World, Writing, Wealth discussion

Did it happen to you that you've invested in reading maybe a few thousand pages of long series, just to arrive to a disappointing ending?
What outweighs what: the enjoyment of the process or the disappointment in the finale?

I think if you are disappointed at the ending, then the middle, that has prepared you fro the ending, was not doing its job.

Nik wrote: "Did it happen to you that you've invested in reading maybe a few thousand pages of long series, just to arrive to a disappointing ending?
What outweighs what: the enjoyment of the process or the d..."

Disappointment sometimes has to to do with what the reader expects to see happening. For example, a hero normally has to succeed, but what if he doesn't? This kind of dilemma probably gave birth to the notion of anti-hero where the issue is not necessarily succeding but doing as much as he can hoping to acheive something good, against all odds.

Ian wrote: "I think if you are disappointed at the ending, then the middle, that has prepared you fro the ending, was not doing its job."

Disappointment isn't always due to an unsatisfying ending. With the current focus on series, a lot of readers are let down when an author ends the book in the middle of the story to force you to buy the next part. Another variation is when the story takes a sharp left turn in the final chapters to create a similar "cliff-hanger." In this case, the problem isn't the ending, but the beginning...an author should make full-disclosure up front that they're selling a serial, not a series. Not to say serials are bad, after all a lot of classic authors from the nineteenth century released their books as serials, but the consumer knew what they were getting at that time.

Nik's question was specific to series, then Ian would be right that the middle (wherever that is in a series) would probably signal the end is not nigh enough. I think it's a good question for writers to struggle with. I am constantly disappointed by endings. Which reminds me of a quibble I have with agents and writing comps. They usually ask for the first thirty pages or two chapters and a synopsis which seldom describes the quality of a good book. I know the present fashion is to set back the ears in the first few pages but really good books are like good sex, they start slowly and build up to a climax - or so people tell me. And synopsis can only outline the action, not the style, the characterisation or the humour. So I would like to see the above ask for the first chapter, a middle chapter and the ending.

As it happens, I just completed a book where I found the ending disappointing. There were two reasons for this. The first might be slightly my fault - it turns out it was a dreaded series, so it had to avoid the obvious ending, but the second was what really got to me. The author wanted to make a point, so he did, then again, and again, and just in case I missed it, I was effectively hit over the head with it. Repetition in music can be very good, but it gets tiresome in prose, at least for me.

I think it's totally fine when I find an ending to a book I really liked and couldn't put down to be disappointing. Hell, isn't that why most of us are writers in the first place? We see something ending in a way we didn't like and go like "Hm... what the hero doesn't win?" or any other scenario that comes to the mind.

I've had an instance where the poor ending of a book inspired a completely different idea (and book) so I really don't mind this at all to be honest.

I've always seen fiction as a means of making sense of the chaotic world we live in. Of asserting some power in the universe, if only in words. Humans seek resolution, and if a writer doesn't use his/her power to give me that, I'm disappointed.

Ian, what is a dreaded series? The second complaint about making a point is the same things as 'getting the message across' which is apparent in this confab. But I guess the magic of writing and imagination is getting an idea or inspiration from anything, even just one short sentence overheard on a bus - which is what MG probably means. But it doesn't excuse a lazy or unplanned ending.
Scout, I'm finding it difficult to get anyone to read my book; how do i assert some power over the universe?

My comment on the "dreaded series" was it turned out to be a series, but I did not pick it when I got the book - careless on my part.
My complaint about making a point is not that he made it - he left making the same point. I got it a lot earlier.

Scout wrote: "I've always seen fiction as a means of making sense of the chaotic world we live in. Of asserting some power in the universe, if only in words. Humans seek resolution, and if a writer doesn't use h..."

I would agree this is key. Even if you go with the cliffhanger or if you choose to serialize, the reader should still receive some sort of resolution by the final page of the individual piece.

Soap operas constantly deal with the balance between resolution and keeping around favorite characters no matter how far they cross the lines. General rule of thumb is that when someone does something wrong, they must pay for it at some point even if the scales don't balance. It's why you'll encounter characters who may commit murder and avoid jail time, but at some point in their story, they'll suffer some sort of downfall. It may not appear just, but if their lawyer gets them cleared of the charge, at least there was some "punishment" in the scope of the universe. General resolution is the same way. A book may not end with absolute resolution, but if something is resolved and the reader walks away feeling something was settled, then you've created a suitable ending.

By chance, over the weekend, I saw an interview with David Baldacci (The Fix) on the BBC. He said he never knows how a book will end when he's writing it. I think that underlines one of the favourite rules of many writers; follow the characters, let them tell the story. At least, that way the ending should not be dishonest or unbelievable.

Or you could be writing "The Neverending Story".

That would depend on the plot-line I guess, Ian

I get what you're saying, P.K., even though I'm not a writer and can't imagine how one creates a world with words. I'm a constant reader, and I'm amazed every time I read a good book. I'm so thankful that writers do what they do. It seems to me that endings are particularly difficult for writers. Would you agree?

Disagree. For me, the ending is known before I start writing. It is how to get to it convincingly that is the problem.

Scout, that is such an uplifting statement for any writer to read. I, and I hope our other writer friends here, am so grateful to hear it.
Writing is unavoidable for most of us. It is the same as being an artist; one just has to do it nomatter how poor is the result. Thank you. There are many ways to tell a story - and many reasons for doing so. I know some writers who cannot start writing the story until they know everything about the plot and characters, beginning, middle and ending. It would seem that applies to Ian. But I find that a very small thing can start the process. I think I've said somewhere above that it can be the snatch of part of a conversation, or some physical evemt, no matter how insignificant, like a dog running onto a busy road or finding a dead swallow. When one starts to write about it, it just grows, like a flower, sometimes rapidly sometimes in jerks. When I find a character in my mind or memory and start to write about them, they just grow the same, like getting to know a new friend or a baby. That is called, following the characters. Dickens did that. On my website (penpowerwriting.com - Books) I talk about Dicken's last, and unfinished book, 'The Mystery of Edwin Drood'. Many famous writers have conjectured as to how he meant to finish it. I don't think he knew how he would. Yes, endings can be difficult. My published book, Getting Tyson has a Postscript ending. The ending of the events came naturally following the story but I felt there would be questions in the reader's mind about what happened to the characters afterwards, so I did a postscript chapter of quick (I hope) amusing explanations. But I have another espionage story ready for polishing where the ending happened suddenly and unexpectedly, not as I had intended. That was because the intended ending would not have been truthful because it would have ignored one of the characters and when I thought of that there could only be one ending. That is the magic of storytelling to me.
Ian, Horses for Courses. I'm reading Delphian. I can see how the physical events dominate and I think I will know the ending before I finish it.

I write both ways sometimes I start with an ending and sometimes it just goes where the story leads. My first book turned into a trilogy by accident not design. I knew the endings of all three parts but did not plan the complete series. My second book which I am still asked and half started to write a sequel ended when I was finished.

On the other hand I have a space opera series two parts done but struggling with next part although the story is ot done by any means.

I would say that in all cases I believe the books are stand alone and can be read without reference to previous books - but I would say that. Writing that way does cause back story issues in the follow on parts. An editing (what was that character's name and spelling did I really kill them off in chapter 3 of book two only to find them alive and well in chapter 6 of book 4) and a show don't tell nightmare.

P.K., What I said is what seems to work for me. I hope nobody took it that I was trying to say that is how writing should be done. I think it is important that everyone does what they think suits them best, because that lets you write naturally. The more relaxed you are about the process, the more spontaneous your first draft is.

Ian wrote: "P.K., What I said is what seems to work for me. I hope nobody took it that I was trying to say that is how writing should be done. I think it is important that everyone does what they think suits t..."

Well said

Sorry about the dreaded series, Ian. I'm one who is guilty. Even when I try for a single book, there's just too much happening!
Either that or you'll get a 300k doorstop. My first attempt (still lurking waiting to be turned into something readable) topped 600k. The second was a million words about a character and a world (also awaiting the editorial chainsaw).

Maybe it's partly the style, writers who don't know the end can't tell how long the road will be.
I start with a general aim in mind, then part-way through I've got the end and possibly three important way-points, then I need to find a way to connect up that's not too linear.

As has been said earlier, everyone writes differently. So series vs single books isn't good vs bad, it's two sides of a coin (or three, or seven, or Wheel of Time?)
Providing the story ends eventually, that is. Hopefully not too predictably and without having the message riveted to my skull.

Of course, Ian, everyone finds their own way. I haven't tried writing a series, I find it difficult enough to find enough material for one book, but I can see how that can make the whole process so much more complicated. I know what you mean, Philip; I have to go back and check names or dates even in one book. Vance, perhaps you need a ruthless editor? Having been a jobbing journalist I know the value of the red pencil. Editing is the hardest thing about writing, we hate leaving fond characters or ideas on the floor. But, think of it like clearing the attic; if you don't need it, get rid.

Ian. Humble apologies. My mind had one of those ageing moments. I was mixing you up with Tim when I mentioned Delphian. So, sorry.

P.K., no apology needed. I was puzzled with the reference to Delphian, but assumed a wheel fell off.

The writing of a series is an interesting problem and if anyone is interested, I thought I would explain how my main SF series happened, which was mainly by logic. First, around 1988 I had spare time on my hands so I decided I would try to write my "War and Peace". (I believe in ambition :=) In this case it got away from me a bit.) I wanted to include bits from my travels because that made the background easier to write, and I was interested in political economics, so my future was an extrapolation of one of J. K. Galbraith's models, in which corporations would grow and control the economy. I decided to have much of the world in Federation. Having done that much, I needed an enemy - aliens were obvious - and a hero - a young man who wanted to be a space pilot, but I wanted this to have some science in the background, so I made him a "could have been" physicist. To get him into the picture, I had him, through his physics/astronomy, discover the aliens arriving.

Why were the aliens there? They had suffered a major battle defeat, and they needed their ships repaired. The Corporations would help, BUT they wanted the Federation overthrown as the price. So the aliens were actually tolerably reasonable. I decided I would have two major heroines - one would have a love/hate relationship with my hero, and the other would be the ugliest woman in the world. My next major hero was a Roman legatus who had been abducted by aliens and had been permitted to return to help. He brought two advanced battleships - not enough. See how we have lots of material here?

It needed a prequel - how did this roman get there and back. (It had to be a Roman because of relativity.) That led to what was effectively a trilogy, in which the Roman was required to go and get help for humanity in the future. Then, we find that the aliens came here as a consequence of what the Roman did, so we now had a logic loop paradox, resolvable only by yet another book, that followed the big one. See how it all grows?

Like Topsy! Somewhere along that line, Ian, there were three or four books if you had stopped that big brain of yours getting out of control - there probably still are.
I admire the objective concept of writing and getting down to it and seeing it through. That is like the many tasks one has to perform in life; I hate gardening but it has to be done; I must clean out the garage and get rid of all that junk, oh well, another day.
I have often spoken with old colleagues from my journalism days who want to write a book but just don't have any ideas about what to write; they are just plumb numb with news events. I have been there and had to take your approach. It's like an artist staring at a blank canvas waiting for inspiration. But we know inspiration only comes when one starts putting a few words on paper, one foot at a time.
You make me interested in sci-fi - but I don't go for that Roman thing; relativity is relative. I once fancied writing a sci fi, inspired by Ray Bradbury. I'll give you the idea. A space-probe is lost on another planet or moon. Some years later a rescue/research mission is launched. They find the skeletons of the previous crew. Their souls are locked into their space-suits inside the capsule and one of the original female crew pines after one of the young male rescue mission, but he has a relationship going with a female member of his crew. The old soul causes the new female to have a fatal accident and when she is taken from her suit for attention the old female spirit takes over her body, hoping the male will fall in love with her. He is ecstatic when he thinks his love has survived but slowly the young body disintergrates to an old hag.
Panto cum love-story cum thriller cum sci-fi. How can it fail?

Unfortunately, relativity is part of nature, and the time dilation effect follows using what is effectively high school maths (you need pythagoras theorem). Part of what I write is to try and introduce some rather complex scientific concepts in a very simplified way, so that the reader will understand what is going on, and why, but of course they would hardly be the basis for claiming to understand physics. My guess is, many physicists would argue I have oversimplified relativity, but the idea was to give to someone who has no idea that it even exists why it is happening. The reason for this was as part of the plot, my hero and his sister and some others were abducted by aliens, and sister and husband were having a fight. The aliens let the husband off at another planet, and the problem was, she could never see him again because if they turned around and went back, he would have been dead for at least 600 years. It was important that someone grasped this could be real.

That, to borrow a modern idiom, sounds awesome. I was always pretty awful at maths and didn't get into physics, which I regretted because it meant I couldn't fly Navy when I wanted to. But I now am fascinated by the subject. Likewise with gravity; there was a programme on the Beeb about it which was so disappointing because it was just like a fourth grade primer. I had so many questions I wanted answers to.
I will promise myself to sample your work, Ian when I catch-up with two books I am trying to finish.

It is unfortunate when people cannot get into maths because I think it shows a failure of the teaching system to get the children thinking the right way. I know that in my upbringing, maths teaching was fairly bad, and I got there in spite of the teachers, not because of them. It would be a failure on my part if I did not encourage you to read my books, but as long as you stick with the fiction, I can promise no maths. You can get a surprisingly long way with the essence of science with concepts. However, if you do not understand maths, my books on planetary formation and quantum mechanics should be left alone.

Just to add to the last post, the reason I did this was because I read somewhere that a good way to get sales was to include puzzles into novels (e.g. Dan Brown). With "Athene's Prophecy" and "Legatus Legionis" the protagonist had to prove the Earth was spinning and went around the sun using knowledge only available in the first century, or by experiment at the time. The advantage was that the scenario was known to make sense - Aristarchus of Samos not only put forward the model, but also effectively measured the size and distances of the moon and sun. However, the great disadvantage was that Aristotle had "proved" this was wrong, so part of the problem was to demonstrate that Aristotle was wrong. How do you do that? The answer might seem simple, but Aristotle was not stupid - he was extremely intelligent, but he made a couple of mistakes, the biggest one being not following his own prescription! (H outlined his methodology for forming theories that I believe are essentially as good today as then - but he seemingly wrote his Prior and Post Analytics after his Physica and de Caelo, and never went back to look for errors!

So the books were written not only to tell the necessary story, but also to give some indication how science works and also does not work, and offers some puzzles to the readers that are real. The answers are simple, but I bet most readers will fail to reach them. The reason being that most science seems simple when someone tells you the answer, but before that it is anything but.

P.K. wrote: "Of course, Ian, everyone finds their own way. I haven't tried writing a series, I find it difficult enough to find enough material for one book, but I can see how that can make the whole process so..."

Believe me P.K. my editor uses an axe. She re-sharpens it for every page I send her. Just as well, really. Her red pen didn't say the back story explanation or prequel wasn't necessary, just that it shouldn't arrive in a big cold lump and interrupt the story.

Like Ian in a way, the length comes from the plots. I imagine big, beautiful (loosely speaking) new worlds and people them, then write a story that roams across them. Without the world, the stories are kinda hanging there in a limbo. I sometimes write the first draft of the middle or third book first, then the book that led to it. (I've got a big problem with one, how to get from book one to book three)

Other authors peel out the bits they need and write it all in one book. If the reviews really tank, I might have to seriously consider trying that but it wouldn't be as much fun.

I may be wrong, but the longer the book, the harder it is to sell. It is easier to sell a trilogy than one book to thirds as long, as far as I can see.

Vance, you have an editor; that is the first step an unsure writer should take. But even getting the right editor is a problem. It is why publishing houses are so careful in committing themselves to an author, because editing takes up so much time and concentration. And, of course, unless one is lucky enough to have a good friend or spouse who can not just copy-edit but content-edit too, it can cost quite a bit of money.
Getting stuck with a series must be a problem. When I am stuck with one book it is bad enough. I am struggling with a book that flits between time and events and I find that a nightmare trying to remember who did what when and in what order I should shuffle the pack. Writing from the middle can be a good idea too. I have found that going back and rewriting the beginning can improve the book hugely; because we get better as we get into the story.

Ian, you are right, of course; trying to sell War And Peace rather than The Old Man And The Sea is a no-brainer. But, going back to your books, it seems to me that, because they are truly science-based, you have a market. Why don't you attend scientific conferences and get permission to sell your books at them? Or university, science faculties? I did read a bit of Aristotle (Politica) once. What I like about him was the way he prefaced work with definations of words that he would use. I am fascinated and amazed at the brains of ancient scholars.

P.K., the main reason I have given up scientific conferences is that I am starting to feel old. Right now I am recovering from surgery, which does not help :-) However, I am also retired so I have to watch dollars a bit. From where I live, experience has shown that attending a foreign conference costs about, on average, $NZ6,000. Sine I am concentrating on ebooks, that does not make economic sense. I have also noticed that the scientific community, or at least the chemists, are strangely conservative and have not taken up ebooks. Environmentalists rant on, but only buy dead trees and consume vast amounts of jet fuel :-). Fortunately, I do make some sales, and I have made a policy of taking this as a business, that is, expenditure on promotion should be undertaken only in the expectation of making a profit. I do pay tax on my literary efforts, but advertising that worked, at least sort of, a couple of years ago no longer does, so it is a bit of a problem. The really curious thing is I am making as much from the books I am not trying to promote as the ones I am. This shows I do not understand ebook marketing very well.

Ian; I know the feeling about age. I hope your surgery went well and you continue to recover. You hav a brain and you obviously use it so I think you can find answers if you ask yourself the right questions. I suppose living in NZ is a problem for opportunities to mix in international science seminars. Have you tried releasing your books in parts; perhaps as light relief in scientific journals?
Your advertising v book sales is topical elsewhere in these posts. Have you been following Graem Rodaughan's efforts ? His figures prove that, for some time at least, that advertising is not profitable. Surely you can find a calculus that will prove or disprove the theory so we can all decide to either shut up or keep trying to sell?

I have two sets of books: scientific and fiction with a science base.

The science books are not really suitable for scientific journals because while they eventually make big points, they do so too slowly because I have to demolish some previous ideas that are wrong. Also, one of the interesting things about scientific papers is that unless you have a big name, a paper is usually read by fewer than two people outside the authors! (That is according to statistics, but I am wondering how the figures were obtained.) To give an example, there are over two million chemical related papers published a year; who has time to read any of that, and worse, if you haven't got access to a major University library, you cannot anyway.

As for developing a calculus for how to do sales, that would be easy if we could find some relationship between sales and activity, but so far I can't.

P.K. wrote: "Vance, you have an editor; that is the first step an unsure writer should take. But even getting the right editor is a problem. It is why publishing houses are so careful in committing themselves t..."

I'm definitely lucky in my editor, Sharon Umbaugh. She taught me to write vs putting down words.
I'm also incredibly fortunate in having a publisher, one who is very tolerant about word count (when I was beating my literary breast, Rachel told me the book is as long as the story). Though I'm sure she is grateful I cut the stories into a series.
Rachel also warned me that being an overnight success can take 10 years (I'm only 18 months in).

Because I'm writing in 3 or 4 genres (I'm never sure) and 4 series I end up reading my previous books to get 'in the zone' for the next, which helps the flow from one to the next (I hope). The retrospective look at the published one does definitely show me mistakes, ways could have written it better, and I hope I avoid them thereafter.

Ian, I agree on the sales bit. Though even as series they aren't selling enough to excite the taxman yet :-)
About the scientific books - my brother is a Research and Development Fellow in Biotechnology. He points out that after forty years on the cutting edge and umpteen published papers, I'll still be more famous and wider read if I get one moderate success. (Even though he is a big name in his field)

I'm not hung up op on either the success or sales (although I'd love to break even on the betas and editing :-). I write because I can't watch TV or move about much. I travel imaginary worlds and decided to write them down. Maybe that's why my stories roam?

With regard to advertising, a free giveaway seems to be followed by a few sales, and some reviews. I'm sure that doesn't come close to covering the costs of the publisher's advertising, but without some exposure how will anyone know your book (or you) exists?

A refreshing look at reality Vance. I'm old so it now comes with the age but you seem to be looking at everything right when it matters. I suppose, from your comment about betas and editing that you pay for it. But both your editor and publisher are telling you as it is, so you are buying well.
Yes, unfortunately, as Ian will confirm, scientific anything takes a back seat in the 'grab me' stakes. It is a stupid world of stupid people to the fore. The majority think with their bellies and their other parts so why do they need science, knowledge or just good literature?
I am extremely sorry for any physical deficiencies you might have to struggle with. I hope your writing takes you where you can't go and takes a lot of other people with you.

P.K. wrote: "A refreshing look at reality Vance. I'm old so it now comes with the age but you seem to be looking at everything right when it matters. I suppose, from your comment about betas and editing that yo..."

I pay for betas and editing then the publishers edit again, sometimes twice. Sharon edits but also helps me tremendously with smoothing the storyline and character developments (we have discussions but polite ones because, after all, I'm British y'know)

My brother takes solace in my writing under a pen name, so actually he'll always be the famous one (family joke). We also rant a little about science vs culture - or whatever is today's name for popular. I did read one of his papers - but I needed him there to translate, or three other papers to explain bits of it :-)

I treat how I am as normal (it is for me) so I'm good, thanks. Writing has definitely helped, I roam where nobody can follow :-)

Read this and saved it - I think it applies to writing as well:

Enablement

When pain first stole my morning walk, crippled limb and mind
All I could think was what I'd lost, how fate was so unkind
Then like a sunbeam in my heart, cutting through the gloom
a spark became a beacon, and poetry began to bloom

So now I run to greet the dawn, I soar through endless skies
All the mysteries of time and space, revealed before my eyes
The pain that ate me up, made me so miserable and terse
is now lost against the splendour of the poetic universe

My words can paint a panorama, full of colour, fire and life
An antidote to realities, to our modern, soul-less strife
Lift spirits on clouds of laughter, light fires in your heart
Bring the strongest to their knees, or break a world apart

Paint spots dropped on canvas, seeds in a forest glade
Rewriting our conceptions, transforming feather into blade
Poetry spreads and merges, ever bringing a different hue
So open up your heart, and let its magic flow right through

Vance made a good point. I too have tried various types of promotion, advertising, and in general they do not pay their cost, BUT if you don't do something, how will anyone know you exist?

Ian wrote: "Vance made a good point. I too have tried various types of promotion, advertising, and in general they do not pay their cost, BUT if you don't do something, how will anyone know you exist?"

Graeme has listed on another post his compulsive efforts at promotion and the results seem to be that it is a financial no-go. But big publishing houses face the same problem. They rely on reviews in major outlets, like newspapers and periodicals and they also rely on one or more of their stable to be successful in order to share the bounty across the board so that the cook-celebrity-book helps the better books to float. We are here because we haven't attracted a major publisher; we are second-division struggling for promotion to the major league. The one thing we can do here on GR is to help each other achieve a better standard. As I have said elsewhere, anyone can self-publish. It helps assuage our desires and lessen our cries in the wilderness but if we want to sell books we have to get other people to read them and then they have to be good enough for those readers to talk about them. Are our books good enough? That is the first hurdle to overcome. Then one could try a naked reading posted on Facebook.
Nice poem Vance, but the bottom line is; there is no bottom line; no author.

And how about you?

Nik wrote: "And how about you?"

Cryptic, Nik. Care to expand on what you are asking?

Meant to ask whether an ending can be a killer for an otherwise tasty book :)

I think it can. I recently read one in which the ending, for me, appeared to have the quality of "help - this is long - got to finish". and the ending did not make sense, given what had come before. My response was, "What? What the . . " That is not, in my opinion, the feeling you want to leave your readers with.

Right. And sometimes you invest your time and your attention, and then the ending is one of those that "leaves it open to interpretation." In my opinion, that's a cop out. One of the functions of fiction is that it helps us work things out and provides resolution that we seldom find in real life. I don't want to have to provide my own ending. I do that every day in my life. I want resolution! Also, some of the really interesting novels I've read have weak endings, as if the writer just wants to get it over with. Disappointing.

Yes, one thing that annoys me is when the whole story suddenly comes together in the last 8 pages, and not at all convincingly. The only conclusion I can make is the author must have decided it was time to stop, so somehow this has to end.

It's not my story; I am not he writer - so I accept the ending just like I accept transporters and FTL.

What does bother me is when it feels like the ending has been rushed and compressed into the final few pages after reading a lengthy story that built everything well - the plot, the characters, the world, - and then suddenly it's over. I feel like all the air suddenly got sucked out.

The 2nd issue has already been raised. I enjoy there being a series to keep reading, but I don't like a cliffhanger. I want to choose to continue to read the series because it is good, not because it failed to have an ending to the main issues and the only way I can find out is to buy the next book, which will also end in a cliffhanger.

In my books in a series or not I want a satisfactory ending - unfortunately the characters don't always let me. I do like it when readers ask where the sequel/next part is. I do however highlight where it is a series if it started that way.

I don't see how I can write a series without some element of cliffhanger. After all, the story isn't finished, because if it is a series it has a storyline that spreads from beginning to end.
Some series are a set of single stories that use the same characters, but I can't do that (I have trouble cramming a story into three books.)

I wrote one cliffhanger (trying to keep the book to 'acceptable' length) but the next book took two years because I started too many series. Rookie mistake, I didn't think anyone would be interested, that they'd sink without trace.

Now I like to close a thread at the end of a book, settle the main issue for the characters so the reader has a finish point, but leave the overall plot running. I agree with Philip, a reader asking for the sequel is a real buzz.