zerohour21
Okay, didn't want to jack the 101 things writers should know thread, or whatever you want to call it, but I've wanted to ask this question, so will start a new thread for it.
Okay, so people said that you shouldn't kill off the main character of the book. I can understand the whole "don't have them randomly run over by a truck at the end" thing as that would seem pretty cheap (and I definitely agree about the whole "it was only a dream" ending; sooooo lame). But what if the protagonist dies heroically, making a noble sacrifice for his/her friends, lover, family, the world at large, etc. Wouldn't that be a bit more acceptable?
Of course, another thing to consider is that if the author does from time to time have stories end tragically where the bad guys win and the protagonist either ends up dead or screwed really badly some other way, then when the author does have the good guys win and have a happy ending for them (or semi-happy), then wouldn't it mean that much more to the reader, because they know that the author has had novels end tragically before, and that this one could have also ended tragically, but things worked out for the character after all. Would mean more than if the author always had the story end happily, because then when the current one ends happily then it would be just business as usual and you would have come to expect it. There would be more suspense if the author did have novels with both kinds of endings, because you really WOULDN'T know what would happen in the end.
Just my opinion.
Okay, so people said that you shouldn't kill off the main character of the book. I can understand the whole "don't have them randomly run over by a truck at the end" thing as that would seem pretty cheap (and I definitely agree about the whole "it was only a dream" ending; sooooo lame). But what if the protagonist dies heroically, making a noble sacrifice for his/her friends, lover, family, the world at large, etc. Wouldn't that be a bit more acceptable?
Of course, another thing to consider is that if the author does from time to time have stories end tragically where the bad guys win and the protagonist either ends up dead or screwed really badly some other way, then when the author does have the good guys win and have a happy ending for them (or semi-happy), then wouldn't it mean that much more to the reader, because they know that the author has had novels end tragically before, and that this one could have also ended tragically, but things worked out for the character after all. Would mean more than if the author always had the story end happily, because then when the current one ends happily then it would be just business as usual and you would have come to expect it. There would be more suspense if the author did have novels with both kinds of endings, because you really WOULDN'T know what would happen in the end.
Just my opinion.