Are you fond of 'Shoot the Shaggy Dog'?

^ I think my mother's been living in a Hollywood happy ending for the last forty years. Sure, she'll die eventually, but that doesn't make her life invalid.

edited 5th Feb '12 9:15:24 PM by feotakahari

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful

I'll have to take your word for it. A shame around 7 billion other people can't share her good fortune.

Still, there's nothing in that that prevents Shoot the Shaggy Dog from being a realistic ending. And a valid creative choice for a story.

Oh, it's definitely a valid creative choice, though not one that interests me personally - I just don't want the claim being made that it's more realistic then the stereotypical Hollywood happy ending. Both can happen, neither does so very often.

^^ I give up. How the hell are you defining your terms? What does "Shoot the Shaggy Dog" mean to you?

edited 5th Feb '12 10:02:04 PM by feotakahari

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful

I prefer Shoot The Shaggy Dog than a "Shaggy Dog" Story.

If you're going to have the heroes waste their time, at least give me the satisfaction of watching them all get killed off.

I'm happy, too. Bad things happen and I have serious problem with some people, but that's not enough to call my life a failure.

What annoys me about unhappy people is that they seem to think that everybody else either is or must be unhappy too.

Or do you only consider a successful life one that is completely devoid of any problems? That makes no sense.

edited 6th Feb '12 6:58:10 AM by Teraus

"You cannot judge a system if your judgement is determined by the system."

I usually find these kinds of stories immensely frustrating. In something like 1984, the writer was trying to make a point with its ending, but most Shoot the Shaggy Dog stories I've seen do it for thrill value or for the sake of a twist ending without having any point.

See The Mist or Night of the Living Dead, two films which I otherwise love, but had terribly depressing endings that just made me not want to watch them ever again.

Depends heavily upon what the author is trying to do with the story, and upon how they do it. Sometimes you want to crush your reader with a sense of futility and misery, but doing that poorly can make the story seem pointless; doing it properly, however, can send your point home in the best kind of way, making your reader think about the implications of what you've done in the story without resenting you for screwing with their emotions. But even then, the tone of the story at large is crucial, and the ending should reflect the tone. A happy-enough tale need not some awful, soul-searing ending where a bittersweet or hopeful one might suffice, but one of a dark or neutral tone might assuming that the story plays itself out in that direction.

That said, assuming decent writing and build-up, as well as an appropriate context: Yes. I love horrific endings.

edited 6th Feb '12 10:18:29 AM by JHM

I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.

I think it's possible for it to be well done, like in the examples listed above, but I don't like to use it. I don't write stories about people who don't do things that matter. Even if they make the world worse, they still do something that lasts.

So Shoot the Shaggy Dog is a story ending that basically just randomly kills off the main character making all their struggles and accomplishments pointless?

Oh, so that's what I've been writing.

I don't like to read them much.

"What a century this week has been." - Seung Min Kim

That's more of a "Shaggy Dog" Story.

Shoot the Shaggy Dog is if not only the protagonist's efforts are rendered worthless, but he or she managed to make things worse. Usually for the good guys.

edited 6th Feb '12 8:33:04 PM by chihuahua0

These endings can be just as contrived and unrealistic as any happy ending. Whether or not I enjoy them depends on if the message of the story is strong enough to justify the choice of ending.

to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee

Actually, that makes me wonder: is it technically possible to have a Shoot the Shaggy Dog ending with a villain protagonist (not the kind who's fighting even worse opponents)?

Well, Death Note seems to have the trope on its page, but I say it skirts the line. If there's shades of gray, I guess the Villain Protagonist can shoot the shaggy dog by failing to reach his goal and screw everybody else over in the process.

edited 6th Feb '12 9:06:17 PM by chihuahua0

I always thought it Shoot the Shaggy Dog was morally neutral- the protagonist gets nothing accomplished except for effects that they didn't intend, nor want. So for a hero, they furthered the Evil Overlord's plans. For a villain, they furthered the hero's plans. Neither wanted the other's plans to be furthered nor intended to do so, and thus.

edited 6th Feb '12 9:07:40 PM by CrystalGlacia

"Jack, you have debauched my sloth."

There are some works I like, one may consider shooting the dog - Cormac's The Road, Texhnolyze, Irreversible - where everything winds up into pieces. Everyone will die, and time destroys everything - and much of our lives may be considered a shaggy dog story in centuries; we'd be lucky to be mentioned in statistics and have people look through the archives, skim our names. But you also should hold the realization that it is not the destination that should entirely matter, our journies beforehand have matter too.

There is a question posed in these stories that make us comfortable: if you merely sit back and think about your impending termination, and your terrifying insignificance and aloneness in the cosmos, you would surely go mad, or succumb to a numbing sense of futility. Why, you might ask yourself, should you bother to write a great symphony, or strive to make a living, or even to love another, when you are no more than a momentary microbe on a dust mote whirling through the unimaginable immensity of space?

When Life is viewed under this perspective, you can fall prey all too easily to the ultimate anomie.

edited 6th Feb '12 9:50:26 PM by QQQQQ

I always found this thought to be very comforting, actually. There's something really beautiful about the insignificance and pointlessness of any human being's life.

edited 7th Feb '12 3:53:58 AM by fanty

It's all a matter of perspective really. Sure, on a grand, astronomical scale, none of our accomplishents mean anything, unless that accomplishment is the discovery of FTL travel and space colonization.

But on a smaller scale, life is what you make of it, and what scale you see yourself. You can make profound differences upon somebody else's life, and if you're big and influencial enough, perhaps differences in your community, or even the country/planet. We are all part of a whole. On a grand scheme, we may seem like nothing, but a whole is nothing more than the sum of its parts.

What would think if all the conflict in a story is completely and utterly pointless? I would be a little irked especially if I invest some time into the seeing the action and conflict in the story. I know stories need conflict but some stories the characters are better off at the beginning rather than at the end. I know in slice of life stories, most of everyhting stays more or less the same but the characters do change.

"Eratoeir is a Gangsta."

I don't like this trope, and I've never tried to write it. I much prefer a Bittersweet Ending or Earn Your Happy Ending, as they have the balance of good and bad that comes across as a lot more realistic to me. Maybe I'm just too idealistic to accept this kind of ending to a story I invested my time and emotions into.

Even when your hope is gone, move along, move along just to make it through

As I've stated before, I despise this kind of ending. It leaves me feeling almost insulted for bothering to read and give a damn.

edited 13th Feb '12 7:31:18 PM by CrystalGlacia

"Jack, you have debauched my sloth."

I find it works for Black Comedy...and that's about it. Dramatically, I find that it just sort of ends up being uncomfortably comical since it simply feels like the author is trying way too hard to be edgy.

"If you're out here why do I miss you so much?"

A quick question to the "no, never!" people (and the "yes, definitely!" people as well): Would it make a difference if you were reading a short story or a novel and this happened? Watching a short film or a feature? Does the genre have a bearing upon your answer?

I just want some clarification here.

I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.

If the work is longer, I'd probably feel even more insulted/pissed. Caring about the characters as people is something that I always attempt to do.

"Jack, you have debauched my sloth."

Longer would doubtless increase the feeling that the author just made a rude gesture at me, since I bothered to read their work and they're now making a statement that everything in their work, including the time I just invested in it to read it, is a waste or worse. Backlash against such a pronouncement is commensurate to investment in its opposite, but since some investment is always required, some backlash is always present.

Or in other words, it's not the tragedy that bothers me, but that by invoking it in this particular method you negate all efforts, both mine and the story's. (But then I tend to consider simply killing someone off not shooting the shaggy dog; there has to be a more formal negation of not only characters but what characters have done. The trope page is kind of sketchy on this.)

edited 14th Feb '12 12:16:13 PM by Night

Nous restons ici.