Forum: Author Hangout

So you'd agree with me, since no one was ever in dire peril at the end of a chapter I submitted, I never ended a chapter with a cliffhanger?

Yes, I agree. It's the conflict that keeps readers reading. There's always a main one outstanding. The reader keeps reading to find out if the protagonist will succeed or fail. That's not a cliffhanger. That's the plot's conflict.

Depending on the length of a story, you also have sub-conflicts. One is resolved and another pops up. Again, it's what makes the story interesting and keeps the reader reading.

IMO, the only time a cliffhanger is annoying to a reader is if the next chapter isn't available and they have to wait. That was the case with the movie serials. You see it sometimes in a TV episode, sometimes the last of the season.

I used to write comic scripts. There are multiple panels (the boxes) on each page. The last one typically is a cliffhanger to get the reader to turn the page.

You see it sometimes in a TV episode, sometimes the last of the season.

One of the most (in)famous versions of that was in the TV series 'Dallas'. Who shot J.R. was a huge topic at the time, and what ended up making the practice of cliffhangers at the end of a season popular.

For those too young, this was back in 1980, when we didn't have a lot of channels to watch - and I was still in college but living at home, so I didn't get a lot of choice on my TV selection, either. We could pick up all of five channels on our antenna ...

Who shot J.R. ... ended up making the practice of cliffhangers at the end of a season popular.

Seasons lasted a bit longer back then too

We could pick up all of five channels on our antenna ...

Must have been a metropolitan area. We only got three channels and had to turn the antenna depending on which station we wanted!

The sad thing is, back then there was always something good on and you had to decide which show you REALLY wanted to watch. Now, there are hundreds of channels with not much of anything worth watching.

with the male and female leads in the middle of a major argument

And that's not a live and death situation for the guy? LOL

So you'd agree with me, since no one was ever in dire peril at the end of a chapter I submitted, I never ended a chapter with a cliffhanger?

It's not only dire peril, it's any situation which leaves the reader wanting to know the outcome of an event. For example, ending a chapter with one character asking another to marry them, leaving the reader in suspense as to the answer.

AJ

It's not only dire peril, it's any situation which leaves the reader wanting to know the outcome of an event.

In the draft of my first novel, I ended a chapter with the cop staking out a church. I thought it would be good suspense. It was too good. My Beta reader skimmed through the next chapter because she wanted to know why he was there. I ended up providing that information earlier in the published version.

since no one was ever in dire peril at the end of a chapter

Dire peril wasn't necessary. Some form of risk or hazard was. The villain showing up at the end of the installment to seize the family estate was the danger in some cases.

ETA: I'm referencing the early cliffhangers in the silent films. The definition has evolved as evidenced by the former posts.

I thought it started with the radio serials

I don't know where it started, but I do recall the radio serials. I don't recall them that clearly, but I do recall reruns of the silent movies.

I don't know where it started, but I do recall the radio serials. I don't recall them that clearly, but I do recall reruns of the silent movies.

Comics used to do that, too.

Ending a written chapter in a serial to leave people in suspense apparently started with Dickens. The actual term of cliffhanger was from an author who literally left a character hanging from a cliff in his serial. But (and this is what I thought) it really came into popular use with silent films (which predated radio serials).

Which work of Dickens?

The Old Curiosity Shop.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/serial-thriller/309235/

Before the arrival of the 40th and final installment of The Old Curiosity Shop, in 1841, American readers of the series were forced to wait. And wait. And wait—not just for Charles Dickens to finish his story, but for his completed work to cross the Atlantic. When the ship bearing the resolution of the series finally docked in New York, a mob desperate to learn the fate of the tale's protagonist, Little Nell, stormed the wharf. The ensuing scene would make a modern-day publisher swoon: a band of readers passionately demanding to learn how the story ends.

The Old Curiosity Shop owed its narrative power not just to the genius of Dickens but also to a certain type of ending: the cliffhanger.

I'm referencing the early cliffhangers in the silent films. The definition has evolved as evidenced by the former posts.

Note: the term 'cliffhanger' didn't originate in silent movies, instead it was originally coined in reference to the weekly/monthly magazine where they'd run stories which ended dramatically mid-scene, expected you to wait and THEN pay more money to find out how the scene ended.

Actually, my editor praises cliffhanger endings. He views them as one of the great writing tools of an author.

While many readers regard them as the most used tool of the poor writer because they feel the only way to keep the reader interested it to be leaving an unfinished action at that point.

In modern writing the term cliff hanger is used to refer to where you start an action right at the end of a chapter, then continue the action in the next chapter or a later chapter. Wes Boyd's Snowplow Extra has a lot of cliff hangers in it where the action is left to a later chapter, read it for some classic examples.

Each chapter is supposed to be complete in itself in regards to the minor actions and activities within it, and having it end in the middle of an active scene violates that concept. This doesn't mean the main conflict or sub-plot conflicts have to be finished within the chapter, but the scene has to be completed within the chapter.

The typical type of cliffhanger you see today is chapter 3 will be about something happening at Place A, the action there finishes and the main character leaves Place A to go to Place B so he gets in his car drives down the street, and a car pulls out of another spot to race at his while people shoot at him from the car - end of chapter. The next chapter may pick up the scene or it may switch to another character doing something else, and when you come back to the car chase scene it picks up right from where the other chapter ended and continues on.

In the situation above the way most good authors do that is to have the chapter end with the main character getting into his car to close out the first chapter, the events after the main character starts the car are part of the chapter with the car chase.

If you have the start of a scene in one chapter and the end of the scene in another chapter it simply shows you made a chapter break where you shouldn't have, so you split a single chapter in two.

While cliffhangers split between consecutive chapters in a completed story may not be very annoying while reading the full story, posting the story a bit at a time with them will annoy a lot of readers who will dump the story at the second cliffhanger regardless of how much they like the rest of it. Also, cliff hangers in non-consecutive chapters will often see a story dumped as soon as it's seen.

The other thing to keep in mind is only a very small percentage of readers will actually write to the author to complain about something, most will simply dump the story if they don't like something, or they'll score it low.

If you have a scene that starts in the chapter but doesn't end within the chapter it's a cliff hanger - it's that simple. All scenes started in the chapter are to be finished by the end of the chapter.

Where can I find that rule?

It's in all of the How to write books and classes about how to write a good document or story. It's right in there with the stuff on using good grammar.

@Ernest Bywater
All scenes started in the chapter are to be finished by the end of the chapter.
@robberhands
Where can I find that rule?

@Ernest Bywater
It's in all of the How to write books and classes about how to write a good document or story.

That's strange. I googled the rule and couldn't find it anywhere.

While I could not find any references to not use cliffhangers, I did find references on how to write them, including this one from stratemeyer.org:

In the first part of this exploration of the Stratemeyer Syndicate's "Formula for Outlines," comparisons are made with the National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) goals of 50,000 words in 30 days.

The second part described the evolution of Syndicate outlines provided to its ghostwriters.

Here we can consider the details of the outlines, including ways to build suspense with "cliffhanger" chapter endings of various types and how the Syndicate spread them throughout a story.

While I could not find any references to not use cliffhangers, I did find references on how to write them

A quick google search for advice on how to divide stories/novels into chapters found different sources provided contradictory advice.

From a statistically small sample, I got the impression that more sources advocated finishing chapters on a cliffhanger (so the reader is compelled to start the next chapter) than advocated finishing chapters on a lull (so readers have a convenient point to come back to after going outside and fucking the goat).

By contrast, the dead-tree novels I read end most chapters on a lull, with perhaps only one or two chapters near the end finishing with cliffhangers as the story's main conflict approaches its resolution.

AJ

From a statistically small sample, I got the impression that more sources advocated finishing chapters on a cliffhanger (so the reader is compelled to start the next chapter) than advocated finishing chapters on a lull (so readers have a convenient point to come back to after going outside and fucking the goat).

Again, it's not so clear cut. As long as you resolve the central 'episode' within the one chapter, you're largely in the clear, however you don't need to end 'on a lull'. Instead, you relate how the action applies to the larger conflict and/or split it off into a new threat with a new subplot (in my previous example, with the character being treated in an ambulance while he's delusional and unsure what's happening, and reader are left wondering what his medical prognosis will be).

In that example, the first episode is the initial fight, which gets resolved, while the second episode is whether he'll survive, which is addressed in a separate chapter. In none of those chapters does the story ever resolve why he was attacked, or how to solve the conflict between the two individuals, as that's a larger story conflict.

If you have a scene that starts in the chapter but doesn't end within the chapter it's a cliff hanger - it's that simple. All scenes started in the chapter are to be finished by the end of the chapter.

That's the definition of 'episodic chapters', where chapters are defined by specific 'episodes' (rather than the streaming 'day-in-the-life' chapters many newbie authors tend to write). If you create a scene in a chapter, you resolve the scene before you switch to a new chapter, thus each chapter represents a new scene, even if that one episode lasts more than a single day.

The best way to avoid cliffhangers is to refine how you formulate your chapters, focusing on this 'episodic' approach rather than just writing until something 'naturally' resolves itself.

Also, cliff hangers in non-consecutive chapters will often see a story dumped as soon as it's seen.

Unless it's 'Game of Thrones', where the author on occasion keeps the reader on tenterhooks for whole books until a cliffhanger is resolved.

AJ

Each chapter is supposed to be complete in itself in regards to the minor actions and activities within it, and having it end in the middle of an active scene violates that concept.

Unless the POV changes at that point in a 3rd-limited multiple story. I did that in my first novel.

but does succesfully eliciting anticipation already justify to apply the term cliffhanger to a chapter ending?

If a chapter doesn't elicit any anticipation, the story must be pretty boring. However I think there's a subjective quality to deciding whether the anticipation rates as a cliffhanger.

AJ

Stories have a main plot and can have multiple subplots. The main plot is obviously spread across all of the story's chapters. The subplots can span two or more chapters. We authors like to end our chapters with some type of plot/subplot drama that will entice the reader to read the next chapter.

An important point (this isn't directed at you, REP), is that the typical way to avoid the problem of 'cliffhangers' is to resolve the subplot issues immediately, rather than leaving the reader in suspense.

An example of this, taken from one of my own stories, is I had a character attacked in his own house. The chapter ended with him defeating his opponent (by shattering his knee, thus ending his promising football career), just before a chair (thrown by his attacker) breaks over his head.

That scene is not a cliffhanger, because the scene brought up in that chapter is resolved, though it raises a new issue, because readers don't know whether the chapter survived the attack or not (they're essentially two separate issues, not a continuation of the one threat).

That's a good example of 'defusing' a potential cliffhanger, while still providing a reason to keep your readers reading.

Also, care must be taken on a site like SOL, since a 'continuous story' is often posted once a week/month/every couple of months), thus readers are not able to keep reading as easily as they could in a published book.

That scene is not a cliffhanger, because the scene brought up in that chapter is resolved, though it raises a new issue, because readers don't know whether the chapter survived the attack or not

Leaving a chapter with unanswered questions is what you must do, but those don't have to be cliffhangers.

But your example is a cliffhanger. Why is that different from a character dangling from a cliff and may die?

But your example is a cliffhanger. Why is that different from a character dangling from a cliff and may die?

Let's put it this way, there are ways to minimize the effects of potential cliffhangers, but the key is to always resolve the central conflict. If you introduce a separate conflict, which is only explored in a separate episodic chapter, it's a separate component which is addressed after the main chapter conflict has been resolved.

That approach offers the benefits of a cliffhanger, without violating requirement that you resolve conflicts dealt with in a given episode/chapter.

By the way, this is not an approach I've used often, as the example referenced was from early in my writing career, but I still typically end on crisis, but highlighting how it introduces a new unresolved and unaddressed conflict.

it's a separate component which is addressed after the main chapter conflict has been resolved.

Except when the main conflict is resolved the story is over. Unless the conflict in Chapter 1 isn't the main conflict, as with my STEELE JUSTICE novel.

Except when the main conflict is resolved the story is over. Unless the conflict in Chapter 1 isn't the main conflict, as with my STEELE JUSTICE novel.

Sorry, I meant the main chapter conflict, once again assuming we're dealing with episodic chapters.

My favorite example of how not to cliffhanger is from a Dan Brown novel. A main character boards a helicopter that's going to take her to meet with the President, and then the chapter ends with an ominous, "... but the helicopter would never arrive at the White House."

James Patterson uses the same 'technique'. It sucks majorly. :(

AJ

My favorite example of how not to cliffhanger is from a Dan Brown novel. A main character boards a helicopter that's going to take her to meet with the President, and then the chapter ends with an ominous, "... but the helicopter would never arrive at the White House." (Quoted from memory, may not be exact.)

That's the same technique used for a full season on Dallas, where they ended with an 'it was ALL a dream' episode, that essentially said, 'never mind, we were only kidding about the entire last season.

An author either believes in his story, or he's willing to do anything at all to promote his story. If they're unwilling to stand up for what was said in a story, I'd never read another word. (By the way, I'd quit watching Dallas a long time before the 'Who shot JR episode' ever took place.)

Someone correct me if this is internet BS.

You're corrected.

It wasn't the Who Shot JR that was a contract issue (Larry Hagman, by the way, played JR). It was later on, when they killed off Bobby Ewing, played by Patrick Duffy, that there was a problem. The main actor (again, Larry Hagman - aka Major Nelson from 'I Dream of Jeanie') was unhappy with the whole new season was going and gave the producers an ultimatum - either the producer goes, or he goes. He also wanted Patrick Duffy back.

Thus, the dream season.

Source:

http://www.ultimatedallas.com/episodeguide/dreamzonefaq.htm

That's the same technique used for a full season on Dallas, where they ended with an 'it was ALL a dream' episode, that essentially said, 'never mind, we were only kidding about the entire last season.

In the original "Roseanne," the John Goodman character died in the last episode. In the first episode of the new one, he and Roseanne are lying in bed (I think he's wearing an oxygen mask) and he says, "Why does everyone think I'm dead?"

(I'm actually not a fan of those, because the gap between books is too long. By the time the next book is actually available to read, the suspense has worn off and I've pretty much forgotten about the cliffhanger. When the next book starts posting, it's not, "Oo, I get to see what happened!", it's, "What was happening again? Oh, right. That.")

If I could write faster, I would, but I also like to have a book done before I post. :-) I totally get your point, and you aren't the first one to make it.

I'll offer one counterpoint - that the entire corpus is nearly 7,000,000 words. Anyone who starts reading now gets resolution to seventeen book-ending cliffhangers by simply clicking the next story. :-)

And, TBH, there are several books that don't end with cliffhangers, including Book 10 of AWLL1. So the overall series doesn't have a cliffhanger (though it has many unresolved plot arcs).

That's a rather dubious suggestion. How many complaints are enough to verify a complaint is valid? Compared to, how few complaints are not enough to prove their validity?

This gets a little dicey, as it's not so much 'how many complain', but precisely how to leave the reader hanging. Thus it's less about the specific number of complaints, but about the complaints themselves. If you're getting complaints, it means that readers are feeling manipulated. Given that there's generally a 3% feedback ratio (i.e. only 3% of SOL readers to respond to any story issue), you generally have to multiple each complaint by 97% to get a more realistic estimate to just how many readers are feeling manipulated.

But getting specifically to Switch's point, no one would read a story where the main conflict was resolved within the first chapter, so readers expect the main conflict to continue. They also expect new subplots to develop, so spinning off a new concern based on what happens in a given chapter isn't a problem. What is a problem, is leaving readers expecting a resolution to a specific problem, but then not delivering on it when you've led them to expect it.

Is that a 'fuzzy' enough answer for you?

I was just running an idea up a flagpole. The author appears to be resistant to changing their writing style. I thought this might reduce the irritation some readers feel without any need to change their writing style.

If he's getting repeated complaints from readers, assuming the 3% rule, it's probably a good idea to advise his readers that the story does contain cliffhangers and, if that bothers them, to not read the story until it's complete. That's akin to tagging a story with a 'cliffhanger' tag, so readers are warned before they start reading.

How much would you value the critique of someone who didn't read your story and still feels inclined to give advice to your readers?

I don't understand your criticism of my statement. Did you misunderstand my 3% (only 3% of readers will comment on a story), the cautioning of readers over objectionable material, or targeting readers who'll never read the story in the first place (i.e. people who don't like cliffhangers)? In either case, I never said anything about targeting someone who wouldn't read a story, just giving readers a 'heads up' that the story unfolding weekly contains cliffhangers (which would be easier to handle once the story is completed).

Geez, you can twist ANY statement way out of context!

I opened this thread with the question 'what is a cliffhanger'? I stated some people complain about cliffhangers in my story, whereas I don't think I ever wrote a chapter ending with a cliffhanger. So how do you come to the conclusion I use cliffhangers without to know the story?

You said that, even after denying your write cliffhangers to your readers, several continue to complain. Using my 3% figure (for those who communicate vs. the readers who don't) I'm saying those 'few people' might represent a LOT of people. Your assuming that it's simply a couple who don't know the difference is a risky assumption. If you have dissatisfied readers, it may represent a bigger problem than you're ready to admit.

I've also readers complaining about too short chapters and readers complaining about too infrequent new chapters. I'll start worrying when they stop complaining because it all means the same; they want to read more.

When NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt was asked about fans booing him, he replied that he didn't mind if they cheered or booed, but when they were silent, THEN it would be time to hang it up and go home.

Why stop at cliffhangers? Let's have tags for wallpaperhangers, clotheshangers and aircrafthangers too. They could all be gamechangers ;)

AJ

Or you could wait until the story is completely posted to start reading it.

A cliffhanger of a couple years is worse than one of a single year, is worse than one of a month, is worse than one of a couple days, but in each case, the readers feel manipulated.

If I stayed up long after my normal bedtime, reading chapter after chapter trying to find out what happened, only to discover that 'nothing happened', I'd burn the book!

In my example of an alternative, I was introducing a new conflict, not keeping the existing one going. It's the same thing I typically do when a MC is attacked, they defend themselves, but are then left wondering WHY they were attacked. That's not leaving the initial conflict unresolved (i.e. continuing the action into another chapter), it's instead creating a new subplot, which then needs to be investigated to determine what happened.

@Switch

In my novel LAST KISS, the protagonist crawls to his girlfriend after she's thrown from the car after an accident, holds her bloodied body, gives her a kiss, and blacks out.

There are a lot of unanswered questions, but I don't consider that a cliffhanger.

That's the exact same thing I did in my example, the one you objected to. In the chapter in question, the character gets knocked unconscious, and in the next chapter, we find he's being rushed to the hospital in a delirious state, unable to figure out what the various bits of information he's picking up mean.

That's the exact same thing I did in my example, the one you objected to. In the chapter in question, the character gets knocked unconscious, and in the next chapter, we find he's being rushed to the hospital in a delirious state

You said it was a life and death blow to the head. My guy just blacked out.

You said it was a life and death blow to the head. My guy just blacked out.

If it was a 'life or death blow', the story would be over, however the next chapter unfolds. I meant that the readers don't know what will happen to the MC, though he doesn't land in the ambulance until the next chapter.

The chapter doesn't continue the current conflict, it merely introduces a new conflict in a last few lines, without outlining exactly what it is. In that case, it's more of a 'teaser' line.

To be fair, Star Trek continuity was a huge pile of contradictory nonsense to begin with.

These were referred to as YATI. Yet Another Trek Inconsistency.

edited to add link