Bad guy wins in my book seriesPlot twist where the antagonist winsStandalone book, followed by seriesKilling the protagonist - should it be done?How to avoid the 'magic explanation' info dump in Fantasy novelsHow can I Switch Protagonists Between Books?Plot and characters conflict too muchHow to avoid the villain being a caricatureCharacter motivations facing death?Does it really serve a main character to give them one driving want?How do you earn the reader's trust?Plot twist where the antagonist wins
Does a Hand Crossbow with the Repeating Shot Infusion still require a Free Hand to use?
What will happen if I checked in for another room in the same hotel, but not for the booked one?
Closest Proximity of Oceans to Freshwater Springs
Why would anyone even use a Portkey?
Comment traduire « That screams X »
I hit a pipe with a mower and now it won't turn
Can a stressful Wish's Strength reduction be cured early by a Greater Restoration spell?
Do home values typically rise and fall at a consistent percent?
Can European countries bypass the EU and make their own individual trade deal with the U.S.?
I need help with pasta
How did they film the Invisible Man being invisible, in 1933?
What verb for taking advantage fits in "I don't want to ________ on the friendship"?
How to securely dispose of a smartphone?
Word ending in "-ine" for rat-like
Which is better for keeping data: primary partition or logical partition?
Why is Japan trying to have a better relationship with Iran?
Using “ser” without "un/una"?
If two black hole event horizons overlap (touch) can they ever separate again?
The warming up game
Thin wall to block LED light from hitting photodiode?
"sort -nu" on uuids
Why were the first airplanes "backwards"?
My colleague is constantly blaming me for his errors
Have any large aeroplanes been landed - safely and without damage - in locations that they could not be flown away from?
Bad guy wins in my book series
Plot twist where the antagonist winsStandalone book, followed by seriesKilling the protagonist - should it be done?How to avoid the 'magic explanation' info dump in Fantasy novelsHow can I Switch Protagonists Between Books?Plot and characters conflict too muchHow to avoid the villain being a caricatureCharacter motivations facing death?Does it really serve a main character to give them one driving want?How do you earn the reader's trust?Plot twist where the antagonist wins
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I have a five book series and I have plotted them all out. The main bad guy wins in the end. My problem with this is my girlfriend keeps telling me that bad guys winning will make readers upset that they invested in the heroes only for them to die or lose. So now I am second guessing the entire series.
Do you guys think that it would be ok for a bad guy to win in the end?
creative-writing characters novel series antagonist
|
show 6 more comments
I have a five book series and I have plotted them all out. The main bad guy wins in the end. My problem with this is my girlfriend keeps telling me that bad guys winning will make readers upset that they invested in the heroes only for them to die or lose. So now I am second guessing the entire series.
Do you guys think that it would be ok for a bad guy to win in the end?
creative-writing characters novel series antagonist
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
1
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
3
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
I have a five book series and I have plotted them all out. The main bad guy wins in the end. My problem with this is my girlfriend keeps telling me that bad guys winning will make readers upset that they invested in the heroes only for them to die or lose. So now I am second guessing the entire series.
Do you guys think that it would be ok for a bad guy to win in the end?
creative-writing characters novel series antagonist
I have a five book series and I have plotted them all out. The main bad guy wins in the end. My problem with this is my girlfriend keeps telling me that bad guys winning will make readers upset that they invested in the heroes only for them to die or lose. So now I am second guessing the entire series.
Do you guys think that it would be ok for a bad guy to win in the end?
creative-writing characters novel series antagonist
creative-writing characters novel series antagonist
edited 7 hours ago
Cyn
25.4k2 gold badges56 silver badges116 bronze badges
25.4k2 gold badges56 silver badges116 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
icefireicefire
274 bronze badges
274 bronze badges
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
1
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
3
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
1
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
3
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
3
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
1
1
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
3
3
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
3
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
It is perfectly fine for your story to end with the "bad guy" winning. Consider for example George Orwell's 1984:
He loved Big Brother
Complete and utter defeat. 1984 is one of last century's masterpieces.
@Wetcircuit mentions tragedy in a comment, for good reason. Tragedy does not necessarily imply that the "bad guys" win, but it does imply the "good guys" lose, or at best earn a Pyrrhic victory. Consider Antigone or Hamlet, or For Whom the Bell Tolls. In fact, tragedy is often considered a "higher", more "literary" form.
Yes, your readers are going to be upset when your characters die or lose. At least, hopefully they will have come to care about your characters, so their death would sadden them. But that is not a bad thing. One feels sorrow when one finishes For Whom the Bell Tolls, but does one go "what a bad, disappointing book?" Never! On the contrary - one is profoundly touched by that sorrow, one appreciates more the fleeting beauty of life through it. @Amadeus apparently looks for entertainment in the books he reads. Me - I look for art. I look for that which would touch me, and take me out of my comfort zone, and make me think. Formulaic "good guys defeat bad guys, then live happily ever after" bores me out of my mind.
Now, there is a question of what you're trying to say with your story. Why does your "bad guy" win? What does it all imply? If all your story suggests is futility, for example, then your readers might well be disappointed. But if your story does have something else in it, like any of the examples I've mentioned above, or countless others, then go ahead.
add a comment |
You can do it. But the expectation has to be set that this is possible, and it should be written like a tragedy. The market for such a book may be small, but it isn't nonexistent.
Check out the grimdark genre (third law series is an example). People do buy into it and even like it. But it's unlikely to sell as wide as something that has a feel good ending.
Or, go see the musical Hamilton.
As a writer you'll have to be excellent to even have a chance. And putting "the tragedy of" in your title might not be a bad idea.
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
add a comment |
No, I don't think it would be okay for a bad guy to win in the end.
Readers don't like it. They read for fantasy fulfillment. Happy endings outsell unhappy endings ten to one; publishers and studios don't like unhappy endings. They want something positive in the end.
Especially from a writer that has no following; if you were already a best-selling author or script-writer they might trust you and publish it anyway, but not if you are starting out.
In a series you can have a mixed ending; basically a draw. The hero doesn't win, but doesn't lose. But even that might not be satisfying.
If you are unpublished, you probably should not be writing a series, unless you intend to write all of it before trying to sell it. Publishers do not want to publish book one with an ambiguous ending if there is no guarantee you will actually finish the rest of the series. And if you are a beginner, they don't want to buy three or five books at once. And if your series has an unhappy ending, they don't want to buy any of it.
I suggest you write a book, even a somewhat long book, that stands on its own, with a reasonably happy ending in which the hero prevails, perhaps at a cost but prevails. The villain is defeated, perhaps escaping with their life and bound to return, but defeated.
The problem here is psychological. Reading fiction is escapism. What are readers trying to escape? The real world, where the bad guys win pretty much all the time! In real life, crime pays. People get away with rape and murder and abuse of others. Drug kingpins, dictators, corrupt politicians destroy innocent lives and live high on the hog without a single regret.
The real world is what we are trying to get away from. We want you to make your story and setting believable, and the dangers feel real, but in the end we don't want the realism of the hero chickening out, or the bad guys prevailing and continuing to create pain, misery and hopelessness. In the end, we want the wish fulfillment fantasy that the good will prevail and the nightmare will end.
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "166"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f46284%2fbad-guy-wins-in-my-book-series%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is perfectly fine for your story to end with the "bad guy" winning. Consider for example George Orwell's 1984:
He loved Big Brother
Complete and utter defeat. 1984 is one of last century's masterpieces.
@Wetcircuit mentions tragedy in a comment, for good reason. Tragedy does not necessarily imply that the "bad guys" win, but it does imply the "good guys" lose, or at best earn a Pyrrhic victory. Consider Antigone or Hamlet, or For Whom the Bell Tolls. In fact, tragedy is often considered a "higher", more "literary" form.
Yes, your readers are going to be upset when your characters die or lose. At least, hopefully they will have come to care about your characters, so their death would sadden them. But that is not a bad thing. One feels sorrow when one finishes For Whom the Bell Tolls, but does one go "what a bad, disappointing book?" Never! On the contrary - one is profoundly touched by that sorrow, one appreciates more the fleeting beauty of life through it. @Amadeus apparently looks for entertainment in the books he reads. Me - I look for art. I look for that which would touch me, and take me out of my comfort zone, and make me think. Formulaic "good guys defeat bad guys, then live happily ever after" bores me out of my mind.
Now, there is a question of what you're trying to say with your story. Why does your "bad guy" win? What does it all imply? If all your story suggests is futility, for example, then your readers might well be disappointed. But if your story does have something else in it, like any of the examples I've mentioned above, or countless others, then go ahead.
add a comment |
It is perfectly fine for your story to end with the "bad guy" winning. Consider for example George Orwell's 1984:
He loved Big Brother
Complete and utter defeat. 1984 is one of last century's masterpieces.
@Wetcircuit mentions tragedy in a comment, for good reason. Tragedy does not necessarily imply that the "bad guys" win, but it does imply the "good guys" lose, or at best earn a Pyrrhic victory. Consider Antigone or Hamlet, or For Whom the Bell Tolls. In fact, tragedy is often considered a "higher", more "literary" form.
Yes, your readers are going to be upset when your characters die or lose. At least, hopefully they will have come to care about your characters, so their death would sadden them. But that is not a bad thing. One feels sorrow when one finishes For Whom the Bell Tolls, but does one go "what a bad, disappointing book?" Never! On the contrary - one is profoundly touched by that sorrow, one appreciates more the fleeting beauty of life through it. @Amadeus apparently looks for entertainment in the books he reads. Me - I look for art. I look for that which would touch me, and take me out of my comfort zone, and make me think. Formulaic "good guys defeat bad guys, then live happily ever after" bores me out of my mind.
Now, there is a question of what you're trying to say with your story. Why does your "bad guy" win? What does it all imply? If all your story suggests is futility, for example, then your readers might well be disappointed. But if your story does have something else in it, like any of the examples I've mentioned above, or countless others, then go ahead.
add a comment |
It is perfectly fine for your story to end with the "bad guy" winning. Consider for example George Orwell's 1984:
He loved Big Brother
Complete and utter defeat. 1984 is one of last century's masterpieces.
@Wetcircuit mentions tragedy in a comment, for good reason. Tragedy does not necessarily imply that the "bad guys" win, but it does imply the "good guys" lose, or at best earn a Pyrrhic victory. Consider Antigone or Hamlet, or For Whom the Bell Tolls. In fact, tragedy is often considered a "higher", more "literary" form.
Yes, your readers are going to be upset when your characters die or lose. At least, hopefully they will have come to care about your characters, so their death would sadden them. But that is not a bad thing. One feels sorrow when one finishes For Whom the Bell Tolls, but does one go "what a bad, disappointing book?" Never! On the contrary - one is profoundly touched by that sorrow, one appreciates more the fleeting beauty of life through it. @Amadeus apparently looks for entertainment in the books he reads. Me - I look for art. I look for that which would touch me, and take me out of my comfort zone, and make me think. Formulaic "good guys defeat bad guys, then live happily ever after" bores me out of my mind.
Now, there is a question of what you're trying to say with your story. Why does your "bad guy" win? What does it all imply? If all your story suggests is futility, for example, then your readers might well be disappointed. But if your story does have something else in it, like any of the examples I've mentioned above, or countless others, then go ahead.
It is perfectly fine for your story to end with the "bad guy" winning. Consider for example George Orwell's 1984:
He loved Big Brother
Complete and utter defeat. 1984 is one of last century's masterpieces.
@Wetcircuit mentions tragedy in a comment, for good reason. Tragedy does not necessarily imply that the "bad guys" win, but it does imply the "good guys" lose, or at best earn a Pyrrhic victory. Consider Antigone or Hamlet, or For Whom the Bell Tolls. In fact, tragedy is often considered a "higher", more "literary" form.
Yes, your readers are going to be upset when your characters die or lose. At least, hopefully they will have come to care about your characters, so their death would sadden them. But that is not a bad thing. One feels sorrow when one finishes For Whom the Bell Tolls, but does one go "what a bad, disappointing book?" Never! On the contrary - one is profoundly touched by that sorrow, one appreciates more the fleeting beauty of life through it. @Amadeus apparently looks for entertainment in the books he reads. Me - I look for art. I look for that which would touch me, and take me out of my comfort zone, and make me think. Formulaic "good guys defeat bad guys, then live happily ever after" bores me out of my mind.
Now, there is a question of what you're trying to say with your story. Why does your "bad guy" win? What does it all imply? If all your story suggests is futility, for example, then your readers might well be disappointed. But if your story does have something else in it, like any of the examples I've mentioned above, or countless others, then go ahead.
answered 7 hours ago
GalastelGalastel
40.1k6 gold badges117 silver badges219 bronze badges
40.1k6 gold badges117 silver badges219 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
You can do it. But the expectation has to be set that this is possible, and it should be written like a tragedy. The market for such a book may be small, but it isn't nonexistent.
Check out the grimdark genre (third law series is an example). People do buy into it and even like it. But it's unlikely to sell as wide as something that has a feel good ending.
Or, go see the musical Hamilton.
As a writer you'll have to be excellent to even have a chance. And putting "the tragedy of" in your title might not be a bad idea.
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
add a comment |
You can do it. But the expectation has to be set that this is possible, and it should be written like a tragedy. The market for such a book may be small, but it isn't nonexistent.
Check out the grimdark genre (third law series is an example). People do buy into it and even like it. But it's unlikely to sell as wide as something that has a feel good ending.
Or, go see the musical Hamilton.
As a writer you'll have to be excellent to even have a chance. And putting "the tragedy of" in your title might not be a bad idea.
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
add a comment |
You can do it. But the expectation has to be set that this is possible, and it should be written like a tragedy. The market for such a book may be small, but it isn't nonexistent.
Check out the grimdark genre (third law series is an example). People do buy into it and even like it. But it's unlikely to sell as wide as something that has a feel good ending.
Or, go see the musical Hamilton.
As a writer you'll have to be excellent to even have a chance. And putting "the tragedy of" in your title might not be a bad idea.
You can do it. But the expectation has to be set that this is possible, and it should be written like a tragedy. The market for such a book may be small, but it isn't nonexistent.
Check out the grimdark genre (third law series is an example). People do buy into it and even like it. But it's unlikely to sell as wide as something that has a feel good ending.
Or, go see the musical Hamilton.
As a writer you'll have to be excellent to even have a chance. And putting "the tragedy of" in your title might not be a bad idea.
answered 8 hours ago
KirkKirk
6,7101 gold badge9 silver badges38 bronze badges
6,7101 gold badge9 silver badges38 bronze badges
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Why Hamilton? I did not have the impression that: a) there was a bad guy, b) that the bad guy wins.
– NofP
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Burr, the vice president of the United States, shot his political rival and was never charged or convicted. Yes his political career was over, and maybe you have a more black and white definition of bad guy, but the point is that's a modern and very popular tragedy where the bad guy sort of wins.
– Kirk
6 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
Definitively I have a more black and white definition of bad character. Also, it is not that Burr went sniper-mode. They fought in a duel, and they did so in a place and in a manner conducive to the expectation of avoiding prosecution. Chance is perhaps more to blame than Burr himself.
– NofP
5 hours ago
add a comment |
No, I don't think it would be okay for a bad guy to win in the end.
Readers don't like it. They read for fantasy fulfillment. Happy endings outsell unhappy endings ten to one; publishers and studios don't like unhappy endings. They want something positive in the end.
Especially from a writer that has no following; if you were already a best-selling author or script-writer they might trust you and publish it anyway, but not if you are starting out.
In a series you can have a mixed ending; basically a draw. The hero doesn't win, but doesn't lose. But even that might not be satisfying.
If you are unpublished, you probably should not be writing a series, unless you intend to write all of it before trying to sell it. Publishers do not want to publish book one with an ambiguous ending if there is no guarantee you will actually finish the rest of the series. And if you are a beginner, they don't want to buy three or five books at once. And if your series has an unhappy ending, they don't want to buy any of it.
I suggest you write a book, even a somewhat long book, that stands on its own, with a reasonably happy ending in which the hero prevails, perhaps at a cost but prevails. The villain is defeated, perhaps escaping with their life and bound to return, but defeated.
The problem here is psychological. Reading fiction is escapism. What are readers trying to escape? The real world, where the bad guys win pretty much all the time! In real life, crime pays. People get away with rape and murder and abuse of others. Drug kingpins, dictators, corrupt politicians destroy innocent lives and live high on the hog without a single regret.
The real world is what we are trying to get away from. We want you to make your story and setting believable, and the dangers feel real, but in the end we don't want the realism of the hero chickening out, or the bad guys prevailing and continuing to create pain, misery and hopelessness. In the end, we want the wish fulfillment fantasy that the good will prevail and the nightmare will end.
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
add a comment |
No, I don't think it would be okay for a bad guy to win in the end.
Readers don't like it. They read for fantasy fulfillment. Happy endings outsell unhappy endings ten to one; publishers and studios don't like unhappy endings. They want something positive in the end.
Especially from a writer that has no following; if you were already a best-selling author or script-writer they might trust you and publish it anyway, but not if you are starting out.
In a series you can have a mixed ending; basically a draw. The hero doesn't win, but doesn't lose. But even that might not be satisfying.
If you are unpublished, you probably should not be writing a series, unless you intend to write all of it before trying to sell it. Publishers do not want to publish book one with an ambiguous ending if there is no guarantee you will actually finish the rest of the series. And if you are a beginner, they don't want to buy three or five books at once. And if your series has an unhappy ending, they don't want to buy any of it.
I suggest you write a book, even a somewhat long book, that stands on its own, with a reasonably happy ending in which the hero prevails, perhaps at a cost but prevails. The villain is defeated, perhaps escaping with their life and bound to return, but defeated.
The problem here is psychological. Reading fiction is escapism. What are readers trying to escape? The real world, where the bad guys win pretty much all the time! In real life, crime pays. People get away with rape and murder and abuse of others. Drug kingpins, dictators, corrupt politicians destroy innocent lives and live high on the hog without a single regret.
The real world is what we are trying to get away from. We want you to make your story and setting believable, and the dangers feel real, but in the end we don't want the realism of the hero chickening out, or the bad guys prevailing and continuing to create pain, misery and hopelessness. In the end, we want the wish fulfillment fantasy that the good will prevail and the nightmare will end.
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
add a comment |
No, I don't think it would be okay for a bad guy to win in the end.
Readers don't like it. They read for fantasy fulfillment. Happy endings outsell unhappy endings ten to one; publishers and studios don't like unhappy endings. They want something positive in the end.
Especially from a writer that has no following; if you were already a best-selling author or script-writer they might trust you and publish it anyway, but not if you are starting out.
In a series you can have a mixed ending; basically a draw. The hero doesn't win, but doesn't lose. But even that might not be satisfying.
If you are unpublished, you probably should not be writing a series, unless you intend to write all of it before trying to sell it. Publishers do not want to publish book one with an ambiguous ending if there is no guarantee you will actually finish the rest of the series. And if you are a beginner, they don't want to buy three or five books at once. And if your series has an unhappy ending, they don't want to buy any of it.
I suggest you write a book, even a somewhat long book, that stands on its own, with a reasonably happy ending in which the hero prevails, perhaps at a cost but prevails. The villain is defeated, perhaps escaping with their life and bound to return, but defeated.
The problem here is psychological. Reading fiction is escapism. What are readers trying to escape? The real world, where the bad guys win pretty much all the time! In real life, crime pays. People get away with rape and murder and abuse of others. Drug kingpins, dictators, corrupt politicians destroy innocent lives and live high on the hog without a single regret.
The real world is what we are trying to get away from. We want you to make your story and setting believable, and the dangers feel real, but in the end we don't want the realism of the hero chickening out, or the bad guys prevailing and continuing to create pain, misery and hopelessness. In the end, we want the wish fulfillment fantasy that the good will prevail and the nightmare will end.
No, I don't think it would be okay for a bad guy to win in the end.
Readers don't like it. They read for fantasy fulfillment. Happy endings outsell unhappy endings ten to one; publishers and studios don't like unhappy endings. They want something positive in the end.
Especially from a writer that has no following; if you were already a best-selling author or script-writer they might trust you and publish it anyway, but not if you are starting out.
In a series you can have a mixed ending; basically a draw. The hero doesn't win, but doesn't lose. But even that might not be satisfying.
If you are unpublished, you probably should not be writing a series, unless you intend to write all of it before trying to sell it. Publishers do not want to publish book one with an ambiguous ending if there is no guarantee you will actually finish the rest of the series. And if you are a beginner, they don't want to buy three or five books at once. And if your series has an unhappy ending, they don't want to buy any of it.
I suggest you write a book, even a somewhat long book, that stands on its own, with a reasonably happy ending in which the hero prevails, perhaps at a cost but prevails. The villain is defeated, perhaps escaping with their life and bound to return, but defeated.
The problem here is psychological. Reading fiction is escapism. What are readers trying to escape? The real world, where the bad guys win pretty much all the time! In real life, crime pays. People get away with rape and murder and abuse of others. Drug kingpins, dictators, corrupt politicians destroy innocent lives and live high on the hog without a single regret.
The real world is what we are trying to get away from. We want you to make your story and setting believable, and the dangers feel real, but in the end we don't want the realism of the hero chickening out, or the bad guys prevailing and continuing to create pain, misery and hopelessness. In the end, we want the wish fulfillment fantasy that the good will prevail and the nightmare will end.
answered 8 hours ago
AmadeusAmadeus
65.4k7 gold badges81 silver badges212 bronze badges
65.4k7 gold badges81 silver badges212 bronze badges
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
add a comment |
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
2
2
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
You're wrong, but not about what people want most often. Some of the best stories are tragedies and you're ignoring a ton of historical context in this answer.
– Kirk
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Writing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f46284%2fbad-guy-wins-in-my-book-series%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I think this question is Primarily Opinion-Based as written. Perhaps you could ask what the likely reaction would be for a reader to find that the "bad guy" wins, or whether there are any best practices in presenting this to the reader without making the story too depressing.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So your genre is which: Horror or Tragedy?
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago
1
its more Sci-fi than anything else.
– icefire
8 hours ago
3
Even in many classic tragedies, it's not so much that the "bad guy" wins but that the "good guys" lose. In some cases (cough)>Shakespeare(/cough), this ends in a literal pile of bodies.
– Robert Columbia
8 hours ago
3
So you have an evil protagonist.
– wetcircuit
8 hours ago