Erik Kripke wrote it; his character Chuck said it; and it's true.
Guys, endings SUCK. So. Much!!!!!
Not just because it's literally "the end", but because they are so difficult to write in the first place. No joke, what I usually do when I read the end of something is keep my fingers crossed that I haven't left anyone hanging. Endings are never, ever easy.
I hate reading them;
I hate writing them;
I hate seeing them;
I hate reaching them.
But I guess every writer feels that way. It's not just because it's the end of a story; a lot of times it has to do with ending it right.
There have been an infinite amount of times when I have reached the last page of a book, or the last five minutes of a film, and I'm not satisfied.
Because the ending sucked.
Yeah, it was "the end", but nothing was tied up; nothing was resolved; nothing enticed me to come see a sequel(if there was one). It just--stopped.
Cliffhangers are great; if they're used for a reason. Sometimes though, the ending of something feels like a cop out. Like the author ran out of things to say and so just called it quits.
Now, I know there are numerous other factors that can contribute to a situation like this. In television, for example, the network(*cough* Fox *cough*) can abruptly cancel a show(*cough* Firefly *cough*) before it gets a chance to actually "end"; it just leaves us hanging through no fault of it's own, and nobody's really satisfied(of course, it could also have something to do with the fact that the-episodes-weren't-aired-in-order-in-the-first-place-and-so-everybody-was-confused-anyway. But Joss Whedon fixed that--sort of--so I'm ok now.)
However, it's the job of a writer so satisfy his audience, to a degree. The author is the one who invites others into his world, and allows them to live inside it. And to make sure others enjoy being in that world.
No pressure, or anything.
I wrote something once that didn't really have an "ending". It just stopped. Not because I ran out of things to say, but because I didn't really know how to tie it up. Which is why I love the SPN quote so much. Writing courses make it so easy--you follow the diagram and you're ok. HA!!! Guess what? There is no perfect way write a perfect ending.
But that doesn't mean you just leave people hanging. That also sucks. There has to be some kind of resolution, even if it's "and they all died and nothing worked out for anybody we were rooting for"(thank you, Hamlet).
If the guy gets the girl, that's good enough; even the monster dies, that's good enough. Those endings are easy, tied up nice and neat. If you don't chose to go that route, at least do something to get some kind of resolution. Even if one question you had gets answered, that's good enough.
Endings really are a "pain in the ass". But if they're done right, they can be awesome!
Guys, endings SUCK. So. Much!!!!!
Not just because it's literally "the end", but because they are so difficult to write in the first place. No joke, what I usually do when I read the end of something is keep my fingers crossed that I haven't left anyone hanging. Endings are never, ever easy.
I hate reading them;
I hate writing them;
I hate seeing them;
I hate reaching them.
But I guess every writer feels that way. It's not just because it's the end of a story; a lot of times it has to do with ending it right.
There have been an infinite amount of times when I have reached the last page of a book, or the last five minutes of a film, and I'm not satisfied.
Because the ending sucked.
Yeah, it was "the end", but nothing was tied up; nothing was resolved; nothing enticed me to come see a sequel(if there was one). It just--stopped.
Cliffhangers are great; if they're used for a reason. Sometimes though, the ending of something feels like a cop out. Like the author ran out of things to say and so just called it quits.
Now, I know there are numerous other factors that can contribute to a situation like this. In television, for example, the network(*cough* Fox *cough*) can abruptly cancel a show(*cough* Firefly *cough*) before it gets a chance to actually "end"; it just leaves us hanging through no fault of it's own, and nobody's really satisfied(of course, it could also have something to do with the fact that the-episodes-weren't-aired-in-order-in-the-first-place-and-so-everybody-was-confused-anyway. But Joss Whedon fixed that--sort of--so I'm ok now.)
However, it's the job of a writer so satisfy his audience, to a degree. The author is the one who invites others into his world, and allows them to live inside it. And to make sure others enjoy being in that world.
No pressure, or anything.
I wrote something once that didn't really have an "ending". It just stopped. Not because I ran out of things to say, but because I didn't really know how to tie it up. Which is why I love the SPN quote so much. Writing courses make it so easy--you follow the diagram and you're ok. HA!!! Guess what? There is no perfect way write a perfect ending.
But that doesn't mean you just leave people hanging. That also sucks. There has to be some kind of resolution, even if it's "and they all died and nothing worked out for anybody we were rooting for"(thank you, Hamlet).
If the guy gets the girl, that's good enough; even the monster dies, that's good enough. Those endings are easy, tied up nice and neat. If you don't chose to go that route, at least do something to get some kind of resolution. Even if one question you had gets answered, that's good enough.
Endings really are a "pain in the ass". But if they're done right, they can be awesome!
No comments:
Post a Comment