Satisfying endings.

[therapist]

Have been thinking about what makes a satisfying ending by analyzing the endings for storys I love. This is the conclusion i've come up with.
In the end the hero should make one single decisive action, a leap of faith, something they couldn't/wouldn't have done at the start of the book, something that shows they have changed, something that is high stakes but it's something they feel so strongly about the risks no longer matter. Also, ending in a climactic fight/battle scene is often unsatisfying, lame, and uninteresting.

I just finished rereading Game of Thrones book 1, and out of all seven PoV characters the most I found the most satisfying ending was Daenerys Targaryen. She finally realizes who she is, and her decisive action is walking into her dead husband's funeral pyre, and not only survives the fire unhurt but emerges with dragons.
That encapsulates what I stated before perfectly. And with all the other books and films I looked at, their endings could usually be boiled down the same way.

What do you think? Can you think of any great endings that does not abide by this?

 

[Wayne Mack]

Especially for a novel, I feel that there need to be conclusions of multiple arcs (and of course, story telling basics, the reader needs to care about the characters and understand their goals). There may be a dramatic arc, a romantic arc, a redemption arc, a mystery arc, etc. The arcs do not need to be all resolved positively, some come end in failure. Having a mix of successes and failures can make the conclusion more interesting than if everything resolves positively. One of the secondary arcs can be left unresolved, even if there is not going to be a sequel. If the primary arc results in failure, then it would probably be considered a dark story.

Also, the story could end at the conclusion of the primary arc, following the conclusion of the primary arc, or (more rarely) before the conclusion of the primary arc.

In the film, "Independence Day," I find the conclusion of the primary arc to be pretty poor; the alien fleet is defeated by a computer virus. What makes the ending memorable is the redemption story of the drunken father ends tragically, the warring factions of Earth unite and attack using more basic tech, and the various characters are reunited when Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum walk out of the desert to find their families, the president is reunited with his daughter, and characters marry. It is all of these secondary arcs that save a rather poor primary arc conclusion. It is due to hitting the reader or viewer with multiple conclusions that make the ending enjoyable.

 

[sknox]

There are simply too many different kinds of books. As with so many other aspects of art, it's easier to say what doesn't work than to say what does, especially what works for a wide range of people.

For a mystery, you had better solve the mystery. Whether the reader sees it coming or not is sort of secondary and depends on the temperament of the reader.

For romance, there are some very clear conventions with different sub-genres, and the author needs to land the right one.

SF seems to have two main endings. One is the twist, far more common in short stories but sometimes in novels. And the other is the "just desserts" sort of ending, the one you can see is being set up and all the events are leading or dragging the characters to it. Whatever it is, the ending must deliver on the promise.

Fantasy is just too huge. It has to be broken down. Paranormal romance is miles away from sword-and-sorcery.

I find a wide variety of endings to be satisfactory. Some happy, some not. Some expected, some surprising. Some horrifying or chilling.

I said above it's easier to say what not to do. One big one for me is not to have the main character become something else at the end without obvious reason or motive. An example is The Adventures of Augie Marsh, which is marvelously picaresque for most of the book. Then, at the end, Augie more or less shrugs and goes home. It's so deflating! My only real complaint about War and Peace is Pierre's conversion. I can see Tolstoy lead him to that moment, but somehow it always felt contrived, which detracted from my overall love of the work.

Contrast that with a character like Philip Marlowe, who is not only true to himself, but is true even at the cost of other people he cares about. But we expect him to hold fast. Easy Rawlins is another example of the same type. Many heroes in Westerns are similar.

Anyway, it's a good topic.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I think that whatever the ending, it has to make sense and it also has to be one that the reader could have worked out whilst reading the story.

 

[Steve Harrison]

An author friend describes a good ending as one that comes as a complete surprise, but in hindsight was inevitable.

 

[therapist]

An author friend describes a good ending as one that comes as a complete surprise, but in hindsight was inevitable.

I like this and have often found it to be true. I think the example I mentioned with Daenerys targaryen is a good example. But there are a lot of storys where the ending is both unsurprising and satisfying. For example LotR ending wasn't surprising, nor are underdog sports storys, yet when done well those can be just as satisfying.

Having a mix of successes and failures can make the conclusion more interesting than if everything resolves positively.

I think this is a really important thing to keep in mind for larger stories with multiple threads. I have a tendency to default towards resolving stories positively, whereas the negative arc adds a very nice spice to stories.