Re-reading a book of Writer Balakumaran, after 6-7 years set me thinking for the quintessential dramatic need at the end of every story. While dramatic need is a concept often talked about during the script writing stages of a movie-making, it plays a vital role in usually completing the story that had started.
Just like screen-writing, even the books have three distinct stages viz., the start, conflict and the end. Towards the end, most writers seem to hurry in sneaking a dramatic need and completing the story. This could either be due to the lack of space/time and other undocumented reasons. One other reason could be that the writer probably has already started work on his next project and wants to rush through the current one.
Anbulla Appa, a short novel of Balakumaran which was out during the late 90s did impress me at that time due to the philosophical values it hinted. Was discussing this with some friends a few days back and it prompted me to go back and re-read it. Reading a same book after few years is a wonderful feeling. At a sub-conscious level it scales your mental growth.
Coming back, Anbulla Appa talks about a teenager who due to his family compulsions is set to be sold for adoption. What follows is how he wades through these tough days to grasp the meaning of relationships. While the book itself is very philosophical, at the fag-end it stuck me that the writer rushed through the final parts just to complete the story. This is exactly where the dramatic need of the story gets transformed to a dramatic super-urgency. All the time, during the book, he was relaxed in preaching philosophy and just at the point of climax, speeded through. A similar quick-end also came to his recent book, Yezhaavathu Kaathal.
If this is in a case of a movie, I agree to the rational behind it. Making the movie climax at appropriate length is an art and its a tightrope walk. But a book can always accommodate two more extra pages to give completeness to the story. A movie watcher is tad different from a book reader. A book reader, presumably spends more time than in reading a decent sized novel and the most important distinction is that he reads it alone. Unlike movies which are watched mostly alongwith public. So the bond that the writer strikes with the reader is much better than a movie director. He can use this liberty to his favor. At times at the end of the book, I feel a let down. A let down just because the writer rushed through the final stuff.
Balakumaran is just used here as a reference. All or most of the writers have at some point of their writing career have done this. Now the question I am pondering over is that, if I am the odd one noticing stuff like this or are there other takers with better explanations ?