I'm fairly certain the majority of book readers would agree with the claim that when one spends a certain amount of time with a character (or characters), one becomes very attached to said character or characters. After spending hours and days inside these fictional people's minds, feeling their feelings and thinking their thoughts, following them on every step of an arduous journey and every moment of development and personal growth, a reader begins to feel a strong emotional attachment to these characters. One might say that, depending on the believability of the character's thoughts and actions and overall presentation, a reader begins to feel that the character is someone whom they've grown fond of and connected with, like a traveling companion whom one has gotten to know and become quite close to.
When we as real life human beings grow attached to someone and form bonds, it matters to us what happens to these people. We feel their apprehension when swarms of Dead Hands are nearby, acutely experience their terror when confronting a Stilken for the first time, rejoice with them when they're reunited with a loved one (or someone we desperately ship them with xDDD), and suffer the devastating prospect of their imminent demise when they decide to make a grave sacrifice. We care about what happens to these characters, just as we would care about what happens an old friend.
We especially would like to maintain contact with said friend if s/he had to move away, or depart for a long period of time. We want to keep up that emotional bond, at least for some sense of closure. "What's up with you? Did you get a new job? A degree? What's your new place like? You have a boyfriend/girlfriend now? You got married???? That's awesome!!! Tell me about it!" It's something we human beings simply need as communal creatures: we need that sense of completeness, that knowledge that even though the closeness has come to an end, the other person's life goes on - and we can still share some small part of it, and keep some sort of connection.
Well, since we as readers form attachments to the characters we read about, it only stands to reason that we need the same sort of closure when a story ends. The companionship and the nearness to the character has drawn to an all-too-soon close; now we need that sense of completion, the few scraps of information to remind us that their personal story isn't over yet, that life goes on for them, and that a small connection can still be maintained. It's the literary equivalent of leaving a close friend with a phone number or email address, or promising that they'll still Skype and chat online every once-in-a-while. It's only fair - we've been with them so long!
Now, with all that in mind...
Garth Nix, why must you end your story without giving ANY explanation whatsoever as to what happened to the characters afterward????? I've been with most of them for two whole books, and a few of them for as many as three! We've grown to know them intimately, feared what they feared, loved what they loved, cared about them as if we knew them in real life!! Would it really be all that difficult to at least provide a bloody epilogue, so we know what they did with their lives after the battles were fought and won and taken care of? For goodness' sake - would it cause the heavens to quake and the universe to wink out of existence if you simply told what happened after all the dust settled, instead of leaving us at the scene of the climax immediately after all the action has happened?
Now, I understand that it's the author's prerogative to write whatever s/he deems fit: that ultimately, the writing is a work of art, and a personal expression of the writer's inner thoughts. The writer has no obligation to alter that expression for anyone, and especially not to satisfy fans who are only participating in the full creation that the writer envisions and experiences in his/her own mind. To argue otherwise would be a blasphemy against the very practice of writing as an art form.
However, an author conveys a message with his/her words. Whether it's an observation about humanity and society, or a story about fictional characters, all writers communicate some sort of message; and it's only common courtesy to finish a message once one has begun. I might be completely mistaken in saying this, but it seemed as though the message conveyed through your trilogy was all about the journey of certain characters in growing in their persons and bringing down the evil which threatens their world. All well and good - the message was conveyed. But such a message about these characters can only be properly concluded with an actual conclusion; some assurance that their efforts were lasting, and that battle really did end there and that they didn't collapse and die from exhaustion two minutes afterward.
When friends or loved ones have to leave, they give us some form of maintaining communication. It's an unspoken gesture that brings meaning and completion to the message they've been giving us this entire time: "I care about you, and this journey we've been on was worth it to me." In the same manner, readers need the same conclusion to the message about the characters that they've been invested in for hours, days, and sometimes weeks.
This isn't about me as a fan. It's about me and all your readers who got to know your characters, and metaphorically want to find them on Facebook after the journey has ended. It's about all those of us who formed emotional attachments, and need closure.
From one writer to another: I cry FOUL.
It was a magnificent trilogy - now where's the real ending?
Read "Across the Wall" by Garth Nix. I absolutely love his books.
ReplyDelete