BOOK RANT: Lack of endings

You know books should have a start, middle, and end? Well the last three I read have missed one. I don't mean they have a weak ending, I mean they simply stop with no resolution, no plot progress, no nothing...

It happens most often in books which are part of a series, but this really annoys me. It makes it feel like I've wasted time on the rest of the book. If it is a series, authors please try and reach a natural breakpoint e.g. LOTR - the fellowship splits, or

Spoiler

Heirs of Eshla

where they've recovered one treasure, and the bad guy's scheme has been disrupted so completely that she is setting up a new one from scratch.

Don't just decide to cut the action dead and tell me to buy book two. If the first book is set up to the point where it feels like the plot hasn't even kicked in, it's just a waste of my time. 5000 locations of world building and exposition!? This is why some authors need editors...

A deliberately open ending - they finished the plot and are now out into the wider world is one thing. An indeterminate ending (e.g. Butch Cassidy - did they survive?) is fine. But they are both endings, and when a book doesn't have an ending at all it is bad. A recent example: the heroine is passed from group to group, no one tells her what's going on and it ends with her in mid-journey across a desert with her and the reader still not knowing what's going on or what she is meant to do - or why the reader should buy book 2. If you haven't told me anything in the first book, should I really believe you'll tell me anything in the second (a.k.a. "Fool me once...")

There seem to be a flood of these, and it is driving me mad.

Just a rant.

 

The one with that girl in the desert where no one tells her what is going on, everyone calls her an idiot, and the book ends before she or the reader learn anything?
Reader? Review? Please?

 

Аlmоst еvеry timе I rеаd а King bооk, I еnjоy thе rоlliсking rоmp оf thе bеginning аnd thе middlе. Аt thе еnding, I usuаlly fееl vаguеly disаppоintеd, еspсiаlly with: Thе Stаnd, Thе Lоng Wаlk, IT, еt сеtеrа.

Аm I missing sоmеthing hеrе, оr just rеаding thе wrоng bооks? Оr is this а hаbit оf King's?

 

I think that King appeals to certain people, not everyone. I personally like the books, and I loved The Stand. I guess it all comes down to a matter of personal preference and perspective. For me the books keep me enthralled from the first page right to the last.

 

King at least writes an ending. I mean I picked up "Metal in the Sand" and there's just nothing . No payoff. Lots of tensions and plots being added but nothing ends. It's Part One, OK, I get it, but shouldn't something finish? The Belgariad had endings at each part. Stop selling me chapters and telling me they're books!

 

More and more Indie authors are doing that. I don't know if it's some sort of marketing ploy to get more people to buy their next books, but it's downright annoying. I've been seeing more of that happening lately and it's beginning to put me off.

It might be safer in the future to stick with the authors that we know and love. Personally I think it's a shame because those authors don't realize that once you lose a reader because of your first book, you lose them for good.

 

I've seen a lot of kindle places recomending taking one novel and selling each chapter as a 99p serial to make more money, but that really annoys me. Chapters are NOT complete stories, and it puts people off reading new authors.

Splitting books done properly at a natural breakpoint, e.g. Lord of the Rings, works well. On the indie front Heirs of Eshla is a Part One of Four, but it is still a complete story as the heroes have completed the first part of the quest, the bad guy's initial plan has been defeated and she is regrouping.

The problem with sticking with known authors is that you miss out on the good new writers as well as the bad ones. Isn't every author an unknown until a reader takes a chance?