I recently read Hyperion by Dan Simmons on the Masterworks label, and although I enjoyed most of it I was bitterly disappointed by the ending.
I don't really have a problem with 'cliffhanger' endings (although I wouldn't call this one a cliffhanger as such - more like a dead stop).
After a little investigating I discovered that Hyperion and its sequel, Fall of Hyperion, were written as one book by the author (and that was how he intended it to be read) and the publisher decided to split it into two.
Why was this decision made?
- Would a complete book have been considered too long? (compared to other similar books I don't think this is the case)
- Did the change in writing styles prompt this decision?
- Was it to make the authors contract easier to fulfill?
I'm particularly annoyed because there is absolutely no mention in the blurb of the book that if I wanted ANY kind of answers to the story I'd have to invest in the sequel, or even that the book is a two parter.
For those of you unfamiliar with the books, imagine going to the cinema to watch 2001: A Space Odyssey and the film abruptly ends with the scientists staring at the monolith on the moon, or Rocky ends with his training and you'll have to go back to watch the fight.
Now I appreciate that part of the strength of great storytelling is how a tale is told as much as where the story takes us but that's not really my point.
I would appreciate it if any answers were supported by evidence rather than supposition.