posted
I'd like to form a group to examine this topic.
I have this book, you see. THE 3RD ACT by Drew Yanno. The ending of stories is what it's all about. He talks not only about the '3RD ACT' but about how to lead up to the ending from the opening through the middle. It's a screenwriting text, but, hey, I'm not proud. Story is story whatever the medium.
So, what do you guys know about ending a story?
I know there are three types. Open endings. (The Lady Or The Tiger) Closed endings. (Most stories these days) Circular endings where the story ends where it began. (The Worm Orobouros - or how ever that is spelled)
Can you think of any others?
Also, I know that before the final word you have to have some sort of final "battle." Not necessarily a physical broughah hah. But where -- lets see -- where the question raised in the opening section is solved/answered.
That make sense?
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited May 22, 2009).]
posted
Yeah, I think it makes sense. Being a beginner myself, I use a method whereby I break my story into various plot threads, each with 3 'acts'. I try and line up the climax of the third act for each thread so that they occur at the same time, which results (I think) in increasing tension throughout leading to the final resolution of all the questions raised in the story.
Since I can't actually climax every plot at the same instant, one of the interesting facets of this is working out which order to climax which plots. For example, the romance plot thread, should one exist, I'll generally climax last regardless of when it was introduced - I find little more annoying than resolving sexual tension too early and completing the rest of the novel in a new relationship.
Part of this idea I derived from something I read years ago - the introduction to Stephen R. Donaldson's The Real Story, in which (iirc) one issue he discussed was moving multiple threads towards a common climax.
I don't know if we need a group for this though? Doesn't it seem more like an Open Discussions About Writing topic?
posted
I think you'd have better luck finding a group if you announced it in the Open Discussions About Writing section. I think only a small percentage of us ever even check out the writing groups section. Posts: 938 | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm interested, but so far I've just been lurking because I have almost zilch experience in actually ending stories (something I'm currently working on).
The only thing I know about endings is that - as a reader - I prefer the ones that validate the reading experience. While I prefer at least a semi-positive ending, I don't mind tragic deaths so long as there's some upside that makes the suffering meaningful and brings closure (i.e. other characters learn their lesson b/c of tragic deaths and mend their ways). I've only ever read one book that let me down (hero loses girl, loses job, never figures out the underlying mystery before the site is destroyed, and is left moping around alone; meanwhile, the bad guy gets away pretty much scot free) and I left feeling like I had wasted all the time and energy I invested in the novel.
Of course, I've discovered (for me at least) producing such a meaningful ending is much easier said than done...
posted
Knowing when the story ends is almost as hard as knowing how to start it. So far, I have more trouble with beginnings than endings. But it could still be an interesting discussion.
Posts: 4633 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it helps a lot if you know what kind of story you are telling (as in OSC's M.I.C.E. categories). He discusses story structure, and endings, with respect to those categories in his book, HOW TO WRITE SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY, and I strongly recommend considering what he says in terms of the stories you all are trying to find endings for.
Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thing I have learned recently is the difference between telling what happened and telling a story.
Stories are art.
I have this story I've written that I think is good, but it isn't QUITE working. Now I see that my ending, my final battle, falls short of being...significant(?) enough. It ends the story, but it is not satisfying. The big question is why?
The last story I had people look at - FISH STORY - didn't get past HM status. I'm not certain why. The final battle there really did work and I had a good denouement.
Now I have this basement story and it's as if the story just sort of peters out rather than ending.
Searching around for help I found this book -- THE 3RD ACT by Drew Yanno, a screenwriter.
Here someone talks about how endings work. At least how a lot of successful stories do.
I realized that my story's MC didn't fight a significant battle/overcome a significant obstacle there at the end and, while my denouement was short and effective, the whole ending fell flat.
I now -- it seems -- have to rethink the entire story and find a different main storyline or add a new line of action that culminates in the final battle/obstacle for the MC to win.
This is not an easy thing to discover and I'd like to talk with other writers about this problem.
How many of us fail at WOTF from this problem, I wonder. We think we have a good or acceptable or even great ending and it's not.
How useful are Yanno's precepts?
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited May 26, 2009).]
posted
the "first act" is where we discover that someone wants something badly. The ending is when he gets/achieves it.
In the first 13 exercises we set up some things like the setting, a problem, an interesting character -- there are all sorts of ways to open a story. But the biggee doesn't usually (?) show up there. The someone wanting something becomes obvious (?) somewhere down the page. It's the difference between that and setting up for that. Isn't it?
Short stories DO compress parts of the story. Can we open with the bit showing someone wanting the something that is the major story arc -- do that in the first 13? It's possible, I assume. Anything is possible. Show that and THEN come in with the setup?
But I digress. What I'm trying to work out is how the opening and ending work together. It seems so simple but in practice I find it more difficult especially since heretofore I've been writing short stories without knowing the ending when I start. That's why I'm in this predicament. The story just boiled out. Now I have to edit to make it work.
It helps to talk about the problem with you guys. If anyone's interested, I could email the story in trouble to you. If you have any with this ending problem, we could exchange.
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited May 26, 2009).]
quote:...difficult especially since heretofore I've been writing short stories without knowing the ending when I start. That's why I'm in this predicament. The story just boiled out. Now I have to edit to make it work.
It sounds to me like a problem less of plot, but of character development. May just be my presumption though.
For an ending to work for me, it needs to not only answer the original question (what that MICE quotient KDW mentioned will help with - you can google that), but also to employ (or, perhaps, prompt) the changes seen in the main character.
Even with MICE I think this applies - you don't need to be writing a pure Character story:
- A Milieu story will certainly begin and end with the Milieu, but if characters are not changed by it, then how do we expect the readers to be? To my reading, LotR's characters changed as Middle Earth did around them.
- An Idea story's question and answer form the beginning and end, but the search for the answer motivates the protagonist, and I suspect its answer must change them in some way, making the search worthwhile.
- An Event story's major disaster or non-stop action has to change the world around it, and the main characters, or else the reader is just going to ask "so what?". Consequently, resolution of the disaster has to leave them as different people than when they started.
For example, let's take a characterless synopsis: A restaurant owner struggles with his failing business until, through a series of events and a final confrontation, he is running the country's top restaurant.
Did anyone else yawn? I did. It was, I think, what you described in 'telling what happened'.
The thing is, I think the events aren't what make the story (and its ending) resonate with the reader - the character is. It's not always about the character just overcoming some great odds - I think it's about them changing with it.
What if it were: A broken, tired and downtrodden restaurant owner struggles with his failing business and life until, through a series of experiences that change his outlook he confronts his problems and changes his business to become the country's top restaurant to boot.
As much as I can dream up in a single sentence synopsis right now, do you think this helps illustrate, perhaps, part of the problem?
It doesn't presume knowing the ending of the story when you start. But you do need to be in tune with that character. You need to be able to have a feel for the character questions: How is this character going to be changed by this story? What will this say to the reader?
Sometimes it has unintended consequences. In one story I wrote, my character was coming out of a life of oppression and an artificial reality to the 'real' world, as well as becoming a little more self-activated in the process. I was surprised then, when a couple hundred pages in I realised that most of the action thus far had taken place at night; this allowed for a sunrise to occur later in the story that symbolises much of the changes that have occurred before. In synopsis it would seem a bit corny (the sunrise is not really an event of import), but it was fun to see a new reality dawning on my character.
posted
You can have a successful story without the character changing. They do that on tv all the time. In books there are James Bond, Sherlock Holmes and loads of other stories that do that.
But how many times have I read a even a published work where the ending doesn't satisfy, not to mention stories for critique.
And it has been difficult to pinpoint where the problem lies -- for me.
I was thinking back over my FISH STORY and maybe that failed at the end, too. It worked but not well enough to be "professional."
Now DRAMATICA, another writing text aimed more an novels, talked about two storylines -- basically a character storyline and a more overt action storyline. Like with your down and out restauranteur example. But in a 2-6 thousand word short story it's hard to stuff all that in.
The struggle at the climax must be difficult enough to (?) reward the reader for reading the story? Should the reader learn something about the "human condition" from it?
With my FISH STORY the MC has to give up being the one who first has proof of intelligent life on Europa in order to spare his friends humiliation and jail.
Hmmm...in that case he doesn't really change. He just makes a decision based on the situation.
It comes down to matching the question raised in the first "act" with the answer given in the ending. And having that answer be satisfying enough. Doesn't it?
quote:You can have a successful story without the character changing. They do that on tv all the time. In books there are James Bond, Sherlock Holmes and loads of other stories that do that.
I think that's a good point. For example (in the older Bond movies) James gets away with little development because his character is meant to be that self-assured. A brand name, the audience would be appalled if he changed dramatically. But I'd suggest that doesn't mean character development doesn't happen: Bond might not change in Moonraker, but Jaws does. And then again many serials (Moonraker being a decent example except to the truly die-hard) are fairly frivolous - not something likely to be winning awards.
Yet I don't think it's really black and white: the story in a series (imo) can still reveal something to or slightly change the characters. It just rarely changes them in a way that makes the next episode require the previous, and the characters usually suffer amnesia so they don't make obvious statements like "Hey this is just like the case I solved two episodes ago". (It could be argued episodic content in many ways defined Holmes too).
quote:With my FISH STORY the MC has to give up being the one who first has proof of intelligent life on Europa in order to spare his friends humiliation and jail.
Hmmm...in that case he doesn't really change. He just makes a decision based on the situation.
But perhaps he does/could change - if his initial primary motivation, his goal and drive was to gain recognition, then it's easy for him to justify sacrificing his friends; having to give the prestige up is very hard. If he walks away with newfound humility then maybe he, and the reader, understand the purpose of the events they've observed.
quote:It comes down to matching the question raised in the first "act" with the answer given in the ending. And having that answer be satisfying enough. Doesn't it?
I think so. I also think if we could define exactly what makes for a perfect ending, writing would be a science, not an art. A perfect rule come up with today will probably be broken tomorrow Posts: 921 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's like the old argument I've heard so many times. That Kipling (was it?) said there no end of ways to tell tribal lays and all of them are right. But, I would say, not all of them entrance your listeners.
There are broad guidelines. You can break them and be successful but only when inspired or knowing the effect of breaking them deliberately and wanting that effect.
Aristotle gave us the idea of opening, middle and ending. Not all literary traditions have that. Chinese doesn't. But when competing with Aristotle's idea his wins out a good part of the time. That's why the Chinese in Taiwan and Hong Kong film makers came over here to study and took back A's ideas.
endings must satisfy the reader's expectations.
On the other hand...not all stories need to be wrenching tales of emotional change.
Or is it that to win awards/WOTF, they do? However, that conclusion, that final struggle, the last major part of the story you can't slough off. Everyone hates when it ends -- and then a truck ran over him -- when said truck appears out of nowhere.
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited May 27, 2009).]
quote:You can have a successful story without the character changing. They do that on tv all the time. In books there are James Bond, Sherlock Holmes and loads of other stories that do that.
They do that all the time in what is called "episodic" stories, because the viewer/reader needs to be able to come in at any point and understand who the main characters are.
However, there is still character change, but it doesn't involve the main character. Instead, it involves the guest character (Sherlock Holmes' client, James Bond's enemy, and so on).
I submit that a stand-alone story should not use episodic stories as a guideline, or as an excuse for not having the characters change.
posted
IMHO character changes don't have to be major. For instance, a character developing a new understanding of a relationship, or coming to terms with a past event that's been bugging them, is a character that's changing.
Arguably, we are what we do - we are the cumulation of all our life experiences (possibly plus/minus some other stuff like genetics, but I don't want to digress) - so by adding to your character's life experiences you're changing them. For example, you give your character a choice he/she's faced before and that character makes a decision. Is he/she breaking out of an old pattern (major change) or missing a chance to break out and instead reverting back into an old pattern (minor change, in the sense that it has now become that much more difficult for him/her to break the pattern in the future)?
Arriki, in your character's situation, I wonder... is he going to 1) feel like the sacrifice was worth it and value the friendship that much more? 2) always going to regret what he's lost in a bittersweet sort of way when someone reminds him of it? 3) always going to seriously regret what he gave up and it's going to warp the way he looks at everything in the future, both in terms of friendships and career? When I think about what you've said about the story, I think the consequences of his decision (how he feels about what he's done) would bring about at least some small change in the character. He hit a turning point, had to choose, and he's not the same person he was before he had to make that (hopefully difficult) decision.
Agh. Hope I'm making sense. It was so much clearer in my head!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
