Skip to main content

The End -- Writer's Poke #129

For Writers:

One of my students told me that he didn't like short stories. "I'm just getting into the story," he said, "and then it's over. And I'm like, what happens next?"

I pointed out to the student that readers of War and Peace might feel the same way, wondering what happens next. In fact, all endings may seem somewhat arbitrary, and that's because -- at least on some levels -- they are.

In writing, the writer has the power to decide when to begin and when to end. Worrying about "what happens next" should not be the main objective. That's just plot. The main objective should be: Does the "middle part" that makes it to the page serve a purpose? Does it have continuity? A discernible and meaningful theme?

Bottom line: Does it make the reader think?

And is leaving the reader wanting more such a bad thing?

Start with the end in mind -- be it your life, a relationship, a piece of writing that you're working on. How do (or did) you get there, and how do (or did) you know it was the end?

"In my end is my beginning." -- Mary, Queen of Scots

"In my beginning is my end." -- T.S. Eliot

Comments

  1. I've noticed that a lot of works from Indian authors have this type of ending. At first, it was offputting because I wanted things in a nice neat little package, but then I grew to enjoy it since this is more how life works. Things don't just end, they keep going.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "All stories," Hemingway said in Death in the Afternoon, "end in death, and he is no true story teller who would keep that from you."

    ReplyDelete
  3. John,

    While I certainly respect Hemingway's view, I still must say: is death really "the end"? If, to paraphrase Faulkner, the past isn't dead, then can the dead really be dead? In other words, if the dead continue living, in what way is death "the end"?? :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Digging for the Truth" Experiment #2 -- Bald and Bankrupt

His first name is Benjamin, but he usually goes by "Bald." Bald has been posting travel videos since 2018. His passion is anything Soviet Union, but he will take the time to learn a language before he visits a place -- not only Russian, but Spanish, say. It's important for him to have the ability to speak to people in their native tongue.  On Friday, April 18, Bald posted a video called "Solo on Ukraine's Eastern Front." So far it's generated 2.7 million views, and based on viewer average, it will likely go over 5 million views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3HRnwC6pso Most of his videos are in the neighborhood of an hour in length. In them, he usually establishes where he is and what his goal for being there is. He will start somewhere and then go seek out a place, without knowing exactly what he will find there.  For the latest Ukraine video, he starts at the Kiev train station. It's been 3 years, he says, since he last visited Ukraine, and he h...

"Digging for the Truth" Experiment #1 - Real Coffee with Scott Adams

I've been curious about how others perceive reality. What is "true" and "real" to me is not necessarily "true" and "real" to others.  First stop: Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert.  He's currently 67, does a daily podcast called "Real Coffee with Scott Adams" which draws about 30,000 listeners on YouTube, with 172,000 total subscribers to the channel. Podcast is also available on all the usual places, with a 4.4 rating on Apple Podcasts. Each episode is about an hour long, or a little less.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15SFbr2vj8c 1. Basic format: Just runs through news articles that drew his interest. On the April 15 episode (link above), he ran through 28 articles. Often he'd laugh at something, sometimes to show his disbelief.  2. Adams is not a big fan of science. He's open to conspiracy theories. Believes that the government doesn't tell us the truth (although he seems to think the Trump administration is an e...

"Digging for the Truth" Experiment #4 -- The Federalist Radio Hour

I first heard of Sean Davis last week. He created an online magazine called The Federalist in 2011, and he currently has about 500,000 followers on X.  It was about last week that he posted something amazing. He suggested if the Supreme Court doesn't rule the way they should, not only should Trump just ignore the ruling, if they keep obstructing the administration, he should just dissolve the Court altogether.  And I thought, wow. This guy is saying outrageous stuff like that, and there's an audience for it.  So, I decided I'd listen to an episode of The Federalist podcast: April 17, 2025 -- Deportation, Due Process, and Deference to the American People (40 minutes) https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/deportation-due-process-and-deference-to-the/id983782306?i=1000703904873 In the 40-minute conversation, the host and guest discussed why due process wasn't required for illegal immigrants.  The case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia was mentioned for a brief second, but...