Too open?

I find them quite appealing personally. There's a market for open endings, such as 'gritty detective novels', i.e. 'The Big Sleep' by Raymond Chandler. It didn't conclude fully, but just enough to make it feel like an ending. So, it does work in some cases, I guess if it's done properly.

Resolve the biggest issues, problems, dilemma, etc. Or solve the biggest problem. In other words, give the novel some sense of closure. (Hate that word.)

Keep a few smaller issues open and running.

Because the rule is (and I hate rules) to make the book a complete, stand-alone novel. If you sell it and get the proper audience...

Then worry about writing Book 2 or a series.

Which many have successfully done. No reason you don't have a shot at it, too.

If the reader feels satisfied at the end, it works. If the reader wants to know more, that can be great - market for the next one. If the reader is dissatisfied, wondering what the point was, they won't read the next one.
To satisfy the reader, you need a solution or resolution to the story problem. Life never leaves us with all the endings tied up, open is real, but certain situations are resolved and a new phase is entered.

If I knew there was going to be a sequel, it wouldn't bother me at all. If it was just a stand-alone book, I might be annoyed. It depends on which questions weren't answered and how much I cared about them. Really minor details might not matter that much.

...

It's very open in the way quite a few questions are answered, but not all of them.

...

Click to expand...

I think the reader should definitely get a pay-off at the end of a story - and a big part of that is answering questions that have been raised throughout the work.

But, if the pay-off is good in other respects, you can leave more questions unanswered, and have a good draw for the next part.

The major issues of a story should be resolved by the end, but those resolutions don't have to be the end, they could be the beginning of larger problems or different problems to be addressed in later installments, think Star Wars, they resolve the first death star being blown up, but that's not the end, there's more to come, but they wrap it up with an award ceremony. The next installment picks up months later. New problems, new situations, but the continuation of the problems.

Did you plan to continue the storyline into more books? If you did then it's fine to leave some questions that aren't pressing, but that are curiosity piquing, unanswered. But there should be some sense of resolution to the main plots of the story in each book.

I think as long as the main question(or questions) are answered then you're okay. Some mystery novels I've read ended with some open questions. For example, one mystery novel I read opened with the protagonist telling that his wife died in a car accident, but he didn't say who the driver of the car was.(Just FYI: the reader finds out about the driver in a later book in the series).

I personally don't tend to write series, or read many for that matter, but I read the Sookie Stackhouse series (and watch True Blood) -- though there is something to be desired about Harris' writing, I'm not over the moon about it, but it's readable. True Blood is also one of those cases where I like the tv show better than the books. But I am up to book 7 in any case. She generally resolves all the situations in the books nice and neat at the end, but leaves a few hanging danglely bits at the end, but each book could be read as a stand alone. I'm also not fond of that fact. I've read books one, two, and three, by book four I shouldn't need all the introductions to characters, explanations, and extra wordage she puts in. It bugs me.

I've also read some young adult books to my kids, like the Septimus Heap series, where the author assumes you've read the previous books, and just picks up where she left off, without all the explanations. She also resolves some of the issues from one book to the next, but presents new challenges at the end to be continued in the next book.

One thing I heard from a few writers of series, with your first series to present to an agent you should have two books written. Book one should have a alone feel, but can be left with continuation of a main plot line, like the bad guy hasn't been defeated yet, only wounded...If two books are finished and available to the agent and publisher, you're more likely to get picked up as a multi-book deal.

You could always avoid the agent publisher deal by publishing directly through places like Amazon and Smashwords. This is my personal choice.

The reason there's so many threads advising to make your first book stand alone is just because it's much easier to sell that way. But on the other hand, if the book needs a sequel to reach a satisfying conclusion, then you can't lie and say it's a standalone either.

Only someone who's read your book can tell you for sure if the ending feels satisfying or not. My suggestion would be to ask others to read it and give you feedback. All we can really do in this thread is theorize about what open-ended books it might resemble and comment about our feelings on those. (Which doesn't really help you.)

Silver-Midnight said:

I think as long as the main question(or questions) are answered then you're okay. Some mystery novels I've read ended with some open questions. For example, one mystery novel I read opened with the protagonist telling that his wife died in a car accident, but he didn't say who the driver of the car was.(Just FYI: the reader finds out about the driver in a later book in the series).

Click to expand...

I agree with this. As long as the main question of the book is answered, I'm ok with it.

If I think of a book series, I think of it in terms of episodic. Each book is a season of TV shows. Most series of TV shows leave the season on a cliff hanger, unless the series is over. Book series are often written with the same characteristic in mind, that's why True Blood, and Dexter make for good TV shows, the books are episodic. One book translates into a season. Each season can essentially be watched as a stand alone, as the season conflict is usually wrapped up in a satisfying way, but something is left as a cliff hanger, something that makes you want more.

People write fan fiction and follow up books to TV series, movies (like Star Wars) because they like the characters and want to know more about what happens to them.

To me each book should have some stand alone quality. The story of that book gets resolved, even if there is a larger overall story being addressed over several books. True Blood is a character driven story, rather than an adventure driven story like Lord of The Rings. LoTR is a quest/goal story, and the characters are important as their arches are great, the goal of good vs evil is what ties the three books together. It's like two sub quests within the main quest that both get resolved on their own within the larger scheme of the story, the last part of the tale wraps it up with the ultimate fight scene and final victory that wraps up the story in a nice neat bow.

You couldn't read the Twilight books as stand alones. There is no revisiting who characters are, what they've been doing in the beginning of her stories, she just jumps right in where she left off and each book has a conclusion, but there is much left open in the overall story, which by the end of the first book you know includes turning Bella into a vampire eventually. Child being conceived was the third act twist.

Only you know the overall story of your story. How you choose to tell that story to others is completely up to you. If you can fit the whole story in one, slightly longer book, then go for it. Nothing says a book can only be 150k words, write 200k and see how it feels. If it feels too much, or like things are cramped, then it might be better to go through it and find a natural ending point for the first part of the story, where something has been concluded, break the story in two there. Depending on where your word count is, add or take away from the story to fix your word count.

You may end up with one longer great story, or two full novels. Win-win in my view. If a story has my interest I'll be more than happy to read 300,000 words. Sometimes when I'm completely in love with a story, I wish I could just wrap myself into that world for as long as possible, I find myself wishing for more...150,000 words just isn't enough. Every writer has that potential to reach, even one person, in the audience that way.

You cannot underestimate how angry and resentful I felt when I realised Lirael wasn't going to pay off at the end. I thought about the amount of plot there was to unravel, and I looked at the amount of book there was to go, and I realised Nix could never do it in the space available.

I don't actually blame him. I blame the publishers, who at no point anywhere on the book--and I looked, believe me, once I understood I'd been had--indicated it was incomplete.

They achieved their aim; I bought the second book as soon as it was published. But I still harbour animosity. I was expecting a payoff and I was cheated out of it. I wouldn't have felt that way had I been aware it was only half a book up front.

So, really, it's for you the writer to do your part and make sure the book pays off. You can't rely on the publishers to treat the reader fairly. Apparently.

Rooke said:

I think the reader should definitely get a pay-off at the end of a story - and a big part of that is answering questions that have been raised throughout the work.

But, if the pay-off is good in other respects, you can leave more questions unanswered, and have a good draw for the next part.

Click to expand...

I do agree with this; If I dedicate my time to 375 pages and the author leaves me hanging at the end it's dissapointing/infuriating.

If the author leaves teasers or even full fledged answers meant to be resolved in a sequel, I'm fine with it. In fact, I prefer it....leaves me hooked and wanting more.

laurie17 said:

I've just finished my first draft of a sci-fi novel aimed at Young Adults and I'm not sure about the ending. It's very open in the way quite a few questions are answered, but not all of them. It could stand alone as a story, but would work better as a couple of books. I didn't 'complete' it as I'm concerned the word count would shoot up.

What I'm wondering is: is it okay to have a very open ending to a book, or will it put people off?

Thanks in advance for any replies!

Click to expand...

Is the main question answered? If not, I'd be pssssd! Very pssssd!

I thought of a good example of a novel with an open ending: Flashback by Dan Simmons.
He leads you to believe one ending, throws in an alternate ending and then brings you to another ending, none of which fully resolve all the issues of the book. This didn't make it a bad ending, it actually made me enjoy it more, because it wasn't just a simple "This happened and now it's finished because of what MC did."

I recently read the first in a trilogy, and the author was, I suppose, trying to make the end a cliff-hanger so readers will be dying for the next book. The problem was, when I finished it I thought, Huh? That's it? I have absolutely no desire to read the next installment. It occurred to me some of the unanswered questions might be due to laziness and oversight.

Not saying the OP is lazy, just that there has to be a delicate balance, and a good reason for leaving lingering questions when a novel is done.