     Dennis Collins | Monday, May 13, 2002 - 07:35 pm 
Just some thoughts running through my mind...
I've read so many books, mostly mysteries, that have an ending that is so bizarre that it's totally unbelievable. Things that could just NEVER happen tend to compromise all of the enjoyment that I get out of reading an otherwise well written story.
Out of respect to some of my favorite authors, I won't mention any specific negative examples but there are a lot of big names out there who are guilty. Maybe that's why I liked Puzo's "GODFATHER" so much. It was brash and bold, but entirely believable.
My philosophy is to write the endings to my stories within the realm of possibility, but pretty close to the outer edge.
In, "THE UNREAL McCOY," the ending sounds unlikely but the fact is it's based on a real life incident that took place in Windsor, Ontario back in the 1960's. Unusual? Certainly, but it DID happen.
"TURN LEFT AT SEPTEMBER," ends with a scene that required considerable research to substantiate. I was able to find documented accounts of similar incidents and the only poetic license taken is in setting up the circumstances.
In both cases, clues to the ending are buried somewhere in the story, intentionally subtle and hopefully inconspicuous. |
| Gloria Marlow | Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:01 pm
Dennis,
When I was writing "Flowers for Megan", I kept thinking the killer needed some deep, huge reason for what he was doing. I don't even know that I cared if it was believable. Then one night, I was watching Forsenic Files or something like that about a man who killed a young lady for no other reason than that her mom had asked him about some property that was stolen from their garden shed. I suddenly realized that the normal everyday person can't even fathom a lot of the reasons people commit murder. I certainly can't. It's often when that one tiny part of life becomes the center of their universe or something. I can't explain it, but it is unbelievable, but believable at the same time. I guess it's just important that our books show why or how or whatever that the person would go to that length and back it up with character or insanity or whatever it is that drives them. We make the unfathomable believable, right?
I am agreeing with you, so I hope it doesn't sound like I'm not. I hope that my books are believable. That's the great part of a good mystery. The thought that it could actually happen.
Gloria |
| Nancy Mehl | Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:15 pm
Dennis,
It depends on what you're writing. Pure mystery must be believable to a point - but goodness, this IS fiction. I don't always want to read something that "would" happen. Sometimes I like to read things that "could" happen. That's what makes it interesting. Reading/movies should take us somewhere we can't usually go. Crime fiction is different - in that genre, I agree. Pure crime fiction must be factual. But even then - the bizarre is acceptable.
You better quit reading MALEVOLENCE. Supernatural mystery probably isn't your cup of tea.
Sci-fi, fantasy - all of these involve the "what if's." I like the unusual.
But with a novel that is presenting itself as factual - unrealistic things bother me. And that happens to me a lot. I'll find myself saying things like, "Why in the world would anyone do...." or whatever applies. I watch for things like self-inflicted gunshots wounds with a rifle....unless the victim was a gorilla - isn't gonna happen. (And I've read this!)
I know I'm rambling here - I'm tired and have a whole night's work ahead of me.
So - that's it for me! LOL!
"Night guys!
Nancy |
| Vickie Adkins | Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:57 pm
Dennis,
Just keep in mind that something might seem unbelievable because it hasn't happened YET!!! There's always gotta be a FIRST time.
Keep us in suspense....
Vickie |
| laurelj | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 02:46 am
Hmmmm. The Real McCoy arrived yesterday - thank you very much - and now you have me VERY curious about the ending. 
I don't write mysteries so can't contribute much to this thread, except to say I sure do enjoy reading them.
LaurelJ |
| righterpenny | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 04:53 am
I agree, Dennis that sometimes the ending ruins the story, but even some famous authors have stories with unbelievable endings. Like Great Expectations. The ending was so coincidental it took away from the story for me. But Dickens is famous for using coincidence.
I gues if you're good, the ending's believeability doesn't matter as much!
Penny |
| Kevin P. Grover | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 05:17 am
Dennis,
As Vickie stated, the only reason a lot of things are unbelieveable is because they haven't happened yet. Look at the examples in history of things that were seemingly too wild to believe would ever happen.....but did:
1. Someone would kill the president...and get away with it (sorry, my own opinion there)
2. Man would walk on the moon
3. The Berlin wall would ever come down
4. 9-11 |
| Dennis Collins | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 06:45 am
Don't get me wrong...
In no way am I suggesting that an author needs to limit his/her thoughts to things that have had documented occurances. Events like the ones that Kevin points out are all things that at one time, only embraced future promise. I would consider developments like these to be logical possibilities.
Superman can fly and see through walls! I can accept that in the context in which Superman is presented. I couldn't handle it if it were in an Elmore Leonard novel. |
| Jan Fields | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 07:39 am
I think Dennis doesn't mean unbelievable as in walking on the moon, but unbelievable in the context of the plot. I read a book recently (recommended by a friend) where the whole book sets you up to be afraid of this serial killer/hit man. He is plotting the torture/death of the main character and her husband. Then, at the end, the police just get him. He never even MENACES the main character and her husband -- though he does kill other people. The ending was totally unbelievable within the plot since the plot totally sets you up to expect some kind of huge scary showdown with the MC and/or her husband. Instead, he just gets caught and packed off to jail. Oh, and on the way, he nearly kills a particularly annoying minor character that you really wanted to see get his. It had a "I am tired of this book and don't know how to fulfill the story promise so I just quit" feel to it. This author has sold many many books, but cheating the reader like that is not good writing.
Is that the kind of thing you mean, Dennis? As authors, we create a story world and the ending needs to believable within that world. It's like having a diamond heist story where the burglar works out this elaborate plan throughout the whole story, then on the way to the job, he just happens to stop at one of the World Trade towers and just happens to be inside when the plane hits. Sure, in real life, it is something that could have happened -- the people inside the tower had all kinds of plans -- good and bad -- that were ended suddenly by the tragedy, but in a story plot, it is not believable or appropriate plotting. Real life is often not believable, that's why denial comes so easy in the face of tragedy.
Jan |
| Nancy Mehl | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 08:04 am
Dennis said:
Superman can fly and see through walls! I can accept that in the context in which Superman is presented. I couldn't handle it if it were in an Elmore Leonard novel.
ROTFL!!!!
How about this?
The story opens with a prologue. Superman is battling a tornado. "Dagnabit, this tornado is really strong!!!!!" Superman intoned blissfully. Suddenly, all hell broke loose!!! Superman, dressed in skin-tight blue leotards, with a big red "S" on the front of his chest, his dark, wavy hair blowing in the wind of the fierce tornado, said forcefully, "Golly gee, this city in Kansas is sparsely populated. I can tell that their main crop is wheat, by the stripped wheat fields left behind by this huge twister!!! There must be at least ten blue houses and fourteen white houses in this town!!!"
(Did I break ALL of E.L.'s rules????) LOL!
Nancy |
| Dennis Collins | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 09:12 am
Gettin' deep, eh?
I think that Jan has accurately captured the spirit of my original thoughts on this subject.
"As authors, we create a story world and the ending has to be believable within that world."
The key phrase is, "within that world." |
| sophie | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 09:13 am
Yes, Nancy, that was really, awfully bad! LOL |
| John Laurence Robinson | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:36 am
"I'd put away that raygun if I were you," the tall stranger lipped thinly." That was an actual line from an honest-to-Pete, bound-in-a-book story I read years ago. "Lipped thinly..." Stuff like that gives me hope that my writing will sell at least as well! (grin) |
| Kevin P. Grover | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 12:13 pm
Agreeable on all points Dennis, Nancy, and Jan.
I guess the point I was making was this: Throughout literary history, there are a trove of stories which were purely fiction at one point...and utterly unbelieveable. However, as science and technology went forward, these became fact. The following is an excerpt from a letter which I received from Majel Barret about 10 years ago:
"You know, when Gene was pitching Star Trek to the industry, there were a lot more of them interested than you would have thought. I remember him telling me about one encounter he had where everything was reluctantly being accepted by the producers. However, when one of them asked him how the ship was powered, Gene said that he 'simply smiled and told them it was matter/anti-matter driven.' They immediately lost the small amount of interest they had. Why? Because one of the members of the board was a scientist. The idea of anti-matter was ludicrous to him. Gene remarked to me right before the release of TNG that he would have liked to had the opportunity to talk with that scientist following the evident proof in the 1970's of the existance of anti-matter."
Perhaps my own experience comes from my ability (be it good or bad) to take something that is an event in historical fact (i.e. the missing hard drives from Los Alamos the other year), and turning it into a ficticious story which revolves around that incident (Strike Swiftly).
either way, when it comes to deriving the means and methods behind plots...aren't all authors correct in their ideas of what works and what doesn't? |
| Kevin P. Grover | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 12:14 pm
Oh, I forgot.
As you stated, when referring to the outcome of a mystery, the only way that I regard something as being impossible is if there are plenty of clues and hard evidence along the way to support that the author's ending is simply not possible based upon the story that is told. Leave the right clues and any ending is both plauseable and possible. |
| Jan Fields | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 12:48 pm
I think my problem with some mysteries I have read is less with the implausible (though I have seen MC's who just come to realize who the killer is with little or no logical means to make the deduction, and I have seen killers who actually were clearly in two places at one time and the author just never resolved the impossibility of that.) than with the unsatisfying. I see many stories with a big build up and a fizzle ending. If, for example, you make a big deal out of the hard drives and how the information they contained could change the political outcome of dozens of nations -- or whatever -- then halfway through the story you just decided to have some bozo accidentally flip on the electromagnet next to where the crooks are storing the harddrives before anyone ever got a chance to access the contents -- THAT is unsatisfying. The bigger you make something, the bigger you need to make the event that reconciles it. I've seen a lot of books that cheat the reader. Writing isn't just about what the writer wants (unless he is planning to keep the manuscript under his bed in a box forever) but about the partnership he is entering into with his reader. Like any deal -- if the writer makes promises he doesn't keep, the reader ends up feeling cheated.
Jan |
| ToK | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 12:50 pm
And you all thought you could hide from me
About believability. When I started writing sci-fi I wnated a pulpulsion system that wasn't cloned from the classics. Hard to do but I came up with a magnetic drive by creating a binary magnetic field (usually +/+) that surrounded the ship. In an absolute void with little gravity, you simply increase the strength of the magnetic field on the opposite side of where you wanted to go. I thought I was being unique and presenting a new thing. Lo and behold, a couple months ago in Popular Science (research material) NASA is developing a very similar technique for planetary (Mars) trips. I'm ahead of my time.
ToK |
| righterpenny | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 02:26 pm
What you say about endings being believable within the world created by the writer is certainly fine.
But, if I would dare to criticize Dickens, I would say that his mistake was that, although his ending was believable within the world that he created, it was rendered unbelievable because it was so coincidental. This is true not only in Great Expectations but other Dickens works as well.
I think sometimes modern mysteries do the same thing, having endings that are very believable but are too too much coincidence.
Penny |
| Dennis Collins | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 03:41 pm
Kevin opens a new door...
Training ourselves to THINK as writers/storytellers.
If we look around us, there are stories everywhere. Learning to recognize potential is a skill all fiction writers need to hone. Remember "The Natural?" Lightning strikes a tree. A boy picks up a scorched limb from that tree, digs out his pocket knife and begins to whittle a baseball bat. A story begins.
Vickie has an almost unfair advantage with her homestead literally hurling stories at her.
Two weeks ago, I was at a writer's conference in a very peaceful little Canadian City. I was interrupted by the wail of sirens as I was speaking to the audience. When I left the library, I found the parking structure next door secured with "Crime Scene" yellow barrier tape. Seems that while I was describing a murder mystery, there had been a real murder committed, the first one anyone could remember in that town. I felt a little like Jessica Fletcher, tripping over the bodies. |
| Dennis Collins | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 06:47 pm
Me and Charles Dickens...
Talk about unlikely events and coincidences... Bear with me on this...
The first book that I will be reviewing for Myshelf.com is Deborah Morgan's "Death is a Cabaret". It's the story of several people's obsession with owning a Cabaret set that had once belonged to Josephine, a gift from Napoleon. It's as if there's a supernatural force compelling people to kill for the right to possess this treasure as it comes to the auction block.
The following events occured while I was reading this book.
A banjo that had at one time belonged to my father surfaced on an eBay auction. Fifty-five years ago, my father recorded, "I'm Looking Over a Four Leaf Clover'" making him a moderately well known local celebrity. A bidder from Dublin, Ireland wanted the banjo but I just couldn't let him outbid me. I spent money that I really couldn't afford because I was "driven" to bring this precious gem back into the family.
Coincidence + Unexplained forces= unbelievable endings. |
| righterpenny | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 07:00 pm
Dennis,
Call it "unexplained forces", you're a natural at this stuff!
I think you're going to figure out a way for your next ending to have a real Oliver (plot) Twist!
Penny |
| Vickie Adkins | Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:01 pm
Attributes of a really great author (to me) are:
1) A great beginning
2) A great build-up
3) An even greater ending
Asking too much? Nah.....
When a storyteller finishes with a lame ending, I have to ask myself if they just tired of the whole ordeal, or what???? Perhaps they saw it all on the big screen as they were writing. This is how I write, and others I know as well. If so, they wanted the audience to walk away saying, "Huh?"
They feel gratified if they leave the reader/audience with a tiny bit of question or intrigue. Me, I find it completely unforgivable. I hate wasting my time on a book with a disappointing ending, and hate it even worse if I put down the time and money on a movie that leaves me wishing I could rewrite the last scene. I mean, nothing's worse than a lengthy joke that ends up being not funny, or somehow the person gets the punchline wrong and ruins the whole thing, right? Complete waste of time. 
If you build the audience up and then leave them hanging, have you actually completed your mission? Guess that depends on your mission.
Take the season finale of "Crossing Jordan," one of my favorite shows. Left me hanging, but for good reason. Next season. If the movie has a lame ending but no seqel then my imagination is left unfulfilled, so to speak. Is it fair to the audience that the author just ran out of gas?
Sorry! Done rambling!
Vickie |
| Dennis Collins | Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 05:22 am
HOWEVER!!!
There is an old show business axiom that says, "Always leave them wanting more." My dad used to explain it as, slightly, very subtly, understate everything. The successful entertainers are the ones who can focus in on this very arbitrary and largely undefined line.
Now, I always felt as if Stanley Kubrick went way beyond the reasonable limits on this. I remember walking out of the theater after seeing, "2001, a space odyssey," and hearing people ask each other, "What message did you get from it?" or, "What did you think the moral was?" I know what message Kubrick got; $$$$$!! And he laughed at the fools all the way to the bank. |
| Vickie Adkins | Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 08:21 am
Dennis,
Totally agree. Always leave them wanting more - but be sure and give them more. If I have to make up my own ending, then I want a cut of the $$$! 
Vickie |
| righterpenny | Thursday, May 16, 2002 - 09:23 am
Dennis,
Yes, like the Lord of the Rings three movie series. They know everyone who saw the first movie, probably more, will come to see the second and third movies. Some might even go back and see the first one again.
Maybe you could split your book into two parts, and "leave them wanting more" at the end of the the first part.
Penny |
| Vickie Adkins | Thursday, May 16, 2002 - 12:55 pm
I get really attached. If I see the first part of a series, then there's no way I'd miss the upcoming sequel. Same with reading. Baited breath, that's me!
Vickie |
| righterpenny | Thursday, May 16, 2002 - 03:02 pm
Vickie,
It's the same with me too! I can't stop reading something that I've started and keeps my interest. If there's a second in the series, I'm there!
Penny |
| Tyrone Godfrey | Thursday, May 23, 2002 - 11:49 am
When I was writing the "Ledgend's Prophecy Series" I wanted the characters to
be believable even though it is fantasy. I think it is important to stay close
to the readers wants and needs while creating a strong foundation for your story. Every reader wants to feel what the writer is feeling at the time he or
she wrote the story. A good book will pull you into the pages and keep you
captivated until the very end. It's great being an author, am I right? |
