Joanna’s on a rant about endings 😉
This post is about unsatisfactory endings to novels, where they fall off a cliff. Sarah has posted about problem endings before, as have I, but both were a while ago so I feel it’s safe for me to have another go.
In my own previous post, I was recommending allowing the reader a wallow at the end of a romantic novel. This post probably applies to most novels, including romances, but I’m thinking particularly of crime and thrillers. They fall off a cliff often. Too often, in my view.
To fall off a cliff.
It’s one of Sophie’s descriptions, but I think it’s apt for many unsatisfactory endings.
What, exactly, do I mean by it?
You’ll recognise it when you read it. It’s the equivalent of a jump-cut to “and they all lived happily ever after”.
Or, if you like, the entrance of the deus ex machina to sort all the problems and end the play.
In the case of a crime novel, it’s when the sleuth (amateur or professional), having been struggling to solve the crime throughout the book, suddenly has a eureka moment.
The sleuth might be half-asleep in bed, or driving the car, or staring out of the window but somehow, suddenly, he or she knows the answer.
The Eureka Moment. Yes, well…
But do we believe in the sleuth’s eureka moment? That’s the $64,000 question. (Or should It be $64 billion these days?)
I’d say, as ever, that it depends.
I was recently reading a crime novel by a much lauded writer, a winner of many awards. I hadn’t read anything by him before.
The crime, involving a number of deaths, was mystifying to all concerned, including me. I couldn’t see how it was going to be solved. And I was getting ever closer to the end of the book. I wondered what the author was going to do. Given the shortage of pages, I was prepared (sighing) for the story to fall off a cliff.
Nor had I seen any clues or hints that might help anyone. And I had been watching for them, I promise you.
The whole police team was totally stumped. They had proved that neither of their prime suspects could possibly have done the murders. They had no one else in the frame.
But the chief police sleuth suddenly knew the answer.
He sent his bamboozled team haring off in all directions to get individual pieces of the necessary evidence to prove his theory. He didn’t tell them what his theory was.
(And, of course, the author did not share the theory with the reader, either. Nor did we know what evidence the team was seeking.)
Then, in the space of a few pages, the sleuth had it all.
He, alone. Through sheer brilliance.
Eureka, indeed.
Reader reaction?
Did I believe it? No.
As a reader, I felt cheated.
How had he come to realise the keys to the mystery?
I might have missed something vital as I read.
I admit that.
But I don’t think I did. I wasn’t skim reading. I was enjoying the story and the many blind alleys the sleuth and I went down together.
Yes, I will admit that, when the answers were all laid out at the end, the plot did hang together pretty well. I could see that it made sense even though it was convoluted in the extreme. Some of the clues were in the text. But not all of them. Not enough of them.
How a novel can fall off a cliff
So how did the sleuth piece it all together? Essentially out of thin air?
I haven’t a clue.
And the author did not enlighten me.
He explained how the killings were done and why. He demonstrated motive and opportunity. Fine.
But never, at any stage, did he share how his sleuth had worked it all out. The author led me up through the intricacies of the crime, showed me the full solution and then…
Then he pushed me off into the void.
And I grumbled all the way down.
To be precise, the Eureka moment occurred on page 308 of a book of 338 pages. But the actual unravelling didn’t begin at the Eureka moment. The reader (me) had to wait for another chapter before it all began to happen and we finally got the answer.
Sort of.
Murderer, yes; explanation, no.
You may disagree, but I’d say the ending fell off a cliff 🙁
So no gold star from this reader.
Tips to avoid that fall off a cliff?
1 Don’t deliberately withhold clues from the reader.
Include the necessary clues somewhere, somehow. It’s OK to conceal them within the text. As a reader, I never skim read any list of things in a crime novel because that’s often where a crucial clue is hiding in plain sight.
And there are other tricks crime novelists often use to conceal clues. For example, the clue may be mentioned in passing in dialogue that then goes on to explain some aspect of the crime that appears infinitely more important at that moment. So the crucial clue is easily overlooked. The reader may not clock the clues at the time but will often remember them once the book concludes and think, “Ah yes. It was there all the time. I could have worked it out myself.”
2 It’s not OK to lie to the reader.
Though it is OK to misdirect the reader. By all means, produce evidence that points to a suspect who is not the actual murderer. But don’t say categorically that character X was at the scene of the crime if X wasn’t actually there.
Of course, there are times when a character in the story will lie to the sleuth. That’s allowed and par for the course. But the sleuth should be testing all the statements made against other evidence and establishing whether or not they can be relied on. Standard procedure, no? And the reader should be party to the results of that. Otherwise, refer to 1 above.
3 Most importantly, take time and space to explain the Eureka moment.
By that I mean not just the criminal’s motive, means, opportunity etc but how the sleuth got to the solution.
Think Miss Marple at the end of one of her mysteries where the assembled friends/police ask how on earth she worked it out. And she then tells them, in detail, how she got there. It may well involve a tedious story about Mabel Unworthy and the village butcher but it will explain Miss Marple’s thinking process. And it will satisfy the reader.
Sadly, my award-winning author failed on all 3 of these. Satisfied reader? What do you think?
PS Since concocting the above rant, I’ve read another crime novel which did not fall off a cliff. It was A Case Of Mice and Murder, a debut novel by Sally Smith KC, set in the Temple, in London, in 1901. I enjoyed it hugely and the author does all of the things included in my Tips above. I even noticed a crucial clue (something mentioned in dialogue, in passing) and was able, at the end, to tell myself I’d done well to do so. Not all that well, though, because I misinterpreted the crucial clue and attributed malign motives to one of the characters. In so doing, I sent myself down a blind alley. But that was my own fault. (The scope for misdirection was in the text, though. Well done to the author for that.)
I recommend Sally Smith’s book. It’s an excellent and intriguing (though rather one-paced) read. Her reclusive sleuth, Sir Gabriel Ward KC, may not appeal to everyone but I found him interesting and, eventually, quite endearing.
I know exactly what you mean, Joanna. I’ve recently read several crime novels recommended by a friend of mine. The first one was very good, so I bought another two. And in both of those, particularly the last one, the central “detecting” character who was assisted by a retired and an active police detective, solved the murder in his mind — but didn’t explain it until the end when he was given “the final piece of the puzzle” — none of which had been shared with the reader until the end. And it infuriated me. So that was the last book of his I’m buying.
Precisely what drives me up the wall, too. And, for some reason, the editors don’t pull the authors up on it which is, in some ways, even worse.
This is absolutely brilliant, Joanna. If I ever write my Cosy Luddite crime novel I shall have your three DON’Ts pinned above my desk in day glo scarlet.
And I completely agree with you about Sally Smith’s Mice and Murder. Deeply satisfying plot and an endearingly courteous picky loner as detective hero. (I’ve read Book 2 and he’s coming along very nicely, in the character department too.)
I too have read book 2 which I thought was better than book 1. My only criticism is that they are both rather one-paced but I can live with that and, as long as she continues in this vein, I’ll buy more.
Thank you, Joanna. I’m just lurching into my fifth crime novel and have learned a lot but, like Sophie, I will printing out the three don’ts and pinning them to my “criime board”. Note to self – must get red thread.
I have read your first 4, Liz, and you do not fall into any of my 3 traps. Your endings are totally satisfying even though, in all of them, I as a reader failed to see who dunnit. But that was my fault. The clues were there. I just didn’t pick them up.
A timely reminder, Joanna, thank you. It’s so easy for writers to get carried away with ending their novel and forget to tie up all the loose ends. Attention to detail on is so important!
… And that includes explanations, in the case of mysteries. Thanks Joanna for such good advice.
It’s easy to hand out advice. It’s more difficult, as the author, to keep to it as we all know.
True of all novels, as you say, Sarah/Melinda. It’s important to keep track of all the loose ends in one’s plot and tie them off at the end. Unless, of course, one is a loose end for the next book…