Friday, August 27, 2010

I hate it...

I hate it when a book just ends—like, just stops, and you have to wait until the next book to hopefully get a solid conclusion.

But after the second book… in let’s say a 4 book series, you find the second book just stops, no conclusion at all, no satisfying end of any kind, no-doubt you’re going to have to wait clear to the end of the last book to hopefully receive the ending that made reading 4 books worthwhile.

No matter what, I feel it is vital to give the reader a bone and end the book in some way… have some closer and then open the dramatic beginning for the next book, what’s so wrong with that?

The more series I read the more I see this happening, I don’t care what the reason is, give me something at the end so I feel I spent my time doing something constructive… who wants to wait until the next book just to get some small piece of closer or satisfaction.

Am I alone here? What do you think? ... What else really bugs you about—whatever?

Thx for any comment you might leave!!


  1. I do not like cliffhangers either. I think, personally, it's a cop-out, a ploy to force people to buy more books. But, more importantly, I think each book should be readable alone, a complete story, even if it is part of a series.

    If the book can't standalone, in my opinion, it's not a real book.

  2. I agree.... Even if a book is part of a series, it should be able to stand alone as well. I think the characters... the love of the characters ... should spur people to read the next book, not the necessity of finding a conclusion to the previous book.

  3. I just have to have some closer, everything that the book was building up and carrying the reader to the climax needs to happen by the ending of it... not just stopping anywhere because the word count reached its limit. Sure the original story might need to be tweaked to make each book a solid piece of work, but don’t take the easy road out.

    As you can tell it bothers me.

  4. I love cliffhangers...but I think the end of a book (even in a series) should indicate what might happen in the next could be misleading, which is fine. The author might not have it written yet....

    I don't like it when a book is NOT part of a series and it just ends with no sense or resolution. It makes me not want to buy that author's work again.

  5. Every book needs a satisfying ending. Each book needs its own story arc and should be able to stand alone, even if it is part of a series.

    A bad, rushed, lazy ending is a deal breaker for me. There re a lot of great writers out there, so I move on from a lazy author.

    The good news, the lesson from reading such an ending, is what NOT to do. :)

  6. I hate cliffhangers. I'm fine if something is unresolved... letting me look forward to the next book to find out more. But I just read a book about a haunted house, and it ends without really resolving ANYTHING, but the main character's mom is taken through a haunted door at the end.

    The book should have been longer. It should have resolved something. Since it didn't, I'm not reading the sequel. I once struggled with an over 800-page book, and when it turned into an ad for the sequel (which my MIL was willing to lend me) I told her no thanks... I don't have that much time to waste just to find out what happens.