Okay, so I'm planning a crime novel - beginning it actually - and I was wondering what you guys think of ending to a crime novel where not all is happy. I am thinking of concluding the book with the MC being the killer. He gets punished, don't worry. Having the MC turn out to be the killer is definitely intense, but is it too much? Any opinions welcome.
Not all is happy ending...
- Thread starter MysteryRiter
- Start date
Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I don't read a lot of crime novels, but I don't think they require a happy ending. I think as long as the ending makes sense given the story, it should be fine.
Great! I'm glad. This is my second novel (the first was an unpublished fail) and I'm aiming to get it published. I need to make sure every aspect is reasonable.
You can end it however you want it to end. This ain't the Romance section. With the MC being the killer and all, is it omni?
Last edited:
Sorry. I was talking about the POV used. Just guessing it's not close to the MC, and that why the reader doesn't know the MC did it?
Oh, ok. There are a few perspectives, mainly the MC's but he doesn't admit to anything. It's complicated, but he doesn't admit to being the killer. He isn't even a suspect.
The best-known example of that twist ending is The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie. Worth a read to see how the master did it.
Cheers.
Cheers.
The problem here is that, though this may have been original and fresh when Christie was writing, but now is pretty cliche.
Also, another beware, you risk alienating the reader by holding on to this information until the end.
Patterson did this in (I'm pretty sure it was) Beach Road. I thought it was amusing, if not a little coy.
It really depends on how it's written.
It really depends on how it's written.
Last edited:
I think you can easily pull it off if you portray the MC as not knowing him/herself, not like split personality or anything, but maybe some type of memory lapse, or loss? You would have to have some red-herrings in there for sure. Watch The Usual Suspects, if you haven't seen it. It isn't the MC, but it's close to it. Plus I love Kevin Spacey. He's the bomb! Come to think of it, there is not a movie I don't like him in.
This would be anything but easy; it requires meticulous plotting and some real knowledge of brain function and psychology to be even remotely believable. And it's also been done, though titles escape me at the moment.
Personally, as a reader, I'd rather have the info deliberately withheld.
ETA: The Usual Suspects was a fantastic movie.
Definitely worth watching.Ok, well, maybe I should give you a little more info.
I'm not too worried about originality in the ending, because the plot is very original. The thing about the MC is... well, he has his fair shair of problems. His mother died when he was young and now that his father died, he is in shock. In the beginning he has these random fits of anger that are setup as foreshadowing for the ending to make it more believable. He becomes lovable despite his problems but is oddly secretive as if there was something he refused to admit to...
I'm not too worried about originality in the ending, because the plot is very original. The thing about the MC is... well, he has his fair shair of problems. His mother died when he was young and now that his father died, he is in shock. In the beginning he has these random fits of anger that are setup as foreshadowing for the ending to make it more believable. He becomes lovable despite his problems but is oddly secretive as if there was something he refused to admit to...
But is it so secretive that even the reader doesn't know or do you show that side of him? I mean, you can't have him killing someone in the scene, then pretend he doesn't know, or that the reader doesn't know. Or do you have someone wind up being dead and work your way backwards?
And HeyJude, you may be right. I was thinking of some of my short stories that the MC was the killer. It's funny, the one I'm thinking of was never published but I do remember one editor saying how "repulsed" he was. And that it really got under his skin, which he said too, that maybe that's what I was aiming for. Anyways...that was fairly easy to write. BUT a novel? Yeah, you are indeed right. It would take a lot of plotting, and scheming big time.
And HeyJude, you may be right. I was thinking of some of my short stories that the MC was the killer. It's funny, the one I'm thinking of was never published but I do remember one editor saying how "repulsed" he was. And that it really got under his skin, which he said too, that maybe that's what I was aiming for. Anyways...that was fairly easy to write. BUT a novel? Yeah, you are indeed right. It would take a lot of plotting, and scheming big time.
He does know that he killed someone, but not the reader. He is secretive, but not too secretive, independent and unwilling to face his action. Independent and angry are the words I use to describe him. Hmmm, well, the plot also doesn't really revolve around the opening murder that much either, so there is little time for the MC to feel guilty, which he doesn't
Yeah, this was my thoughts too.
As an avid reader of MTS, I would actually think the writer had either run out of steam, or had written themselves into a corner that they couldn't get back out again.
Hmmm, from what you've said, I've seen this type of character before. Jack Vance in Val McDermid's Wire in the Blood springs to mind.
I did this very thing on my last ms. Stalled at 20K and no one even died yet. I think I had too much suspicious conflict that went too over-the top. I was thinking of offing one of my characters and the whole dead scene and everything and thinking of who I wanted to have the killer be and who to kill, that I just killed it all by stopping. Does that make any sense?
And Gothicangel, that could very well happen in a case like this if you don't plotline right.
Anyways...good luck Mysteryriter, sounds interesting indeed.
Not so much the MC, I'm sure he's been done before. His dad was a world-famous crime novelist (J.K. Rowling famous) who wrote about being a killer. But once the MC discovers that his dad was a suspect in several murder investigations, he begins to wonder whether his fathers famous stories were just fiction.
Hopefully, that has never been done before. Thank you to everyone who posted. I will try to be careful so that the end revelation isn't too sudden.
mirandashell
Banned
You are definitely going to need red herrings and drop-in clues for this.
Christie did it brilliantly in Roger Ackroyd. The finding of the body was a masterpiece of misdirection. Makes the story really satisfying. And if you can do that with your MC, then you won't need complications like amnesia.
The one thing most MTS readers hate is to have the reveal come totally out of the blue without any prior indication. There has to be clues. Preferably ones the reader doesn't see until afterwards. The 'oh! of course! Duh...' feeling.
Don't worry that it's been done before. Everything has been done before. It's how you do it that is important.
Christie did it brilliantly in Roger Ackroyd. The finding of the body was a masterpiece of misdirection. Makes the story really satisfying. And if you can do that with your MC, then you won't need complications like amnesia.
The one thing most MTS readers hate is to have the reveal come totally out of the blue without any prior indication. There has to be clues. Preferably ones the reader doesn't see until afterwards. The 'oh! of course! Duh...' feeling.
Don't worry that it's been done before. Everything has been done before. It's how you do it that is important.
Oh, I have clues alright. Very subtle hints. The motive is there, definitely there, and I try to make it at least slightly obvious. I think I'll read that book then. Thanks for the advice!
Is the murderer/MC also an investigator? You could do it as a twist on the Sherlock Holmes structure. Have your murderer be the main character but have the story told though the POV of an assistant. That way you're not cheating.