I am LOVING working with publishers! I mean, I daresay not all publishers are as great as mine, and obviously it was God who led me to them for this book, so of course I shouldn’t be surprised that He knew what He was doing there. But it is just adding so much strength to my book to be working as a team, all with one desire to make it as good as it can be. I’m really grateful!
There has only been one real area where we’ve not agreed – and the title above rather gives it away. Now, the disagreement is all very amicable and mutually respectful, so don’t worry that we’ve fallen out because we have not. In fact, this blog post was their idea! But it has surprised me how much this matters to me, when I have been more than happy to go along with most of their suggestions, recognising them all as improvements. Just not this one.
You see, it is no secret that I have a passionate dislike of cliffhanger endings. You know the ones: you read a novel, it seems to be coming to a decent conclusion, then a new drama is introduced near the end, depriving the reader of the satisfaction of resolving the story, and forcing them to buy the next book in the series to find out what happens. I despise them. I have long held the opinion that they are a cheap tactic resorted to by authors with no confidence in their own skill to bring a reader back for a sequel. In fact they annoy me so much that if I read a book – no matter how well-written – that leaves me hanging, I deliberately do not read any more in the series.

But being brutally honest I did actually draft an epilogue with somewhat of a cliffhanger, or at least that introduced a new drama for a potential sequel (as a reader I don’t find epilogue cliffhangers AS offensive, though I still dislike them). I wrote mine because the idea came to me for a sequel while I was writing my novel, and I wanted to capture the essence of the next potential plotline while the characters were fresh in my mind. And when I submitted my manuscript to my publishers I included it to give them an idea of possible sequels, but also said I did not want to publish it as part of the novel. Unfortunately, they loved it and wanted to include it. So we have had a bit of a back-and-forth discussing the way ahead, and I have been doing some more research too. Turns out, this is not a new dispute in the literary world.
Arguments for, as far as I can tell, seem to fit into the following general areas (these are not all coming from my publishers, but include ones I have found during further research):
1/ In real life things do not end with everything tied up with a neat little bow. Open endings are more realistic.
2/ Without open endings the story is artificially complete, and there is no reason for anyone to read the next one.
3/ Cliffhangers sell sequels.
4/ They are especially important when writing a series, otherwise people won’t realise it’s a series, and won’t know to look for the sequel(s).
5/ Adding an epilogue with a cliffhanger gives people something to reflect on, to wonder how the characters will address the issues, making them live longer in the reader’s mind.
6/ If readers don’t like epilogues, they won’t read them.
7/ Many readers like cliffhangers, feeling they add to the book.
My responses/ arguments against:
1/ Yes, an element of open-ending can be natural – and as a reader I do not need everything resolved; just a lack of cliffhangers shoe-horned in during the closing chapters in order to deprive me of resolution and coerce me into buying the next book.
2/ Many readers read for escapism. We read in part for the very sense of resolution and closure that can be so elusive in real life. If we are given the resolution we crave, we will trust the author and are more likely to come back for sequels!
(Also, I am not yet committed to writing a sequel, and would not want to risk withholding resolution permanently.)
3/ *screams internally* (Is it too extreme to compare that approach to a drug-pusher hoping to improve future sales by creating a demand that wasn’t there before?!)
4/ I kind of see this point, but when I read a book that I really enjoy, I always go looking for more books – sequels or otherwise – by the same author, guaranteeing further sales. I don’t need to be forced back by the deliberate withholding of resolution. In fact, cliffhangers have the opposite effect on readers like me, and guarantee no future custom!
5/ Hmmm maybe, but also – of my most recent reads that gave me proper book hangovers (where the characters and their world stayed with me long after the book ended), none had cliffhanger endings.
6/ I do like epilogues and always read them. But they do not necessarily have to include cliffhangers. I like them best when they include a further element of resolution, beyond the timeline of the main story.
7/ I mean, call it tit-for-tat, but this one’s kind of obvious, isn’t it? Many readers do not like cliffhangers, feeling they ruin the book. Ultimately, as that includes me, wouldn’t it be hypocritical for me to include one?
So essentially, I still see cliff-hanger endings as cheap and manipulative, and I would like to offer my readers more respect than that. HOWEVER, the one comment my publishers made that has caused me to stop and think where no other argument did, was that God gave me my epilogue just as surely as He gave me the rest of the story. And now I am wondering, am I making a big deal out of something that doesn’t need to be?
But what about you, dear reader? Do you find cliffhangers annoying? (again, I am not talking about naturally open endings, but the deliberate introduction of new drama that will only be resolved in the sequel). Or are you a fan? If you’re a writer, do you use them or not? (and why?)
All respectful chats welcome! I would LOVE to hear from you, whether we agree or not, because much as this is a strongly-held opinion of mine, I welcome the challenge of respectful disagreement. Opinions that cannot withstand challenge are only a flimsy sort of belief. And of course, if you can change my mind, it will make my fabulous publishers very happy 😉
Personal I strongly dislike cliff hangers, whereas open ends where you can wonder about the future of characters is quite fun, like “I wonder if they will be safe after this adventure?” But I have read many sequels and I always picked up the next book or pre ordered purely because I enjoyed the story in the first one and love the characters and want to be part of their lives again. Where as cliffhanger are just miserable, I want a good ending complete!
i can think of books where there were cliff hangers and then I had to wait years for the next book and I have lost all emotional momentum with the plot and feel obliged to read the story again just to remember what had happened!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree Rachel. I hate cliffhangers but welcome a carefully (i.e., subtle) epilogue (i.e., the story’s resolution).
The key that unlocks the difference is shifting from the much-hated cliffhanger to depositing a thought-provoking (i.e., dramatic) question into the minds of readers. The cliffhanger is an on-the-nose irritation, but the dramatic question serves as a chin-rubbing thought.
Instead of focusing on how the event will conclude in the next book, the reader wonders how the story thread will continue in the series.
The satisfying ending of the story sells the next book, not the cliffhanger. You leave them with the feeling that want more from you, especially if they love the characters.
LikeLiked by 1 person