Satisfying Endings

Last week I had the chance to see the musical Wonderland at BYU.

It's a fairly recent musical; it premiered on Broadway in April 2011.

And closed a month later.

I can understand why. The music is very good, and the performers I saw had strong, excellent voices and acting chops. The musical does convey the sense of madness and danger that we associate with Wonderland. (It made me want to reread Heartless by Marissa Meyer.)

But the story was disappointing. There wasn't much of a narrative through the play, and the characters didn't seem to have much depth. Yeah, I know. It's a version of Alice in Wonderland, which one can argue doesn't have or need much of a narrative. I could have forgiven the lack of narrative except for...anyway, spoilers ahead.

The ending was a let down. The whole play is about an adult woman named Alice and how her life is essentially falling apart. Her daughter follows the White Rabbit into Wonderland and Alice follows, and while down there starts to remember the person she was as a child, becomes less selfish, etc. Not a bad idea. The Mad Hatter is female, and is the mirror image of Alice: the dark to her light, the evil to her good. She's the villain of this piece, and the story is supposed to end when Alice confronts and defeats her.

I was so ready for that ending. I could not wait for the showdown. It never came. Not really. They get ready for a chess battle, the Hatter kills the White Knight (the Wonderland version of Alice's husband), and while Alice mourns, the Queen of Hearts comes out and orders the game over and the Hatter's head removed. This happens as dictated.

Um, no? If the story is setting up for a literal and symbolic battle between Alice and her dark side, I want to freaking see it. I don't see an ending here where Alice has triumphed. It's like the live-action Beauty and the Beast - someone else took care of it for her. I don't feel a sense of completion.

See also the ending of the Twilight Saga. We are promised a battle we never get. Sure, characters learn and grow, but the narrative arc doesn't conclude and we're left feeling like we rode to the top of the first hill of a roller coaster, only to go no further. The rubber needs to actually hit the road. If the story has been about a character's growth, we need to see the character act in a new way that shows that growth. We need to see them face the problem that's been confronting them this whole time and come out on top, or at least fail trying.

I just read Empress of All Seasons by Emiko Jean.

This book gave me a good time. Excellent worldbuilding, and I loved reading a Japanese fantasy. The ending was satisfying in the way I just said: characters had to deal with the consequences of their actions, and the rubber had to hit the road. The characters in this book had to act on the growth they've had over the book, had to test themselves and show what they really cared for, all while the stakes were high, and I loved that.

The ending was a little disappointing, though, in other ways. While the story concluded, I felt like the author tried to shove too much character development, some of it unnecessary to the story, and too many themes and lessons into the end of the book. I felt a little preached to, in a weird and artificial way, which I didn't enjoy, but that's a post for another week.

The point is, endings are hard. I get it. But the ending is the final challenge not only for the writer but also for the characters. This is the moment when the readers see, in action, the way the characters have changed and grown. We see the stakes present and know this is the moment when the characters either win or don't. When the ending doesn't do this, the story fizzles. What has this whole book been building up to, anyway?

That's not something I want as a reader, and I sure don't want it as a writer. I want to leave my readers feeling like they just watched a fireworks finale: they know the story is over, but they're fully satisfied. Don't we all?