Length of endings

[HollyB]

I'd like to ask for everyone's opinion on how much time to spend on endings, as particular to the short story. For me, once the big bang climax is over, I'm ready to get out of the story as fast as I can. I'm bored and ready to move on to the next thing. (Hmm. I must write like a man.)

Anyway, I've had beta readers complain that I end too quickly, they wanted to know what happened to blah blah blah, and one beta even suggested that I add another 1500 words to the ending (to a 4000 word story).

Now, I feel having a long, drawn-out ending dilutes the emotional punch of the story. I don't mind that a reader finishes the story with questions -- I don't think every single loose end needs to be tied up. On the other hand, I don't want to cheat my readers out of a satisfying conclusion, either.

Any thoughts?

[vegiboy99]

There was a big trend, supposedly led by university writers' workshops, to bring stories to an inconclusive end. This left readers with unanswered questions to ponder on their own.

Does anyone know if this is still a popular method? Are writers gravitating back to definitive endings?

Personally, I enjoy writing endings the most and probably spend a lot of effort on that part of the story. And I enjoy reading and writing stories that don't always have a conclusive end.

Jeff

[NickolausPacione]

Could always do a double climax kind of story -- you thought the bang hit you then do another bang.

[Jamesaritchie]

I don't think it's so much a matter of how long the ending should be, it's more how satisfying the ending is, and are there any loose threads. Endings have a particular structure that ties in with the way a particular story is written.

You don't jump to the ending, you lead up to it. As a general rule of thumb, the opening takes ten percent of a story, the middle takes up seventy percent of a story, and the ending takes twenty percent of a story.


But you really have to go by feel and story structure. The ending must be satisfying, meaning it can't leave any loose threads hanging, it must have building tension, which means it usually can't be too abrupt, else the reader feels cheated, and it must be on pace with the rest of the story.

[dpaterso]

Depending on the complexity of the story... could be you're missing the denouement after the climax. You know, the closing scenes where the characters get to discuss what's happened and how it's affected them. Most TV series -- Star Trek to name but one -- use this to good effect so the audience gets to hear the characters' thoughts, which helps them better appreciate what just happened and adds to their overall satisfaction. I write like a man too yet I see the denouement as being every bit as essential as an exciting climax. Not in every case, obviously. But your messages prompted me to look at some of my own stories and sure enough, if I take away the denouement and trim back to immediately after the big bang climax, the story just... stops... on an unsatisfying note.

Each to their own, the above should be construed as my humble opinion not fodder for argument.

-Derek
-----------------------My Web Page - naked women, bestial sex, and whopping big lies. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57)

[maestrowork]

A 1500w ending for a 4000w short story? Are you kidding me?

JA is right -- if the ending is "satisfying" for your story, it really doesn't matter.

IMHO, a short story should end with a short ending, sometimes even just a punchline. If you develop the characters well enough (which is hard to do for a short piece) and have a strong story arc, your readers can use their imagination to fill the blanks about "what happens to them afterward." The ending should be proportionate to the entire length... if it's a 1000-word piece, your ending should be no more than a paragraph or two. If it's 4000-word, maybe 500 words. If it's 10000-word, you may have a little more room for an "and then everyone lives happily ever after ending."

But even with a longer piece, I personally don't like a drawn-out ending or epilogue. The "ending" of my first novel lasts about 3 chapters (of 38 ) .

p.s. by "ending" we're not talking the climax of the story (as HollyB's question indicated). It's the "then what happens" after the climax to tie up loose ends.

A short story is also where an ambiguous ending could work.

[HollyB]

Thanks for the all the interesting replies.

Maestro, "A 1500w ending for a 4000w short story? Are you kidding me?" That was pretty much my response as well. If revising is cutting out the boring parts, then why on earth would I add boring stuff?

At the same time, I recognize I need to enrich the ending somewhat to make it more satisfying. The difficulty is recognizing how to do that without adding what I'd consider meaningless padding.

Hmmm. Have to think about that for awhile... Time to analyze some of the short stories cluttering my nightstand...

Thanks again, everyone.

[Jamesaritchie]

I don't think the ending should be too short. Even punchline endings should still be written so there's a building of tension toward that punchline. In a story of average length, the ending always starts well before the last page.

A 4,000 word short should, by a very general rule of thumb, have a four to five hundred word ending.

Someone telling you to add 1,500 words to the ending may be saying only that there isn't enough story to support the ending you have.

Even though a story has a beginning, a middle, and an ending, you can't really separate the three. There must be a smooth flow and a steadily increasing pace that makes everything flow, that ties the entire story together as a unified whole.

Abruprt endings usually only seem abrupt. They nearly always start just as early in the story as do slower endings.

[maestrowork]

We really should have a definition of what an ending is -- is it after the final climax/conflict or does it include the climax?

To me, a long ending (after the final climax) is anti-climatic (some people could say that was the case with "Return of the King" with those 30 minutes of multiple epilogues -- but one can argue that it was an ending for the entire series, not just that one film).

I usually have about 10% after the final climax/revelation to wind things down and tie up any loose ends, but the ending is still a definitive "ending" to the main story (not "epilogue") and not just "Mary went to school and Joe became the President and they live happily ever after" that lets the readers imagine what happens afterward.

[Jamesaritchie]

I've always considered the ending the place where the main plot thread is securely tied. The climax. Everything after the climax is just tying up loose ends, and it had better be very short.

But I think the ending is also where the roller coaster starts its climb to the climax. There's a certain point where you leave the middle of a story behind and start the steep climb to the climax.

I think it's very important to know when you reach this spot in a particular story. Miss it one way and the ending is too long and drug out. Boring. Miss it the other way and the ending is too abrupt.

[maestrowork]

Thanks James. I think we have a different definition of "ending" as far as this discussion is concerned. :b

The ending I thought of was the "period" of the story. When it comes to a stop. The deceleration. The brakes.

Of course, if the ending is the "final act" of the story (leading to the climax, then the climax, then THE END) it should be rather long. 20-30% of the story is just about right.

[HollyB]

As a writer, I should have better communicated what I meant by "the ending!"

I was referring to the period *after* the climax... the wrap-up, the denouement, or in James's analogy, the part of the roller coaster where you catch your breath just before deboarding.

I've been reviewing several short stories this weekend, and many of the endings I've seen have been quite brief. Arthur C. Clarke's story "The Nine Billion Names of God" could arguably contain the climax and the ending in one sentence: "Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out."

In all, I feel better about my own concise endings. Thanks all!

[Jamesaritchie]

Yes, after the climax, shut the door and turn off the light as soon as you reasonably can.

[MissKathyClarke]

Don't you DARE leave questions :smack It gives me a headache as I'm dying to know what the heck happened... Anyway, quick wrap ups are what I suggest. If you get to lengthy, your reader might quit halfway through the ending and miss something important.

[dpaterso]

No fair citing "Nine Billion Names Of God" as an example -- that's a specific kind of ending, it's a punchline. And (spoiler alert!) given that it signals the end of the universe, there can be no more story! Nor hint of continuation (what happens next?) or character growth (how has your protag been affected by events?). Pick another example, will you?

-Derek
-----------------------My Web Page - naked women, bestial sex, and whopping big lies. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57)

[Jamesaritchie]

"Nine Billion Names of God" isn't a punchline ending in any sense of the word. It's simply a story that ends with teh climax, a very, very good way of ending a story when possible.

A "punchline" is the point of a joke or humorous story. "Nine Billion" is neither a joke nor humorous.

[dpaterso]

James, trust me on this, when a story exists solely to deliver its final line, which leaves the reader with a lasting or profound thought ("By golly, they were right all along, Mankind was created just so God could have a list of all His names!") then it's a punchline. ;) The dictionary definition when applied to a story doesn't insist the story has to be humorous. Certainly in the context of this discussion, I'd like to see another story ending analyzed. If we're talking classic SF then how about James Blish's "Surface Tension" or Theodore Sturgeon's "Macrocosmic God" or maybe one of Asimov's robot stories? A couple of the latter have modified punchline endings but they're delivered so wonderfully and are so integral to the story that you wouldn't notice.

-Derek
-----------------------My Web Page - naked women, bestial sex, and whopping big lies. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57)

[La Belle Dame sans Merci26]

Sometimes I think a story I'm writing needs a little breather after the climax. But this can be just a brief paragraph. Other times I'm carefully working towards creating an electrifying effect with the last line (well, attempting to anyway), and anything after that would undermine the whole piece. I think it comes down to the story, and exactly what it is you want the reader to experience. Abrupt can be good when handled carefully, or an enormous let down, a punchline that doesn't live up to the joke you've been patiently listening to.

[Writing Again]

Aha, I knew Derek was right, but I could not find an authority to support it -- Until now.

Random House Unabridged Dictionary

Punchline:

The climatic phrase or sentence in a joke, speech, advertisement, or humorous story that produces the desired effect.


It does not have to be a joke.

It does not have to be funny.


I love the net, I love dictionary.com but I will never get rid of that towering stack of dictionaries lodged in the corner of my unused bedroom.

[zerohour21]

In my short stories, I usually try to include at least something so you know what happens to the character and how they end up after the climax and after all is said and done. Exceptions are made from time to time, of course, mostly when the character ends up dead at the end of the story, in which case no aftermath is needed, but otherwise, for hte most part, if he or she survives, then yeah, I'm going to want to at least touch on what happens to him/her afterward.