While I've been gone for several weeks, a question was raised, should novel endings always be happy?
Happy or sad, I think isn't the proper question. In my opinion, the story's ending must resolve satisfactorily all the questions and problems that have been posed.
Right now, I'm struggling with the ending of my next novel BRIDGETOWN MURDERS. Should I let the heroine live or die?
If my heroine dies, it would be horrible, heart
wrenching, but a realistic outcome of all that had gone on before. But
would it solve the main problem, that of my hero overcoming his phobia?
As one critiquer suggested, having her die on the bridge would likely
make his phobia worse.If she lives, however, I fear it could read too much like a cheap romance novel, all hearts and flowers, and would not be realistic. But it could have the effect of helping the hero to overcome his phobia, assuming I can write the ending well enough.
Either way, I don't think the question of whether happy versus sad endings is important, as long as it is satisfying. If the reader cries out buckets of tears over the ending, then I as a writer have succeeded in my main purpose, that being to entertain my readers.
While you are pondering that issue, you can read what led up to this question in my novel BRIDGETOWN HIGH. You can find it in Amazon in either paperback or kindle.
Comments