Monday, February 11, 2008


I'm closing in on the end of Wolfsbane 2: Leader of the Pack. I seem to be caught in the never-ending ending though...

I could wrap everything up quickly and relatively cleanly, but leave myself with the feeling that I've 'wrapped it up' or I could draw it out a bit and hopefully give a little more closure and some more satisfaction to the ending without making it seem like I'm dragging it out.

I'm not trying to fill up word count, my characters just don't seem to want to leave the stage yet.

Do you ever want to say to your characters, "Enough already, you're done." Or do you feel that everything should play out as long as it takes to play out? Have you ever read a book and felt like the scenes had been artificially stretched to make them fit between the front and back covers which had to be a certain width apart? I have...and I don't want to do that with this story.

How do you know when enough is enough? If you had to choose, would you prefer a story that ended somewhat abruptly, but with all the ends tied up, or one that went on to give you just a little bit more than you really needed to feel fulfilled?

I know the best answer is neither, but if you had to choose? I guess I'd go for the little bit extra.


Jen Baum said...

I'd go for the abrupt end (that's just my personality) whether it's in a book, movie or play, over the long, drawn out, suck all the life out of the ending ending.

Like the last Harry Potter book -- did ANYONE enjoy the epilogue? (personally, I didn't like a hell of a lot about the book, but the epilogue REALLY irritated me)

That said -- write the longer ending. Give it a try -- you can always edit it down if you find it doesn't work.

Bernadette Gardner and Jennifer Colgan said...

Well, I finally finished it. Now somebody [whistles into the air nonchalantly] shall be asked to read it and tell me if the ending truly is irritating or not. LOL.

I wonder who that will be?