The hero dies...

The main character dies?

I wouldn't be happy, but if the story is well-written and it has an otherwise satisfying ending, it wouldn't make it suddenly a bad novel.

Although, I have been known not to finish novels where a character I liked was killed off.

But I fully admit, I'm an oddball and not indicative of other readers.

you can't really "poll" this....so much depends on execution. MCs die or have died in probably half of King's books, including many of his best, as well as McCammon's, Koontz's, Nicholas Sparks', etc.......

sometimes heroes die. Romeo and Juliet. A Tale of Two Cities. The Star Trek where they killed Spock. Carpenter's The Thing. The Stand, The Dark Tower, Thinner, The Dead Zone... Etc. etc. etc.

But again, a lot depends upon execution.

Maxx B said:

This isn't really research or brainstorming but rather asking for your opinion.

In a novel with two protagonists, both are likable characters. If one were to die through the actions (either direct or indirect) of the antagonist would it spoil the story too much for you as a reader? The antagonist will be brought to justice in the end, so there will be a neat ending, just not the happily ever after that we are used to.

Thanks

Click to expand...

two MC both with equal page time- and one dies- heroically? if he dies to say save the other MC, or some other self sacrificing way- even at the antagonist's hands- yes- that would be bittersweet- and i likes me some bittersweet endings. yes i say- if this is done right it can be beautiful.

how can you have 2 protagonists?

proto = first, lead

Do they both get equal screen time, and equal importance/agency in the plot? or is one really a deuteragonist?

It would depend on the impact on the story the death has, honestly, especially since you say there's two main characters.

If the death was heroic (ie: sacrificing self for someone more vital to succeed, or dying to gain needed information), then I'm better with it. As long as the other characters gain (as well as react) to the death, mind you.

If the death was "for love alone" or any other "unexpected" or "realistic" reason, it's a wallbanger. That means, to me, that the character wasn't focused on the main conflict. Yeah, people do this in real life, but this is FICTION and the main character(s) have a job--and that is to focus on the main plot and not be stupid. Stupid characters deserve to die and not have their stories finished being read. (No, I'm not judgmental at all, am I? LOL!)

Wouldn't bother me if it served a purpose. I like books that don't have "safe" characters.

Another vote for "it depends on the execution/story."

Does the death serve a purpose? Is it the only natural conclusion to the character's story? Is it a story where only something as drastic as a major character's death can resolve the plot? Go for it.

Are you just killing them to jerk the reader around? Is their death pointless, or somehow out of character (like an ex-Marine sniper who forgets which end of a gun the bullets come out of when he cleans his weapon)? Don't expect a lot of repeat readers.

I've read books where character deaths work. And I've read books where character deaths just hack me off. (Oddly enough, I recently finished reading a book where I fully expected a character to die, or at least suffer in some great way for his actions at the climax; the no-strings-attached happy ending he got kinda felt anticlimactic.)

Well, I hate these sort of endings. But I am also a heavy romance reader, and romances end in HEA or HFN.

If you want to sell it as a romance (and it doesn't sound like that's the case), then forget about it. If it's another genre...I'm sure it could be done. Depends on the story.

What's hfn? (Asks the thriller writer who never reads romance)

Happy For Now?

sheadakota said:

What's hfn? (Asks the thriller writer who never reads romance)

Click to expand...

Happy for now.

Ah, thank you. I find it interesting that an ending one loves is one that an other hates. For me HEA or HFN endings are throw against the wall with much force books. I detest them. Give me bittersweet, give me unexpected anytime.

People die when they are killed--that's a fact of life. Stories are no different.

What would spoil the story for me is the character(s) dying for no good reason, or knowing that they are going to die for no good reason (or at the beginning of the story).

Hmm, well if he dies before the end, then he's not really the main character. I have read novels where the torch gets passed or a particular character you think is going to be *the* one, or one of the most important characters anyway, dies before the end.

But they're usually the kind of story where "anyone can die at any time," like George RR Martin's work or something.

Generally it works better if there's some foreshadowing, or at least it makes sense at some level for the person to have died.

In general, I prefer happier endings, though they don't have to be ride into the sunset perfect. Life is filled with broken hearts and bad things happening to good people, so when I read I like to nurture my inner optimist that things are better for the main characters now, and they have a shot at happiness at least.

I actually read a story where the protagonist was killed a little past the 3/4ths mark of the book. The story then switch to a new POV, which happened to be her brother who'd been in the entire book. I think it worked. It was jarring at first, but quick to accept because the story was engaging.

I agree, it depends on how well it's done and whether there's a good reason for it - or if it suits the story etc. While people might not be happy about the protagonist dying they might still enjoy the book, and that kind of means the writer's done their job - made people care about the characters and the story.

I don't mind reading stories where the protagonist dies, and sometimes there's really no other way it can end - Pet Sematary comes to mind.

WillSauger said:

People die when they are killed--that's a fact of life. Stories are no different.

Click to expand...

Depends on the universe. In some of them, death's merely a temporary inconvenience, dependent largely on a character's popularity. Or an actor's contract terms.

Brightdreamer said:

Depends on the universe. In some of them, death's merely a temporary inconvenience, dependent largely on a character's popularity. Or an actor's contract terms.

Click to expand...

---

Or whether the sequel is already in the works...



I'll add my two yen. If I were emotionally invested in the MC (who got offed) then I might feel cheated, but if the author set it up early enough so that we felt the finger of doom settle over him/her before death came a'callin', then if and only if the story has engaged me enough would I forgive it. That's just me. Other readers might not like it.

Personally, I like to have happy endings. Call it a cliche, I like to see my guy get the girl or the girl get the girl. Just the way I roll...

No one has mentioned psycho yet. That may go even further than you're suggesting, but it's worth noting because it's such a classic movie (though it was initially panned).

I personally need a mix of happy endings and downer endings (though, honestly, if the death of the one hero is redeemed properly, that could still make for a happy ending), just so I don't go crazy. But sometimes (as every has said only if it's well done) and not so happy ending can make for a very powerful story.

And, unless it was handled poorly, the death of a beloved character in the middle will make me continue and want to know how it works out, how the bad guy (hopefully) gets his come uppance.

These are all things, I'd add, that I want to work on and hopefully learn to do really well.

The death of a protagonist has to be done a certain way to be satisfying. The key is to flag very early on that this protag is going to die. Make it clear, somehow, that they are not born under a good star. That doesn't mean you have to give everything away, but you want to make it clear from the get-go that someone isn't going to make it.

Sudden tragedy can be effective when used on secondary characters, but MCs are the characters your reader has invested their ego into. When you kill off that character, you abruptly throw your reader out of the story. The death feels upsetting and personal, like an attack on them.

For an MC death to work (in an operational, emotional sense), it must be cathartic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharsis

In a lot of old plays, they often told you up front through a narrator, words to the effect of: "This is the tragic story of so-and-so who is going to die because of his deeds/hate of the gods/teenage infatuation." These days, it is better to signal through internal narrative means. In Media res, flashbacks or flash-forwards, symbols, alternating chapters to draw out a foregone conclusion, etc.

I took on this challenge myself. The book I recently published features the death of the MC and his partner. It's clearly signaled at the beginning - the book opens with him trapped, dying on the battlefield, then goes back into what got him there. That's one route an author can take, but there are as many as there are fish in the ocean.

Like others have said, it all depends on the execution, and sometimes it can work really well. For instance, take A Walk to Remember - we know from the very start that Jamie is going to die, but it's still heartbreaking, and knowing from the offset doesn't do anything to diminish the impact of that death.

shaldna said:

Like others have said, it all depends on the execution, and sometimes it can work really well. For instance, take A Walk to Remember - we know from the very start that Jamie is going to die, but it's still heartbreaking, and knowing from the offset doesn't do anything to diminish the impact of that death.

Click to expand...

Yep. That's the power of catharsis

sheadakota said:

I find it interesting that an ending one loves is one that an other hates. For me HEA or HFN endings are throw against the wall with much force books. I detest them. Give me bittersweet, give me unexpected anytime.

Click to expand...

I know. I didn't used to care so much, but then I had something really horrible happen to me and I became unable to deal with anything but a happy ending. Why would I want to read a sad one? I had real life to give me those. When reading, I needed the promise of the HEA/HFN, needed to know I wouldn't be blindsided--unlike in my own life. But it doesn't work like that for everyone. There are people who read tragedies for comfort.