Consider the end of THE RETURN OF THE KING. It would have been possible for Tolkien to leave out the bit where the ring goes into Mt. Doom. He could have kept the point of view on the battlefield with the other main characters, waiting and hoping — until suddenly, off in the distance, the volcano blows. Someone could cry “Frodo’s done it, he’s destroyed the ring!” I suspect a great many readers, myself included, would have muttered something most unflattering to the author at that point and perhaps even flung the book across the room.

Obligatory scenes can occur at other places in a book than the end, of course. Another example from a fantasy novel: two characters are riding toward an important destination. Alas, the only road runs through the mountains in a pass known to be infested by bandits. What’s more, the enemies of the two characters are probably waiting there to ambush them. They head into the pass. Chapter Break! They are riding out of the pass, quite beaten up, to be sure, and talking about what a stiff fight they had, there in the pass. Why the editor allowed this writer to get away with this lapse, I don’t know. I sure wasn’t impressed enough to read another book in that series.

Nor does the obligatory scene have to be a large or violent confrontation or action sequence. It can be a simple emotional moment or a conversation. For instance, in real life history, Mary Queen of Scots and Elizabeth I never met. On stage (Sardou, I think) and in many movies, they have met, because hell, they really should have, and the audience wants to see it.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21514

Too many people think that everything digital is “the future” and thus somehow good. You know, the future could turn out kind of crummy. It has in the past.

So I was wondering, what do you all want in an ending? What are some of your favorite endings to long books or series? Which ones annoyed the hell out of you or disappointed you? Any thoughts on why you had these reactions?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/02/RVHDVM6J8.DTL&type=books

The reviewer professes to be bewildered by Chabon’s aggressive defense of genre because after all, Chabon himself is highly regarded, so why is he “fighting stale battles” ? Not so stale to the rest of us . . . Three cheers for Michael Chabon, say I, and let’s hope this reviewer eventually gets a clue from someone nicer than I.

Dear M(s, Mr?) Mcmahon,

I am NOT writing to complain about your posting spoilers, first off.

I was very surprised by your remark that the Potter books have “some of the trappings” of fantasy genre fiction but “transcend genre.” I can only conclude that you don’t know much about modern fantasy fiction, or about British “school stories,” such as the “Boys’ Own Paper” genre. The Potter books are a very clever, very well-done arrangment of motifs, themes, character types, and situations from both genres — to say nothing of their over-arching plot, which is typical, not original.

I’m not saying this to disparage them. They’re well done. But why you’d call them “literature” while sneering at the genre fiction that gave them birth is beyond me. As a writer of fantasy fiction, it bothers me when reviewers make that sort of dismissive statement, especially when they are reviewing a piece that most definitely fits into genre.

Yours,

Katharine Kerr

http://www.deverry.com/

Let’s get a little of our own back. Review the reviewers! or the person in your writing group who obviously cannot think to save his or her soul! You don’t have to name names if you don’t want to.

Let’s share our dudgeon, high or low.

My example: the fellow over on amazon.com who thought the magical system in Deverry was “obviously” derived from the Star Wars movies. No professional review has ever sunk as low as that, though some have generously if ignorantly credited me with making it all up.

“On Serious Literature”

http://www.ursulakleguin.com/Note-ChabonAndGenre.html

Much laughter,
Kit

Yesterday I fell prey to this syndrome in a particularly stupid way. THE SPIRIT STONE was reviewed in PUBLISHERS WEEKLY, and yes, I know that many authors would kill for a PW review, just to begin with. The review of TSS was very positive, but — ah, it’s that “but” that’ll get you every time. It started with “After the disappointment of THE GOLD FALCON . . . ”

Now, have I been gloating over getting a good review of STONE in PW? Are you kidding? No, I’ve been obsessing over the fact that an unnamed reviewer made a gratuituous slap at its predecessor, which has been out and selling okay for a year. Apparently said reviewer thought FALCON was too simple and straightfoward, after my editors had bludgeoned me into making it that way, so perhaps that’s why I’m so brought down? No, I’d obsess on it even if the person had made some totally off-the-wall comment.

Anyone else here have this twist in their psychology?

And, as a side note, isn’t it cowardly of reviewers not to sign their reviews?