OK, I've got to chime in on My Sister's Keeper. The reason I hated the ending in the book is that the wrong sister died. There was no way the elder sister was going to survive EVEN with a kidney transplant because it wasn't her kidneys that were the problem. She had multiple forms of terminal cancer and there was no way getting a kidney was going to solve that. In addition there was no way the brother was going to end up having anything like a normal life as an adult. But that was in the book too.

The reason she killed off the spare parts kid was that once you couldn't get spare parts out of her, there was no longer any reason for that child to be allowed to live. After all, she wasn't a real child with the possibility of a real life and neither was her brother.

I hated the ending because the only person who was important in that family to the author was the sister that was sick. And I cared about them. I won't read any more books by that author because I understand that she pulls this stunt in a lot of her books. She has the ability to make you care about the characters, but not the ability to write an honest book.

I loathed Atonement. One poster states the Briony learns from her mistakes, and that may very well be true, but as the book is titled Atonement, I expect some atoning to occur. I'm sorry, but writing and publishing a book where the people you destroyed in life get a happy ending does not keep Briony from sucking as a person, especially considering that she didn't publish the book until she and the characters of said book were dead and gone. She never makes amends and she never brings the criminals to justice. The book should have been called Cowardice.

The Hunger Games! Such a great book, but like so many books do, it left me hanging.

I didn't like the ending to Steve Aylett's timeless classic "Slaughtermatic".

Someone upthread said that the surprise ending for Geraldine Brooks' Year of Wonders was an example of a successful surprise ending, and I have to disagree. I felt like the ending near ruined the book. It did not fit with what had gone on before, and the main character's relocation to a foreign land stretched credibility with me.

I actually thought that the ending to Time Traveler's Wife was very consistent with the characters.

I hated the epilogue/sneak peek to the sequel of the Princess Bride. Really, don't read it. It will ruin your day.

I agree with hating the ending of Bel Canto.

That book made me very angry at the end of it all.

I just finished reading Bel Canto and I had to add it to this list. I didn't love the book, but it was ok, and the regular ending was fine, if predictable. (The foreshadowing could be more accurately described as hitting the reader over the head with a hammer...repeatedly.) But the epilogue ruined the entire book for me. Patchett should have stopped at the end of the last chapter. The epilogue was horrible and completely beyond the realm of believability. I wish I hadn't read it at all.

I loved the ending to My Sister's Keeper. That whole book had me thinking about organ donation long after I finished the book!

The ending I hated was "The Time-Travler's Wife." Talk about wrapping things up quick. I invested in these characters for over 300 pages and I felt like the author finally said, "Well, I'm not really sure how to end this" and slapped on some crap-tastic ending! I really, really liked the book until I got to the ending. I hated it so much that for a little while I actually considered writing my own ending to the book but eventually thought "Why bother?"

I don't know why I disliked her so much, Gail. Everyone else in my book group liked the book and had a lot of sympathy for the main character. I think my feelings probably had something to do with how as she got older and more successful she treated everyone else as badly as she was treated when she was younger. But, the end just pushed me over the edge. It was so ridiculously unrealistic and unbelievable I just wanted to scream.

I remember the ending, and did think that it seemed like Golden just wanted to finish the book before the deadline hit. Other than that, it was a good book.

I have to re-read Memoirs of a Geisha -- it's been a while. I remember loving it but don't remember the ending.

Oh, Kristin, I really liked Memoirs of a Geisha...until the end. I didn't think she was an awful person, but I sure thought that ending was the absolute worst...just stupid and completely unrealistic and...well, you get the drift.

Emily - agreed! On the whole, I adore Hawthorne, but the man really seemed to struggle ending his novels. Throughout the book Hester is such a strong, independent, empowered character - and then he has her conclude her life's story with "and then she realized that someday men and women would be equal, but not now, and not starting with her." It's such a cop-out, and it works to negate the rest of the book's women-affirming sentiments.

By far the worst of Hawthorne's bad endings can be found in The Blithedale Romance. That last sentence just undoes the whole book.

I loved My Sister's Keeper, but I agree the ending was the weakest part of the book. I understand the movie has a different ending.

However, The Awakening is one of my favorite books of all time. The ending is tragic, but not sudden, abrupt, or out of character. If that book had a happy ending it wouldn't have worked--especially not in the time and place in which it took place.

Memoirs of a Geisha is one of the worst books I've ever read and the ending literally made me toss the book across the room. I hated that book and I really, really, really hated the ending. Not only was the ending unbelievable (come on, really?!?), but to reward such a horrible person with what she wanted just made me mad.

Maybe the point of all these endings is to make you uncomfortable...
A Separate Peace ended abruptly as well but that was the point. Perhaps the point of the build-up of some of these books is the let down.
Some books aren't meant to be warm, fuzzy and easy to read (Crime and Punishment I'm looking in your direction here). Sometimes they're meant to be upsetting, annoying, depressing and disappointing. Just sayin...
I think that it's interesting that these endings are expected to be wrapped up nicely for the reader.

And was it just me, or did the ending to The Scarlet Letter just suck?

Heather, The Awakening was awful for me, too. I was so angry/disappointed. I'm not a scholar who can pick apart the deeper meaning of things. I just saw a woman wasted. And I hated it.

I'm a little new here, but I just finished a book that had an ending so frustrating I threw it across a charter bus. Though that was partially through sheer frustration as well as anger towards the friend that recommended the book to me.

How to Be Good had such an unresolved, redundant ending to it that I couldn't help but hate it. I admit, the ending was probably the best way to go, but absolutely useless to a reader that actually wanted an ending to a book. It felt a bit like those movies that have a "sort-of ending" in case they want to make a sequel, but close things off just enough in case they don't make enough money on the first one.

The Awakening was another ending that, I admit, had me nearly crying in frustration. For the time period in which it was written, the ending was perfect, but in the society in which I've been raised, it seemed so entirely useless. I do appreciate the ending and generally like the book, but I had that longing for something more for Edna that was entirely crushed.

Mandy -- YES. My Sister's Keeper was quite abrupt, too. I hate it, because her books are interesting and I like how she develops characters, but the endings always just beat me up.

My Sister's Keeper (happened way to sudden. one sec she was alive, then dead, then book ends)

AND

Breaking Dawn (there should have been a fight)

Amanda, I just finished Jodi Picoult's "Handle With Care" and while I liked most of the book, the ending seriously pissed me off.

Hmm... endings I hated? Two books come immediately to mind. #1 is a recent read. Jodi Picoults Handle With Care. The final chapter of that book is why I will never read another Jodi Picoult book. Even if her books are well researched and not terribly written. I don't like being so manipulated. What a cheap stunt that ending was. It made everything which came before a complete waste of time, and therefore all the time and emotion that went into it was also a waste of my time.
#2 is Captain Corellis Mandolin, which I read a few years ago, and while my memory of the details of that book is fuzzy. I do remember the ending made me really mad. I LOVED that book, but when I read the end and realized the missed opportunity which had occurred I literally threw the book across the room. The only other time If have been tempted to do that was with Handle with Care. (book #1) I didn't because I was driving my car at the time. ( It was an audio book)

Totally! Poor Susan! Just for lipstick and stockings.

it's true, stephen king seems incapable of ending a book well. he'll create a great, creepy situation and then blow it completely at the end, it's uncanny.

nothing's worse than investing time in a long series only to have it peter out or completely flake at the end. the Everworld 12-book series was like that; i can't remember the details anymore but i remember it negated the effort of reading the series.

and of course, there's the famous horrid ending of the Narnia series. can't imagine what he was thinking. and poor susan!

Haha. I feel the same way about the "sneak peak" to the "sequel" at the end of The Princess Bride. You're just better off skipping it.

Oh, Emily, you've reminded me of "The Princess and Curdie." I'm dating myself. It's the sequel to "The Princess and the Goblin," both written about a thousand years ago for different sensibilities and before there was much in the way of children's literature. I read both many times as a kid, always sad about the tacked on coda. Skipped it entirely when I read the two books to my kids.

I always tell everyone; "Great books!! But don't read the last paragraph of the sequel!! It's entirely unnecessary!" (George MacDonald is probably griping and scowling in his grave right now: "Stupid modern readers don't understand how IMPORTANT that is...")

Stephen King isn't good at endings in general.

I'm not a big fan of Jodi Piccoult. All of her books seem to just be too similar to each other. And they're so... stereotypical? Lifetime? I don't know. I actually liked My Sister's Keeper, but I wasn't really satisfied with the ending. It seemed rushed or contrived. I think the whole reason I liked the book was for the brother, who was cool as hell and really touched my lonely teenage heart. (I read it in high school)

I hated the ending to Everfree. It is the third book in a trilogy, and it completely destroys the entire thing. I just pretend that I haven't read that one and that the series ended with Edenborn. It was a totally faked happy ending that was completely uncharacteristic of the characters and the series. He introduced new things, and then didn't do anything with them at all, and actually had the characters willingly ignore them in the end. That isn't like Halloween at all. And the whole Hope thing, and the sight.. ugg. It was terrible. I think that Sagan just got tired of writing that series and wanted to move on, so he threw that book together in one night and made up a terrible ending so he didn't have to think about it. I'm so mad at him for that.
Read the other two books, and stop. You'll be glad you did. I promise you won't miss anything.

Minnie wrote: "Just a thought, it says something about Margaret Mitchell that no-one has said that they disliked the end of Gone with the Wind. I think it is because having sketched Scarlett as a flawed and som..."

hmm, i've never mentioned gwtw's ending because i hated the whole book. but you're right -- the ending fit the storyline and characters.

Just a thought, it says something about Margaret Mitchell that no-one has said that they disliked the end of Gone with the Wind. I think it is because having sketched Scarlett as a flawed and somewhat shortsighted heroine, the ending was inevitable. I loathed the follow-up, can't even remember it's name and the ending was so stupid, I believe Miss Mitchell is turning in her grave.

The ending of My Sisters Keeper sucked major time. It felt like she had a deadline to meet or something."

Fascinating! To me, the ending of "My Sister's Keeper" was what made the book!

I absolutely HATED the ending of "The Partner" by John Grisham though.

Jackie wrote: "The ending to My sister's keeper felt sensational--a sell-out."

The ending of My Sisters Keeper sucked major time. It felt like she had a deadline to meet or something. Come on her sister recovered from a terminal illness!

Tom wrote: "Classical definition of tragedy is that the main character or characters end off worse than they started and the tragedy was of the character's own making, caused by his or her tragic flaw.

Don't forget Tolstoy's quote: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." I totally agree with your classic definition of tragedy and your comments about Atonement - I consider it the best book of the 21st century so far.

Classical definition of tragedy is that the main character or characters end off worse than they started and the tragedy was of the character's own making, caused by his or her tragic flaw.

Modern definition of tragedy (and I expect an argument here) is that the main character or characters go through a trying experience and learn something. They become a different person, possibly better, possibly not in a physical/financial/amorous sense, but definitely changed in some way by their experience.

If the character doesn't learn anything by his/her journey, then we the reader do.

If neither character nor reader learned anything or was not changed, then you've been wasting time and money. I mean, why bother?

Take Atonement by Ian McEwan, which I consider the best book written in the past 10-15 years. This definitely qualifies as a tragedy on all sorts of levels. Does the main character learn at the end? Definitely. Is she better off? Only by understanding or coming to terms with her tragedy, which is accomplished through her recounting/acknowledging her role in the tragedy. Thus the title of the book. I really think this is as close to a perfect book as one can find.

As for tragedy and happy endings, well, happy is a very relative term. Entirely contextual in books. And certainly different for each of us.

I'm all for tragedy when it serves a purpose and is a logical extension of what has been developed in terms of character, plot, etc. If I am wrung out and spent at the end of a novel, often I feel that is the sign of a truly successful effort!

My beef with the ending of Cold Mountain (without giving anything away) is that it seemed forced, as if someone decided that the readers needed a swift kick to the gut in order to make the novel worthwhile. Throwing in an inexplicable "twist" to feign drama seems cheap and lazy.

No Country for Old Men. Did it even have an ending? Did the publisher forget to include it? When the book was printed and bound, did somebody lose a few pages? Did Cormac McCarthy fall asleep and forget to write the ending he had in mind? Did he even have one in mind? Or was he so bored that he just stopped typing? While I was reading it, I kept thinking that I was reading a treatment for a movie by, say, how about the Coen brothers.

Why would your literacy IQ be based on your reading tastes? Everyone is different and I don't believe that liking a genre over another might mean that you have a higher or lower literary IQ. I usually don't like tragic endings, especially when they are pointless, however, tragedy serves to show character development, growth and the resiliency of the human spirit.

I didn't mean tragedy has NO place in fiction, and I do feel that tragedy adds to a lot of fiction. I loved "Heart of Darkness" and "Poisonwood Bible." My problem is, I do like to read a book without knowing the ending, but I am often looking for certain expectations to be met. Sometimes a complete suprise ending is great ("Year of Wonders") but often I will read the book knowing its pigeonhole.

So, if I know it's gothic horror, I figure some horrible stuff will happen, and if it's described as a "mournful, elegiac beauty," I figure some tragedy will occur. I don't really read Harlequins, but when I read other romances I am expecting 2 lovers to work it out somehow. Thank you, Adrianne, for your support.

I would agree with you that this does not reflect well on my maturity or my literacy IQ. But, oh, well. I do the best I can.

At this very moment I am reading a book without knowing its pigeonhole at all. Very suspenseful!

Erica, If you think tragedy has no place in fiction, you will be throwing out the greatest works ever written: "Anna Karenina," "Madame Bovary," "Wuthering Heights," much of Dickens, etc. Of course you could just stick to Jane Austen, I guess, or Harlequin romances. "Harry Potter" has a happy ending. Perhaps you should read book reviews or plot summaries before starting a book that is going to have a tragic ending.

Exactly! It felt gimmicky (if that's a word) and tacked-on. If a novel is a romance, it's a romance, and that's perfectly okay. No need to try and make it something other than what it is.

I was pretty cross at the end of Cold Mountain myself. I don't really see the need for a book to have a slap-in-the-face ending. I guess that's what makes "fine" contemporary literature out of a romance. (Roll eyes here.) Tragedy enough in real life; who needs people to be creating more in fiction?

Cold Mountain by Charles Frazier. I was slavishly devoted to every page until the ending. And I too literally tossed the book across the room in disgust!

Endings that made me angry - Disgrace.

Oh, and The Appeal by John Grisham.

Definitely wanted to hurl both books out the window.

Gretchen,
Didn't you realize at some point that Edgar Sawtelle was Hamlet? As soon as you discover that, you know how it is going to end.
Gerry C

i hated the ending of Huckleberry Finn too, not because of what DID happen, but because Twain's tone was becoming increasingly depressing and downhill, to the point that i was sure if it had gone on for another chapter or two, something would happen to kill Huck.

Tyran wrote: "One book that so totally irked me on the ending was The Historian by Elisabeth Kostova. The book itself was very well written and I loved the history and research that went into writing the novel ..."

I'll spoil it, sort of. Kostova turns Dracula into a totally boring NERD. I hated the ending. I suffered through 900 pages of scenery expecting some sort of a payoff when we finally met him and he was BORING!

Well, thanks, Tyran. Though I would like to support your opinion and rage in concert with you, maybe I'll skip the book altogether.

Anyone love the ending of Lost?

One book that so totally irked me on the ending was The Historian by Elisabeth Kostova. The book itself was very well written and I loved the history and research that went into writing the novel itself, but the ending KILLED the book for me! Why, oh why did she end it like that? Trying very hard not to spoil it for anybody else. But... grr...

I loathed the ending of Huckleberry Finn. That book never seemed to figure out exactly where it wanted to take itself, and it seemed like Twain just got bored with it one day and gave it up.

I didn't like the ending of Dragons of a Vanished Moon. It could have been a little more pleasant than the authors wrote it to be.