The Importance of Endings

Though this does not happen very often, there have been a few occasions in which the ending of the book can significantly change my entire impression of the book and can in some cases quite literally make or break the book. In my own reading experience, a book that I had in fact found to be quite brilliant and thoroughly engaging can be brought down in esteem by a poor ending, as well as a book of which has been average or mediocre can be brought up by the perfect ending.

Some examples of which immediately spring into my mind in which the ending of the book has played a very key role in influencing my overall impression the book and has in fact altered my opinion about the book.

The Jungle by Upton Sinclair: This is a book that from the first sentence had my hooked, and I thought it was brilliant, and completely captivating, and I never wanted to put it down whenever I began reading it. Easily I had it down as a 5 star book, but than in the last few chapters it lost something and the book was lowered a big in my esteem. It seems to me towards the end of the book it did become a bit too political/propaganda and lost the vividness of the story which I was enjoying so much. And though overall I do think it was still a great book and I loved reading it, the ending of it did drop it down to a 4 star rating for me.

Love in the Time of Cholera by Gabriel García Márquez: This book did go outside of what I normally would read, but because I enjoyed 100 Years of Solitude so much I was intrigued to read it. Now I do not deny the skill, talent and beauty of the writing of the book, but that does not change the fact that quite honestly the majority of it was rather boring to read. It moved at a snail's pace, and virtually nothing really happens throughout the book. There were some elements which I did enjoy and the prose was poetic and lyrical, but still it was a struggle to actually read through, and yet the very last paragraph of this book was such a work of beauty that it pulled everything else together, and made the book truly worth reading.

The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafón: Overall I really enjoyed this book, and I thought it was well written and the story was interesting, but there was this reoccurring unrequited love theme in the background of the story, and while I was really enjoying the mystery and suspense aspect I found that all the lamenting and whining of the main characters adventures and misadventures of love were a bit obnoxious and hampered my enjoyment of the story overall. I was in fact all set to write a review critiquing this aspect of the story when the last paragraph of the book really brought everything together in his astounding way that was almost like a sort of epiphany in the book. It opened this sort of doorway which really resonated. In fact I think I may have bumped this book up from 4 stars to 5 because of the ending.

The World Enough and Time by Robert Penn Warren: I Found the majority of reading this book to have been an excoriating experiencing. In fact it is quite amazing that I somehow managed to finish it at all, but there were moments in which I did find certain aspects of the story interesting, and there was one character which I did enjoy so I stuck with it. But overall this book moved and a snails pace and was predominately more boring than not, yet I found that truly the ending of the book was the most enjoyable(and not just because it meant the book was over :biggrin5: ). I have to say in spite of my various contemplations of considering giving up on the book, though the ending might not have been enough to make me think the book as a whole as brilliant, it was enough to make me feel that in spite of all my difficulties and struggles, it was not a waste of time. The ending of this book did make it feel as if the reading of the rest to get to that point was worthwhile.

Have you had any experiences in which the end of the book has dramatically affected or changed your overall reading experience or impressions of a book. Has a books ending redeemed a book for your, or completely ruined a book?

Those long essays and lectures at the end of War and Peace ruined the book for me. I felt cheated, as though the whole point of his novel and it's gigantic length was that he couldn't summarize or condense his ideas, he had to show you in detail. Then he's like, "Oh, this is what the book is about." and I'm like, "You're telling me this 1400 pages in? You bastard!" Every page I'd worked through and struggled to understand it's meaning felt meaningless and a profound waste of time. "Why didn't you say that, and then write a 200 page novel? Jackass!"

Likewise, the ending to Of Human Bondage really lowered my estimation of the book. Note for note, it was pitch perfect, full of truth and life, and then the last 50 pages were full of pretty little lies and fabrications. It was like a loud wet fart at the end of a symphony.

Most books I've ever read I've been at least a little disappointed in the ending - not merely that if I'm enjoying it I don't want it to end, which is normal - but also that if I feel the ending is contrived in some way it can make me feel duped regarding the rest of the work

General speculation about better/preferable finales is a habit I think most readers fall into, certainly if the only option given is one of distaste


I think one of the oddest was The Third Policeman of which the publishers decided to include a post script letter from the author to explain the denouement - if it hadn't been included, well, actually I'm not sure how it would've read without it because it was staring at me immediately upon finishing the main body

Although it clarified O'Brian's intention, I just felt half-ripped off for not having it made plainer within the text, and half-bothered that I'd been reading a great work of Irish surrealism which was suddenly pointed out to me that that's in fact not what I'd been reading at all

If you ever get hold of a copy, get someone to cover the postscript letter for you and you may enjoy it more - but who can say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

..the ending to Of Human Bondage really lowered my estimation of the book. Note for note, it was pitch perfect, full of truth and life, and then the last 50 pages were full of pretty little lies and fabrications. It was like a loud wet fart at the end of a symphony.

---

A loud wet fart? I agree with you, but Maugham was gay, and covering for that badly. I picked up on that even without a college course. I took a lot of notes on this novel though, because he sexualizes disease in original ways.

A "loud, wet fart?!":skep:

Clearly our Mortal is not one ever at a loss for the perfect artistic turn of phrase.:frown2:

I was disappointed by the ending of Crime and Punishment. I thought the novel as a whole would've been more effective (and affective) as a full-on tragedy. I've only read it once, and that was in high school, but I remember being very invested in the book, very curious about what would happen to Raskolnikov, and then being cheated out of a good ending. I don't have a problem with the fact that he was redeemed (though I find the Christian rebirth symbolism cliched), but that the manner in which it was done was so rushed. It felt jarringly unrealistic, while the rest of the novel had been quite the opposite, with its acutely drawn characterizations and psychological insights. It felt like a cop-out.

And since we're on the topic of endings, how about potentially great unfinished works? I'm so curious about what Chaucer would've done to complete his Canterbury Tales or House of Fame.

I agree with the above post, I really like Dostoevsky and Crime and Punishment is great but the ending was rushed, no doubt. Im not sure if he meant to be that way because I know he was in a hurry to finish the novel because he had a time limit on it. Either way, it didnt fit in with the tragic, drawn out tone of the rest of the book. Even with the ending though its still probably my all time fav.

Barbara Pym: A Glass of Blessings. The ending that has been hinted at throughout the book is completely overturned on the last page: the skill with which it was done made me appreciate why some critics consider Pym to be a successor to Jane Austen.

I've been disappointed with almost every ending of Stephen King's novels, The Stand especially.

It definitely seems like the longer a work, the more potential for a let down at the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MystyrMystyry

I think one of the oddest was The Third Policeman of which the publishers decided to include a post script letter from the author to explain the denouement - if it hadn't been included, well, actually I'm not sure how it would've read without it because it was staring at me immediately upon finishing the main body

Although it clarified O'Brian's intention, I just felt half-ripped off for not having it made plainer within the text, and half-bothered that I'd been reading a great work of Irish surrealism which was suddenly pointed out to me that that's in fact not what I'd been reading at all

If you ever get hold of a copy, get someone to cover the postscript letter for you and you may enjoy it more - but who can say?

---

The Third Policeman is reason enough to disavow the glories of the Celtic legacy and its corruption of a classically superior Roman army. I purchased this little horror because of Lost, and assumed it was some kind of advanced surrealist tale.

For a Menippean satire, I think the ending works quite well; it's the meaning of that satire which gives pause. I tend to think Flann thinks Ireland is damned because it is not Anglican enough on the one hand, but lost its identity to the rest of Europe long ago.

A wild guess on my part.

In my experience, novels usually end sadly,happily or indifferently. In the case Of Human Bondage, it ended indifferently. A similar ending occurs at the end of The Sun Also Rises, whereas The Great Gatsby has a sad ending as does Buddenbrooks or L'assommoir. Dickens and Austen, of course, are aficionados of the happy ending. Another possible ending is the optimistic one but I don't recall many of those, except for Maupassant's Une Vie.
I generally take the ending as I find it without letting it spoil the rest of the book. As someone who has written three novels, I have had the endings worked out before I started writing. In the case of Maugham's OHB, I must agree that it read as though he hadn't thought out the ending in advance. Nevertheless, I would say that it is the book that influenced me more than any other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Those long essays and lectures at the end of War and Peace ruined the book for me. I felt cheated, as though the whole point of his novel and it's gigantic length was that he couldn't summarize or condense his ideas, he had to show you in detail. Then he's like, "Oh, this is what the book is about." and I'm like, "You're telling me this 1400 pages in? You bastard!" Every page I'd worked through and struggled to understand it's meaning felt meaningless and a profound waste of time. "Why didn't you say that, and then write a 200 page novel? Jackass!"

Likewise, the ending to Of Human Bondage really lowered my estimation of the book. Note for note, it was pitch perfect, full of truth and life, and then the last 50 pages were full of pretty little lies and fabrications. It was like a loud wet fart at the end of a symphony.

---

Heh. Two books I was considering reading this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

Heh. Two books I was considering reading this year.

---

They are both really great novels, so don't let me dissuade you on that point. They just could have been better, is what I'm saying. Of Human Bondage is still one of my favorite books. However, as Jozanny says, the text is heavily autobiographical and in the end Maugham is largely covering for his homosexuality. As for the Tolstoy, I have lots of good memories from that work too, and some editions take the essays out and place them after the story.

G K Chesterton's novel The Man Who Was Thursday ends with the protagonist waking up to find it has all been a dream (or that God did it, depending on your interpretation). It wouldn't have been so bad if the rest of the novel wasn't so completely brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi

I've been disappointed with almost every ending of Stephen King's novels, The Stand especially.

---

He almost redeemed the Dark Tower books with the ending... almost... but then he had to 'spell it out' for the reader and go 'Did you get it? See? Did you get it?' :skep:

I was pretty disappointed in the ending of Lord of the Flies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi

I've been disappointed with almost every ending of Stephen King's novels, The Stand especially.

It definitely seems like the longer a work, the more potential for a let down at the end.

---

For me the most disappointing was the ending of IT. It felt like a big let down, to have this evil clown figure tormenting these kids, and all these strange and chilling things happen, but than at the end it is just some sort of giant spider that lives in the sewer. Really? I read that entire book for that?

Maybe im a sucker for a happy ending,but all of dostoevskys main novels (incuding the house of the dead.) have weird endings,seemingly abrupt. Maybe dostoevsky wanted them that way to show it wasnt the final conclusive word,or to highlight some specific point?
The couple of exceptions i felt as good endings were bobok and especially a nasty tale.
The gambler and notes from the underground seemed reasonable endings as well.
But,Dostoevsky is such a great writer that he can be forgiven. Lesser writers would have their books thrown in the bin for such strange endings....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Those long essays and lectures at the end of War and Peace ruined the book for me. I felt cheated, as though the whole point of his novel and it's gigantic length was that he couldn't summarize or condense his ideas, he had to show you in detail. Then he's like, "Oh, this is what the book is about." and I'm like, "You're telling me this 1400 pages in? You bastard!" Every page I'd worked through and struggled to understand it's meaning felt meaningless and a profound waste of time. "Why didn't you say that, and then write a 200 page novel? Jackass!"

---

I liked the essays. After reading such a long novel, I felt like reading some related essays. I enjoyed the antics of the Rostov's et.al., and didn't feel that the need to distil one big idea out of their goings on, but I admired Tolstoy for doing such a distillation. After reading Tolstoy's essays i then lost the will, and didn't feel the need, to seek out more 'essays on the novel'. (After all that dry-ish philosophy I needed another novel!) In writing these essays, Tolstoy actually became his own main critic, analyser and commentator.

There are two books that I like a lot. They aren't exactly classics, both are relatively new (one in the last two years and the other the the last 5 or so - my point, I won't reveal the endings. Just that I was disappointed in how both ended.

The first, is my favorite of the two. "The Canal," by Lee Rouke. Honestly, close to a perfect story for me. Wish it did not lead to the painfully obvious conclusion that it did. Don't mind how it ended, so much. Just that it was a straight highway with a big neon sign and arrow.

The second was a fun read, but not as good. "Travels in the Scriptorum," by Paul Auster. This is just one of those that seems that it could have one more chapter. When it ended, I literally re-read the back cover to see if there was something I was missing.

^The one more chapter situation!

Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange had a movie version published which dropped the last chapter (though it included a glossary of the language)

But I found a copy of the original, and although it was sloppy, it tied up the loose ends

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wilde woman

I was disappointed by the ending of Crime and Punishment. I thought the novel as a whole would've been more effective (and affective) as a full-on tragedy. I've only read it once, and that was in high school, but I remember being very invested in the book, very curious about what would happen to Raskolnikov, and then being cheated out of a good ending. I don't have a problem with the fact that he was redeemed (though I find the Christian rebirth symbolism cliched), but that the manner in which it was done was so rushed. It felt jarringly unrealistic, while the rest of the novel had been quite the opposite, with its acutely drawn characterizations and psychological insights. It felt like a cop-out.

And since we're on the topic of endings, how about potentially great unfinished works? I'm so curious about what Chaucer would've done to complete his Canterbury Tales or House of Fame.

---

Yes - for a novel that built up a sense of inevitability and claustrophobia - Raskalnikov's redemption - through rescuing someone from a fire and the religious redemption come as a rushed disappointment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

I generally take the ending as I find it without letting it spoil the rest of the book. As someone who has written three novels, I have had the endings worked out before I started writing. In the case of Maugham's OHB, I must agree that it read as though he hadn't thought out the ending in advance. Nevertheless, I would say that it is the book that influenced me more than any other.

---

Do you think it depends upon the authors' method? I've read that there is a great variety of approaches, and perhaps the authors who write poor endings are more likely to be those who rely on inspiration rather than planning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Do you think it depends upon the authors' method? I've read that there is a great variety of approaches, and perhaps the authors who write poor endings are more likely to be those who rely on inspiration rather than planning.

---

Planning only takes us so far Paul; my story about a woman with MS who murders her caretaker starts at the end, as I am not doing a procedural. Hardest challenge is making her hatred and murder plausible, and it is the most difficult piece in my queue. I pity pot boiler authors and their commercial pressure; the need for sales makes for a lot of lame writing.

I found the ending of Rob Roy to be disappointing; it felt like there should have been a bit more detail at the end. Scott did make up for it by saying there was not room for yet another story on top of what he already wrote, but still. It felt too abrupt.
However, I very much liked the ending of The Gambler, it just felt so perfect for the type of story Dostoevsky was writing, and surprisingly, was even quite fulfilling. I must have pondered over that ending for days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Do you think it depends upon the authors' method? I've read that there is a great variety of approaches, and perhaps the authors who write poor endings are more likely to be those who rely on inspiration rather than planning.

---

Yes you are right about the different methodology used by writers. Some make copious notes while others seem to write from the top of their head. I was listening to a programme about John le Carre leaving a lot of work related papers and MSS that he has given to the Bodley Head Archives. The MS for Tinker,Tailor, Soldier, Spy, showed a mass of alterations where he had extensively revised the original story. Nowadays, it's much easier to do this using a computer but the MS still has to be proof read: which is a skill in itself, as I have found out to my cost. In my own case, I get an idea for a story but it has to have as strong central theme; otherwise it's just pulp fiction.
For example, my novel A Tangled Web came to me from being a member of this forum which gave me the idea of writing a story with a literary theme. As with the other's I had written, I made a rough draft of the outline, including the ending, and proceeded from there. The nearest analogy I can think of to writing a full length novel is that of a sculptor starting with a block of stone and gradually shaping it to a rough form before chipping away and refining it until, after a great deal of effort, he gets the desired result or, at least, something like it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emil Miller

Yes you are right about the different methodology used by writers. Some make copious notes while others seem to write from the top of their head. I was listening to a programme about John le Carre leaving a lot of work related papers and MSS that he has given to the Bodley Head Archives. The MS for Tinker,Tailor, Soldier, Spy, showed a mass of alterations where he had extensively revised the original story. Nowadays, it's much easier to do this using a computer but the MS still has to be proof read: which is a skill in itself, as I have found out to my cost. In my own case, I get an idea for a story but it has to have as strong central theme; otherwise it's just pulp fiction.
For example, my novel A Tangled Web came to me from being a member of this forum which gave me the idea of writing a story with a literary theme. As with the other's I had written, I made a rough draft of the outline, including the ending, and proceeded from there. The nearest analogy I can think of to writing a full length novel is that of a sculptor starting with a block of stone and gradually shaping it to a rough form before chipping away and refining it until, after a great deal of effort, he gets the desired result or, at least, something like it.

---

Your sculpture analogy suggests working on different parts at different times rather than a begin at the beginning and end at the end approach. I think that's how I would tackle such an undertaking. Would you use mindmapping in such an approach for the various themes, characterisation and plotlines?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Your sculpture analogy suggests working on different parts at different times rather than a begin at the beginning and end at the end approach. I think that's how I would tackle such an undertaking. Would you use mindmapping in such an approach for the various themes, characterisation and plotlines?

---

Not exactly, although the central theme is developed along various lines which interlink with each other to produce the finished work. In my first book this was much more marked, to the extent that the first two words were also the last two. The subsequent books were not so reliant on interconnectedness although, like the first, they did have a surprise ending.
In the most recent book, the protagonist is a somewhat pompous character who in the second chapter, intentionally sends up a radio programme in which he is being interviewed. The amusing potential of the man led me to abandon the original tragic nature of the story and turn the novel into a tragicomedy with comical asides on British and American mores, although the final sentence unexpectedly brings the story sharply back to tragedy.
So, in answer to your question, I would say yes, with the proviso that it is possible to change tack from the original conception and still arrive back with the original intention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emil Miller

Not exactly, although the central theme is developed along various lines which interlink with each other to produce the finished work. In my first book this was much more marked, to the extent that the first two words were also the last two. The subsequent books were not so reliant on interconnectedness although, like the first, they did have a surprise ending.
In the most recent book, the protagonist is a somewhat pompous character who in the second chapter, intentionally sends up a radio programme in which he is being interviewed. The amusing potential of the man led me to abandon the original tragic nature of the story and turn the novel into a tragicomedy with comical asides on British and American mores, although the final sentence unexpectedly brings the story sharply back to tragedy.
So, in answer to your question, I would say yes, with the proviso that it is possible to change tack from the original conception and still arrive back with the original intention.

---

Thanks that's very interesting. I suppose you need to keep your options open in case you spot an improvement in the original conception as you have indicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Thanks that's very interesting. I suppose you need to keep your options open in case you spot an improvement in the original conception as you have indicated.

---

Yes, but the downside is that the continuity of the story is broken. The correct way to do it it is to set out in the first instance to mingle the comedic aspect with the tragic in a way that allows for them to be incorporated in the story as two parts of a single whole, i.e as a black comedy. In my case, it was only after I had started writing that I realised the potential for comedy that existed in the story and I couldn't resist it. However, since I wasn't trying to emulate Tolstoy but just write an entertaining novel, it wasn't that important.

the best ending i´ve ever read was a short story by horacio quiroga called "el hijo" (the son) i got goosebump all over, and my jaw droped super low. i dont know if there's an english translation.

I read almost the whole of Tale of two Cities without liking it as much as the other Dickens novels I'd read. The characters especially, with the exception of the Defarges, were supremely uninteresting. Then I came to the last pages and I already knew the plot, so was waiting with resignation for Sydney Carton's supreme sacrifice - and then he started his speech, and I was blown away! I felt I'd never read anything so moving in my life.

A similar thing happened with Tess of the Durbervilles. I found the characters and the idiotic things they did so annoying that I was ready to say I hated the book, but the end was wonderful. It seemed to elevate and beautify the whole book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MystyrMystyry

^The one more chapter situation!

Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange had a movie version published which dropped the last chapter (though it included a glossary of the language)

But I found a copy of the original, and although it was sloppy, it tied up the loose ends

---

I think them dropping the last chapter for the American version totally killed the point they were trying to make, wouldn't you agree? The American version simply seems to glorify violence and anarchy (which the author wasn't too happy about after the book became popular) and readers often seem to miss the point that the book addresses that you cannot mechanically force an individual to change, but they must undergo this change on their own. Without the ending, most people I know think it's just about defying "the man," which just makes me facepalm in frustration.

An ending to a story is essential as was said. It can make an average book good, a good book average or in the case of 1984 a great book even better. I read that thinking the whole time, "wow this is good, very clever." Then came the final 100 pages and I will never forget that ending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanteAlexander

I think them dropping the last chapter for the American version totally killed the point they were trying to make, wouldn't you agree? The American version simply seems to glorify violence and anarchy (which the author wasn't too happy about after the book became popular) and readers often seem to miss the point that the book addresses that you cannot mechanically force an individual to change, but they must undergo this change on their own. Without the ending, most people I know think it's just about defying "the man," which just makes me facepalm in frustration.

---

I must agree completely. To be quite honest that was the only part of the book that I enjoyed, the rest of it was hellish with the slang and the rest of the events seemed somewhat pointless without it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Dante

An ending to a story is essential as was said. It can make an average book good, a good book average or in the case of 1984 a great book even better. I read that thinking the whole time, "wow this is good, very clever." Then came the final 100 pages and I will never forget that ending.

---

That was my first 'intellectual' novel and it was remarkable in the way that it just kept you going until the last word. You just don't see it coming, even after you've finished the novel your mind is still trying cope with the fact that you were wrong all along and there is no hope.

Hands down best ending goes to Steinbeck for Grapes of Wrath. Poignant, elegant and relavent. Worst goes to Ian McEwan for atonement. We all saw it coming, found the whole book frustrating and groaned at the cliched briony wrote it wooooooooo. Very unimpressed.

'The Alchemist' by Paulo Coelho has an enigmatic ending ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

A similar thing happened with Tess of the Durbervilles. I found the characters and the idiotic things they did so annoying that I was ready to say I hated the book, but the end was wonderful. It seemed to elevate and beautify the whole book.

---

My experience was different. I liked most of the story but loathed the ending.

I was annoyed with the end of Captain Correlli's Mandolin by Louis de Bernieres. The way I saw it, the story was essentially over with the end of the war. He could have given it a happy ending with Correlli coming back and marrying his sweetheart, but that would have been weak, and pat and boring. He could have given it a sad ending with Correlli not having survived the war, or perhaps falling in love with another woman, but that would have been unbearably sad. So he gave it a semi-sad ending in which, because of some misunderstanding, neither of the lovers marry and only meet up decades later when they're both old. He should have just given it the weak, but happy ending IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesRhodes

G K Chesterton's novel The Man Who Was Thursday ends with the protagonist waking up to find it has all been a dream (or that God did it, depending on your interpretation). It wouldn't have been so bad if the rest of the novel wasn't so completely brilliant.

---

James I admire for being able to read the book. Too councily and anrachist for me. it very much reminds me of George Orwell type of books.
I guess the name Sunday in there just did my head in.
I find unsettling when proper names become people's namez . When someone call themselves Paris or Jordan or even the Sun when they are primarily proper names. It just takes away that incentive to what to read anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kev67

My experience was different. I liked most of the story but loathed the ending.

---

It wasn't the actual events that happened in the end that did it for me. It was the way it was written. There were other parts, for instance Angel carrying Tess in his sleep, which were really beautiful, but I just couldn't get around the fact that he was behaving like a jerk. But the end was written so well, and I didn't fault Tess for what she did, and Angel was no longer a jerk, and it all became beautiful and tragic and sublime. :)

SPOILER***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mona amon

But the end was written so well, and I didn't fault Tess for what she did, and Angel was no longer a jerk, and it all became beautiful and tragic and sublime. :)

---

I'm afraid I did blame Tess. The previous book I read was Great Expectations, in which Pip behaved badly through most of the book, but when his world crumbled behaved as well as anyone could be expected to. When Tess's world crumbled, she behaved very badly, for a person she must have known was not worth it. It was not just that. Tess had given up her simple Christian faith for Angel, so the implication was that she did not just die, but that her ultimate fate was either damnation or oblivion. I thought that was rather sick.

I read that Thomas Hardy said that had Tess lived, Angel would have started to blame her in time, as Tess seemed to think. So, it may not be true Angel was no longer a jerk.