with novels. Different medium, and a different audience/audience expectations.

I guess the final question to ask yourself is: "Why am I ending this novel in the series with a cliffhanger?" Is it:
To tell a good story
or
To get the reader to pick up and read the next novel.

The second goal will happen if you accomplish the first goal.

 

[MystiqueRain]

While it can be explained, up to a point, each novel/story is a bit different. More like you'd recognize it when you see (or read it).

Take a look at novels that have been published as a series, and that you've enjoyed. Examine the story arc of each, yet how the stories with the characters and setting are connected and continue. Use those as example to guide you.

I used Steven Brust (Vald Taltos Series), Roger Zelazny (Amber Chronicles), Michael Moorcock (Elric Saga) and a couple others and read, reread and studied while preparing for and writing my series.

If you haven't read a fantasy series, then it would benefit you to pick up one or two and give them a read, paying close attention, MystiqueRain, before attempting it with your novels/series. You can learn not only about what works as a proper ending for a series novel, leading to the next, but much more, like effective dialogue, pacing, characterization, how to write action scenes, which POV is best for what story, etc. What you learn can be modified to your writing sytle and applied to your novels.

What works in Television, such as cliffhangers, I don't think works as well with novels. Different medium, and a different audience/audience expectations.

I guess the final question to ask yourself is: "Why am I ending this novel in the series with a cliffhanger?" Is it:
To tell a good story
or
To get the reader to pick up and read the next novel.

The second goal will happen if you accomplish the first goal.

I've read plenty of fantasy series, though not many lately since I haven't found the time to get into some. >< Cliffhanger endings can always be a two-way sort of thing, especially with books in series. But there's always a certain extent to which you can "cliffhang" the book. There are several book series that I enjoy that do end in a definite cliffhanger, but I know the next one has 1) a certain release date and 2) a good plot to keep me reading.

 

[BWFoster78]

I think that a well done cliffhanger is a good technique to use.

A book needs to wrap up significant plot points, but there's no harm in leaving a hook.

 

[Jared]

I'll toss my hat in with the Hate Cliffhangers group.

I think that a well done cliffhanger is a good technique to use.

A book needs to wrap up significant plot points, but there's no harm in leaving a hook.

I would personally disagree with characterizing leaving a hook as a cliffhanger. A cliffhanger is when the main character is in the middle of main-plot dilemma/point of conflict. A hook is a secondary or side thread to the main plot that is left unresolved.

To use a generic example, the Main Character is fighting the Dark Lord on the edge of a waterfall. The DL has the MC on their back, pinned beneath their foot, and has the Dark Sword of Darkness at their throat.

The cliffhanger would be to end the book here.

The hook would be to have the MC knock the sword out of the DL's hand and send it flying over the waterfall. The MC then defeats the DL and saves the day. The main plot is (presumably) resolved by defeating the DL. The hook is "What happened to the sword?" But that hook's not a cliffhanger since there's not imminent danger/conflict in the main plot.

 

[Zero Angel]

I would personally disagree with characterizing leaving a hook as a cliffhanger...

Your post was basically something I was about to say, so agreed! And now you've made it easier on me also for not having to post an argument =)

 

[BWFoster78]

I would personally disagree with characterizing leaving a hook as a cliffhanger.

Depends on the hook.

My understanding of the term is that it derives from old serials that used to literally end with the protagonist hanging off a cliff. I have no problem with the following:

1. Introduce protagonist, significant situation, and antagonist.
2. Kill antagonist and resolve major plot points.
3. Put protagonist in mortal danger to set up next book.
4. End book.

This resolves plot points but is a "cliffhanger."

Edit: Example:

The hero kills Evil Guy, but the killing blow sends him, unconscious plunging toward the river below.

The other characters know that Evil Guy is dead but can't find the hero's body.

 

[MystiqueRain]

So what about something happens to one of the main characters near the end of the book, something dramatic and unexpected, and then the book ends? Yet most of the plot for that story would be concluded then?

 

[TWErvin2]

So what about something happens to one of the main characters near the end of the book, something dramatic and unexpected, and then the book ends? Yet most of the plot for that story would be concluded then?

To answer that I'll go back to a question I asked earlier:

"Why am I ending this novel in the series with a cliffhanger?"

A. To tell a good story
B. To get the reader to pick up and read the next novel.

My vew is that "B" will happen if you accomplish "A"

So why would you have "something happens to one of the main characters near the end of the book, something dramatic and unexpected, and then the book ends."

Because it is more along the lines of telling a good story or more along the lines of trying to motivate the reader to pick up the next novel you write to find out what happened?

Dramatic and unexpected and then ends? I could be wrong, but the answer appears obvious. If that's what you want to do, if you do it well, maybe with some foreshadowing and not fully unexpected, it might work. Or it might completely turn off readers.

What do you imagine readers of your first novel saying, if they spread it by word of mouth?

"Yeah, you've got to read this book. It stops right in the middle something big happening."
or
"Wait until the next book is out before you read the first. It stops right in the middle of something big happening."
or
"Don't bother reading it. It stops right right in the middle of something big happening."