Talk:Keefe and Sophie/@comment-71.226.99.58-20191014231554/@comment-2A02:C7D:4B01:3F00:840F:80E3:4BB7:AFD5-20191015200343

^ Yes, I agree, but it's important not to overwhelm the readers. In books like HoO and ToA, there's a lot of complex Greek and Roman mythology that readers who are uneducated of these may not understand. Keeping it a bit more simple in the case of not ending a book on a cliffhanger can be nice for the reader because it doesn't stray from any other unanswered questions in the book (which there are in ToA). I think SM overloads us on information and questions and action all at once and it can get a bit... I don't know how to put it... too busy? It can be difficult to process all at once and it makes it easier for readers to forget things which can be important. I mean, Flashback was a hard push on the 'not too much information at once' thing, but that book made me feel so many negative emotions towards characters and some of the writing in general (no offence here, I love KOTLC). I went on a ramble there. All I'm saying is that cliffhangers aren't always necessary to make the reader want to, well, keep reading. They are very useful when writing and getting readers but they can just put on added pressure.