Advice on ending stories

[MrHereWriting]

Advice on ending stories​

There's no magic trick to it.
You end a story when it's done or when you no longer want to write about it anymore.

The few people (and I do mean few) that complain about endings tend to want to be handfed every little possible detail they can possible think of. They want to know the story ends their way. There's no pleasing a person who thinks like that and you shouldn't try to.

Sometimes, a great ending takes some time to appreciate.

and sometimes you appreciate them right away.

and sometimes, an ending is an end to what you've written but not to the story itself for those who want to keep it alive in their thoughts.

 

[Actingup]

I have written over 100 stories and admit that one of my weak spots is in ending a story or series. Most times, I don't bring the story to a conclusion. Any time I've clearly ended it, readers don't like the ending (which seems inevitable). If I don't write to an obvious conclusion, readers ask for more chapters.

I have found it difficult to write more than a couple of chapters because I found my writing and storylines become redundant and boring, even to write them. I am amazed at the authors who write 10,20,30, or more chapters.

I was wondering what other authors do. How do you end your stories? Should I even worry about it? My thoughts in the past have been, "It is what it is," and go on to the next story.

I've found it helpful to think of every story as being a snippet of a longer narrative. Your ending point is usually going to be satisfying, cathartic, triumphant, romantic, or similar, but it's not a real ending unless absolutely everybody dies. We don't get to hear about Elizabeth Bennett's struggles to conceive or Darcy's gout, and that's fine. If it's a good story, then people are going to ask for sequels regardless, and (as for your stories) frequently do. It's totally up to you when to put down your baton and leave the stage.

It's obviously also a common problem for successful authors. You can leave room for a sequel (a good financial strategy if you're written a hit), or you can close all the doors you can. You can write an afterword that ties up the threads, and you can include a lot of appendices that really, really tie up the threads (hello Tolkien!). I'd be leaning towards your current approach of not worrying too much.

 

[TheArsonist]

Yes, because they all go hand-in-hand. It's how the industry works.

This discussion isn't about the American TV industry, but about a certain form of storytelling that can be applied to writing LitErotica serials. American TV shows are just the example most people are familiar with; issues that don't carry over, like production pace or network demands, are irrelevant.

Pretty much yes, quite obviously, that's how it's written.

So when called out that your assertion is factually wrong – with examples already given earlier in the thread – you simply repeat the assertion without any counterargument. (I could also add that while a lot of Lost was made up as they went along, the ending was planned from Season 3.)

And no very few broadcast American TV shows with planned endings are bad because there are so few of those with planned endings.

First, you're limiting the scope of discussion in completely unwarranted ways. (When discussing the pros and cons of open-ended shows vs. ones with planned endings, "broadcast" and "American" are irrelevant.) Second, even granting your claim, it doesn't support your argument. Third, as you get more worked up, your punctuation gets worse.

 

[TheArsonist]

Of course, this is true. People can write what they want. But... by their nature, in episodic adventures, each episode will have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Whether another episode follows does not alter the fact that the current episode ends, is resolved in some way. There may be a teaser for something to follow, but it isn't necessary to jump to the next episode to resolve the engine that drove the story in this episode.

Yeah, but you can also have serialized stories where the greater narrative is a big part of the draw. Take Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" stories, for example: each has a beginning, middle and end, but each also represents a turning point in history, as part of the Seldon Plan for the rebuilding of galactic civilization. You can't fully appreciate the Foundation stories out of order: they each build on the previous one. (And for this reason the collections of the stories are often incorrectly described as "novels.")

So Asimov must have had an ending in mind for the Foundation series when he wrote the first story, right? LOL no. He just had a story engine that could generate stories of a certain kind and made it seem like there was an overall design. And once that started to get monotonous, he threw a wrench into the plan with The Mule and Second Foundation stuff (not to mention the later entries).

A lot of serialized narratives follow a similar pattern: a distant goal provides a sense of direction, without committing to a particular ending (whether or not the writer has one in mind), while individual episodes might either depend on what has gone before (continuity) or be more or less standalone.

For a LitErotica-style example, let's make one up on the spot: Imagine a story about a doting, highly respectable wife who finds an ancient amulet that reveals to her that she is the final reincarnation of one of a pair of star-crossed lovers, and if she doesn't manage to reunite carnally with her former lover, his soul will be condemned to Hell forever. Fortunately, the amulet senses that her lover (who looks completely different in this reincarnation) is nearby. Unfortunately, it's not her husband. So she sets out to find her soul mate by having sex with different candidates, while trying to protect the husband and family she loves.

Here we have a story engine that can drive as many chapters as we care to write. They can be completely episodic or highly continuity-driven, but in either case each episode will, necessarily, not resolve the central premise until the series is wrapped up. It's open-ended: I have no particular ending in mind, and at this point I don't think one is necessary. The appropriate ending will depend on how the story and characters evolve, and if the series runs out of steam it shouldn't be hard to think of one.

You say you want an ending—would you be completely opposed to reading something like this? (Meaning the structure, not the specifics of the content.)

 

[pink_silk_glove]

This discussion isn't about the American TV industry, but about a certain form of storytelling that can be applied to writing LitErotica serials. American TV shows are just the example most people are familiar with; issues that don't carry over, like production pace or network demands, are irrelevant.

You're the one who brought up TV series as a comparison to justify meandering aimless episodic plotting/writing. Don't blame me for that.

First, you're limiting the scope of discussion in completely unwarranted ways. (When discussing the pros and cons of open-ended shows vs. ones with planned endings, "broadcast" and "American" are irrelevant.) Second, even granting your claim, it doesn't support your argument. Third, as you get more worked up, your punctuation gets worse.

If you want to discuss the pros and cons of open-ended TV shows or of lit stories, I've said it many many times before and I'll say it again because it hasn't gotten any less true. If one plots out and writes everything before submitting anything, one gives oneself every chance to make the story as good as it can be - closing plot holes, vertical integration (such as adding foreshadows into earlier chapters etc), knowing the characters better as you go and fixing old incongruencies etc, or just plain solid editing. Furthermore, one can guarantee one's audience a complete story and can post each chapter (episode) at regular intervals. The pros to this are endless. If one publishes as one goes, one gives oneself ONE chance to write it as good as it can be, and that is to write perfectly as you go in chronological order. The cons to this method are endless. However ... there is one huge pro to publishing as you go, and that is the instant gratification of the applause. If one chooses to write this way knowing and given the option to wait, then it's a dead giveaway that the writer's prime motivation is for applause - more important than actually telling the story. So why should a reader read this if his reading enjoyment is secondary to his "duty" to applaud the author? The story might still be good or decent, but not terribly likely. It's odds of actually being an enjoyable read go down down down. And that's why these stories almost never end. They fizzle when the applause fizzles at chapter 7 or whenever. Applause: the lit equivalent of ratings and profit. As soon as the ratings drop and the profit dwindles, the author cancels his own series without an ending. If the author doesn't even like his own story, how can it be good?

That is why this method of writing is inferior. All of those reasons. TV shows are generally written this way because it is the nature of the business. Good writers who don't want to write this way are forced to by the industry. Lit writers have no such pressures nor deadlines. There is no reason to write this way, other than impatience, ego and the need for applause - the high of someone (who usually knows little about writing) to tell us that we're good.

As for my typing, that last one was typed on my phone on my lunch break. The vast majority of my posts are typed in the comfort of my recliner in front of my computer, as this one is. I'm a terrible typer but when I have a proper keyboard in my lap it is far easier for me to go back and correct all of my fuck-ups. It has nothing to do with how worked up I may or may not be. For the record I highly doubt that I'm as worked up as you are but unlike you I won't jump to conclusions or otherwise assume. ; )

 

[MorraRose]

A ‘poetic’ end, then maybe an epilogue for cleaning up. A twist, but no hackneyed sayings, original only that heartens back to the story.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Have you ever watched a gymnastic competition, in the Olympics or elsewhere, with a group of people who don't follow gymnastics closely enough to really judge how well the gymnast has performed their routine?

One thing you will hear frequently from those poorly informed observers is "Wow, she really stuck the landing," " or "Oh, too bad, she didn't stick the landing." You will rarely hear any substantive opinions on how well the rest of the routine was performed.

That's because, even the most casual observer can recognize a bad ending. And while the judges will base their scoring on a variety of technical standards, those observers will mostly be thinking about the well done or poorly executed maneuver.

As I finish each story, I ask myself "Did I stick the landing?"

 

[StillStunned]

As I finish each story, I ask myself "Did I stick the landing?"

Nothing new under the sun: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/one-story-where-you-stuck-the-landing.1609277/

 

[lovecraft68]

There's no magic trick to it.
You end a story when it's done or when you no longer want to write about it anymore.

The few people (and I do mean few) that complain about endings tend to want to be handfed every little possible detail they can possible think of. They want to know the story ends their way. There's no pleasing a person who thinks like that and you shouldn't try to.

Sometimes, a great ending takes some time to appreciate.

and sometimes you appreciate them right away.

and sometimes, an ending is an end to what you've written but not to the story itself for those who want to keep it alive in their thoughts.

Whenever I see that last Sopranos scene all I can think of is they were playing Don't Stop Believing in regard to Meadow trying to park her car.

It's an odd scene, totally anti-climactic in one sense, but fitting as well.

I like that they never say who killed him and shot the scene so there were several suspects.

 

[VamPal1]

VamPal, if you can't be bothered finding the Forum rules yourself, they're here. Read them, please. As you've already been told, there's a politics board, which is where political posts go. Also note:

"Literotica requires that all forum users must be at least 18 years of age, they must show respect for each other, follow our Community Guidelines, and our specific Forum Rules (see below). Those violating forum rules or community guidelines may be temporarily or permanently banned."

Posting something in the wrong place, and abusing somebody who was politely redirecting you is showing a lack of respect in any place in the world, wherever you're southeast of. You shouldn't need other people to tell you how to be an adult.

Not sure what you're referring to. I clicked on the first link and there was nothing there.

 

[Actingup]

Not sure what you're referring to. I clicked on the first link and there was nothing there.

https://www.literotica.com/faq/forum/forum-rules

 

[HordHolm]

Whenever I see that last Sopranos scene all I can think of is they were playing Don't Stop Believing in regard to Meadow trying to park her car.

It's an odd scene, totally anti-climactic in one sense, but fitting as well.

I like that they never say who killed him and shot the scene so there were several suspects.

I think what they were doing is very appropriate to the subject. We've been trained to look at mafia stories as Greek tragedies, with build ups to deaths, with a sense of impending doom, the hubris of the character, etc, etc. But if you listen/watch mafia documentaries with the actual players, and can look past their obvious self-justifications, then it seems fairly clear that death is, for the victim, often sudden and unexpected, with no clear warning signs or build up. Simply, one minute they are at a sit down, or in a car, or at a bar/strip club, or cooking a meal, and then the next the last person they expected has put a bullet in the back of their head. Mostly, they don't see it coming.

 

[lovecraft68]

I think what they were doing is very appropriate to the subject. We've been trained to look at mafia stories as Greek tragedies, with build ups to deaths, with a sense of impending doom, the hubris of the character, etc, etc. But if you listen/watch mafia documentaries with the actual players, and can look past their obvious self-justifications, then it seems fairly clear that death is, for the victim, often sudden and unexpected, with no clear warning signs or build up. Simply, one minute they are at a sit down, or in a car, or at a bar/strip club, or cooking a meal, and then the next the last person they expected has put a bullet in the back of their head. Mostly, they don't see it coming.

I watched one of those "endings explained" videos and the person who put it out referred to an episode where they were discussing what it would be like to die by being shot and the consensus was it would like the lights going out, and that quick cut fade to black fit that.

To my knowledge, the show runners never did come out and say who killed him and why which I think is cool. IMO it had to be over Phil getting whacked.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I watched one of those "endings explained" videos and the person who put it out referred to an episode where they were discussing what it would be like to die by being shot and the consensus was it would like the lights going out, and that quick cut fade to black fit that.

To my knowledge, the show runners never did come out and say who killed him and why which I think is cool. IMO it had to be over Phil getting whacked.

A lot of people speculated as to who would kill Tony and why at that particular time, when it seemed like the "family" business was mostly resolved.

The answer is of course, literally hundreds of people would love to kill Tony. He spent his entire life doing people dirty. Was it one of the New York crew? One of his own guys betraying him? More likely it was somebody whose business he busted out five years ago, or the dad of a kid who ODed and blames Tony, or the brother of a guy he whacked...

By the way, on the sudden ending, in a previous episode, Tony and Bobby discuss what it's like to get shot and how it's likely that the victim wouldn't even know it happened, that everything would just go black.

 

[Plathfan]

Whenever I see that last Sopranos scene all I can think of is they were playing Don't Stop Believing in regard to Meadow trying to park her car.

For years, I’ve wondered what the point was of her struggling with the double parking. Beyond the obvious tension-building, I think it was meant to save her life.

She was supposed to sit beside Tony, on the side facing the restroom, the same direction the hitman in the members-only jacket would come from. Her delay was timed so that the moment she stepped into the restaurant, she would see her father’s head explode...

 

[lovecraft68]

For years, I’ve wondered what the point was of her struggling with the double parking. Beyond the obvious tension-building, I think it was meant to save her life.

She was supposed to sit beside Tony, on the side facing the restroom, the same direction the hitman in the members-only jacket would come from. Her delay was timed so that the moment she stepped into the restaurant, she would see her father’s head explode...

Could be that, or the fact that just as she came he looked up at her meaning the last thing he saw before it went dark was his daughter.

Another thing I've wondered is was it just Tony that got whacked? The kill and then the killer bails or did they kill Carmella and AJ?

 

[lovecraft68]

A lot of people speculated as to who would kill Tony and why at that particular time, when it seemed like the "family" business was mostly resolved.

The answer is of course, literally hundreds of people would love to kill Tony. He spent his entire life doing people dirty. Was it one of the New York crew? One of his own guys betraying him? More likely it was somebody whose business he busted out five years ago, or the dad of a kid who ODed and blames Tony, or the brother of a guy he whacked...

By the way, on the sudden ending, in a previous episode, Tony and Bobby discuss what it's like to get shot and how it's likely that the victim wouldn't even know it happened, that everything would just go black.

Right, I referenced that in my post

 

[MelissaBaby]

Right, I referenced that in my post

Sorry, that’s what happens when I post at 6:30 in the morning

 

[Voboy]

I’m not convinced Tony got whacked.

I think the message is that he COULD get whacked, any moment of any day, and that his life is therefore doomed to be forever uncertain.

I think the attempt to impose certainty on the uncertain is the subtext of the whole series.

 

[Craighalbert]

For years, I’ve wondered what the point was of her struggling with the double parking. Beyond the obvious tension-building, I think it was meant to save her life.

She was supposed to sit beside Tony, on the side facing the restroom, the same direction the hitman in the members-only jacket would come from. Her delay was timed so that the moment she stepped into the restaurant, she would see her father’s head explode...

Also she was Tony's favourite. She was his angel. But she wasn't there, so she couldn't protect him / offer him salvation.

Could be that, or the fact that just as she came he looked up at her meaning the last thing he saw before it went dark was his daughter.

Another thing I've wondered is was it just Tony that got whacked? The kill and then the killer bails or did they kill Carmella and AJ?

No chance. I hate the romanticization of the mob, but all those killers did have wives and children, and they didn't want to start the precedent that wives and children were fair game

 

[lovecraft68]

No chance. I hate the romanticization of the mob, but all those killers did have wives and children, and they didn't want to start the precedent that wives and children were fair game

Welcome to the club. I loathe that spineless scum. I've never watched the show, just sone you tube clips. The acting and writing is great, but I wouldn't be able to enjoy the show. Same for Goodfellas and Casino, who thinks these animals are 'cool' and tough and bad ass? Not even close.

And they wouldn't kill the wives of other mobsters, just beat the shit out of their own.

There's an area in Providence RI called Federal Hill. That's where the local mafia, or what's left of it, hang around at all the Italian delis and restaurants because all they do is eat. Bunch of gross old fucks sitting around outside like they're something. Not a man among them, never was or will be.

 

[SkyBubble]

I'm one of those that has an end in mind almost from the beginning, so it's never an issue.

I don't worry about things like epilogues or finality. To me, life is not like that. I like endings that are not too long, that feature a nice turn of phrase, or conclude with appropriate dialogue. I usually leave open the possibility of things happening after the story. "Keep them wanting more." Better to end a story too soon than too late.

Some of my epilogues are about one sentence. Here's an example: The next thing I remember is the sun poking through the bedroom window.

To me, that sentence tied a bow on it.

 

[SkyBubble]

I'll go with NotWise above. After 100 stories I wouldn't think this would be an issue. Conventional wisdom is to "begin with the end in mind" Where do you want this to go? How "should" it end?

"The end is where we start from." -- T.S. Eliot

 

[SkyBubble]

And they almost always fuck it up.

And there are some brilliant exceptions. <em>Newhart</em> (the 1990s series) and <em>The Mary Tyler Moore Show</em> are a couple of excellent examples.

 

[Candy_Kane54]

I just do it like Right Said Fred when he ended his song "I'm too sexy for this song ...."