Titles & subtitles
Oh dear, the bothersome business of titles.
It's a strange thing, really. No one in the trade minds much what you put on the cover of your manuscript. Until a final decision is made by your publisher (and rubberstamped by you), all titles are effectively 'working titles' only. With subtitles (for non-fiction), it's the same deal. Only once has a book of mine worn the same title to the printers as it was wearing when it went to my agent for the first time.
Yet for all that a title is provisional, just as publishers are pitching to retailers, you're pitching to publishers. And titles matter. I've got a book proposal at the moment, which I want to call something like "STORY: Why smart people read bad books".
I think that sums up the promise of the book pretty neatly. And although the book does include a fair bit of popular science and smuggles in a bit of lit crit as well, the subtitle makes it feel like its own unique thing - not some mishmash of popular science and lit crit. (A mishmash, needless to say, which would never enjoy the happy suns of the 3-for-2 tables).
But is the subtitle too negative? After all, the book is also about why smart people read good books - why everyone reads books at all, and why story is so weirdly prevalent in our culture.
I ask, because I genuinely don't know. I thought my subtitle worked. I thought I'd cracked the secret of the commercial title/subtitle. My agent, however, reckons that the manuscript itself is good, but that the subtitle is too negative and fails to sell the book. Is he right? Maybe. He usually (drat the man!) is. But I'm crap on titles and I thought I had it. I think it's back to the drawing board time ...
It's a strange thing, really. No one in the trade minds much what you put on the cover of your manuscript. Until a final decision is made by your publisher (and rubberstamped by you), all titles are effectively 'working titles' only. With subtitles (for non-fiction), it's the same deal. Only once has a book of mine worn the same title to the printers as it was wearing when it went to my agent for the first time.
Yet for all that a title is provisional, just as publishers are pitching to retailers, you're pitching to publishers. And titles matter. I've got a book proposal at the moment, which I want to call something like "STORY: Why smart people read bad books".
I think that sums up the promise of the book pretty neatly. And although the book does include a fair bit of popular science and smuggles in a bit of lit crit as well, the subtitle makes it feel like its own unique thing - not some mishmash of popular science and lit crit. (A mishmash, needless to say, which would never enjoy the happy suns of the 3-for-2 tables).
But is the subtitle too negative? After all, the book is also about why smart people read good books - why everyone reads books at all, and why story is so weirdly prevalent in our culture.
I ask, because I genuinely don't know. I thought my subtitle worked. I thought I'd cracked the secret of the commercial title/subtitle. My agent, however, reckons that the manuscript itself is good, but that the subtitle is too negative and fails to sell the book. Is he right? Maybe. He usually (drat the man!) is. But I'm crap on titles and I thought I had it. I think it's back to the drawing board time ...
22 Comments
How about something like: STORY:
good reads, bad books and guilty pleasures
why good readers love bad books
why bad books make good reads
why clever readers love bad books [sorry, you won't get me to use 'smart' in the American sense]
feel the guilt and read it anyway [no, not seriously]
and so on... BTW, I do hope you get it published. I love stuff which draws together material from lots of disciplines.
In the interests of openness, I should add that my draft title has been "YGUDUH" - a deliberately baffling combination of letters and one only explained in the course of the book. Everyone tells me that that title is hopeless.
But it may be a bit old hat these days.
How about STORY: Why smart people read bad books, too.
You can read that as 'smart people, too' or 'bad books, too' - either way, more positive.
Also, would you consider ART OF STORY or maybe better, SECRET OF STORY?
Although some people may like to consider themselves as smart, it might alienate those who consider ourselves above average on a good day? We may feel that the book is pitched only at the select few who are blessed with a formidable intellect.
I've racked my brain for an alternative and come up with squat to match Emma's first suggestion, STORY: good reads, bad books and guilty pleasures. It promises both enlightenment and entertainment and brings a smile from the outset.
Ironically, having combed the shelves of Foyles only yesterday looking for a similar book on film story i.e. how poor scripts make it to the screen and what we learn from viewing them, I’d definitely have picked up a book displaying such a title as Emma’s and given it a good second look.
I hope that you are able to reach an amicable solution with your agent. Good luck.
I've just finished reading about Clint Eastwood and this short ditty popped into my head:
The Good, The Bad & The Story (and if you want a subtitle) :Why we read
Harry, I think Slipweed has just solved your problem - that is just the best title ever!
Kim, have you found Robert McKee's Story? It's the bible of scriptwriting... (sorry, Harry, that's the only drawback of calling yours that...)
Robert McKee - yes, I've read as much of that book as I can stand. My brother once went to a weekend workshop run by the great man and said he found it so boring he was forced to eat his own leg. I'm fairly sure he exaggerrates a little, or if not, then he's got a good prosthetician.
Richard Kearney - no, but I've just ordered it. Yummy!
http://www.onfiction.ca/
It's a group blog on the psychology of storytelling...
Whisks - yours is the title, of course. No need for further thought. Emma - how come you know everything? You're like a kind of literary Google.
Am part way into Richard Kearney. Enjoying it, but I have my arguments with it too. And all the better it is for that
Click here to sign up now.