Blogger: Etta Wilson
Location: Books & Such Office, Nashville
Weather: Hot for Spring
I was browsing the bookstores and my local library last week, and some things I’ve known for some time about titles were readily evident:
1) Titles are crucial in determining whether a book is picked up.
2) Titles published by general market publishers often have more pizazz than those published by Christian publishers.
Granted I’m thinking mostly about children’s picture books, but here are a few examples:
General market picture books–If You Give a Mouse a Cookie (or a Moose a Muffin) by Laura Numeroff, Fancy Nancy by Jane O’Connor, Oh, the Places You’ll Go by Dr. Seuss.
Christian market picture books–The Prayer That Makes God Smile by Stormie O’Martian, So that’s What God Is Like by LeAnne Hardy, and one crossover title–Why War Is Never a Good Idea by Alice Walker
It seemed rather consistent that picture book titles for the general market were more enticing with a bit of mystery to both the child reader and the parent, who is helping with the selection. While those for the Christian market were clear from the get-go. One type seems written with fun in mind while the other has a more serious purpose. I’m generalizing, and I’d be glad to hear your thoughts, but I wonder how much our titles should tip off the reader about the content.
Do you agree with Shakespeare: “That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”?
I believe that Christian literature for any age can–and should–inspire the imagination. An excellent example of this would anything by Charles Martin. His books are so deep yet are so beautifully written that they require imagination. It’s a marriage of the two elements that is entirely possible. After all, didn’t Jesus teach through Story?
Teaching doesn’t have to be sacrficed for the sake of Story, and neither should Story be sacrificed for the sake of a specific teaching. It’s our job as writers who are Christians to find ways to depict truths in our stories without them being cliche, cheap, or substandard stories when compared to others in the literary world.
As a writer, I try to use imagination in every aspect of my stories, titles included. As a reader/consumer, I gravitate towards the books with similar, creative titles. If a title is too straightforward, it immediately goes back on the shelf without any further consideration on my part. Perhaps that is presumptuous, but I can usually only buy a one or two books at a time and I’d rather have Story instead of a Sunday school lesson.
I don’t disagree with Shakespeare when it comes to roses or the love of your life, but I think it’s a bit different with books.
Even if I know an author or if it’s a best-selling author I’ve never read but want to try out, the title can intice me to pick out a book.
Maybe we can take a lesson from the general market when it comes to creativity in titles. However, my understanding is that authors don’t have a lot of say (other than suggestions) when it comes to titles.
Some of my favorite titles for fiction books include:
Black by Ted Dekker
Thr3e by Ted Dekker
Monster by Frank Peretti
Odd Thomas by Dean Koontz
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card
The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien
Shoofly Pie by Tim Downs
Some titles that I don’t really care for:
The Road by Cormac McCarthy
Blink of an Eye by Ted Dekker (I prefer the original title “Blink”)
The Return of the Guardian-King by Karen Hancock (Gee, this one doesn’t sound ANYTHING like a certain other fantasy book I’ve read)
Hood by Stephen Lawhead
Brisingr by Christopher Paolini
I actually like a great number of these books, even some of those whose titles I don’t care for. “Hood” by Stephen Lawhead is the beginning of one of my favorite trilogies. But “Hood” sounds dumb–I’m sorry, but it does. And the final book in that trilogy, “Tuck”, sounds even worse.
“Brisingr” by Christopher Paolini . . . do I even need to comment on this? It should have a pronunciation on the cover of the book. It looks like a typo meant to read “Bringer”, which would be another lame title. Whoever thought the day would come when a book was the title of a made up word of a made up language of a made up world. “The Fellowship of the Ring” and its sequel: “Ethelas Leaves”.
A good title intrigues me. “Odd Thomas” is perfect. You have to know why this guy is named “Odd”.
“Lord of the Rings” also works because it sounds epic, grand–except the being a lord of some rings doesn’t sound all that impressive. You want to see what’s so special about these rings. There is a mystery within the title that you must read the book to solve.
Alas, I think I have to agree with you, Etta, that CBA titles have a tendency to be stale. Not always, but more often than is healthy.
So I suppose we shouldn’t judge a book by the cover OR the title.
Excellent post, Etta. My upcoming book is a case in point. I had titled it, “Dogwood Winter” which my publisher changed to “The Frontiersman’s Daughter.” This second title captures the very heart of the book. I’m so thankful for marketing folks who take the time to make a title really count. By the way, “If You Give a Mouse a Cookie” is a favorite in our house:) And it sums up the book to a T.
I totally agree that a title sets the tone for the entire book. I tend to have a dry sense of humor with snarky undertones so my title lets the readers know that they can expect this type of humor in the book.
I completely agree about titles. I will pick up a book from the shelf if it’s title makes me go, “Huh? What’s THAT about?” If it’s already obvious, why bother to pick it up and read the back copy? I only have a few bucks to spend on books, so you must grab my sense of curiousity. One of my pet peeves, however, is when I’m done reading a novel and I still don’t really understand what the title had to do with the story. Of course, by that point I’ve already spent the money, so maybe it doesn’t matter. 🙂
Oh man, those Christian PB titles made me laugh out loud. Yes, situated next to Give a Moose a Muffin and Fancy Nancy, the Christian titles don’t make a good showing.
I also appreciated James’ comments on Brisingr, though Hood and Tuck never bothered me.
I am terrible at titles and I wish I wasn’t because I think they are vital.
James, that’s a terrific list, or at least one I agree with. Thanks for sending. I suspect that Stephen Lawhead’s third title, Tuck, was taken from Natalie Babbit’s well-known wonderful book Tuck Everlasting, but I haven’t read Lawhead.
Etta
Titles and artwork do make a difference. I think a little fun should be added even when the purpose is serious.
Wow, you’ve really got me worried about one children’s book of mine that is heading out for consideration. I think I’ll take some time to reconsider titles.
However, I think we need to keep in mind the fact that Fancy Nancy and the other titles mentioned are complete chameleon books–books that fit into any setting, whether that be school, home, etc… Whereas the CBA titles won’t necessarily fit well into, say, an atheist’s book bag. You wouldn’t want to give a generic title to a book with a Christian theme and then have the reader stunned and furious at what they bought…
Although it’s rare that folks aren’t savvy enough to read the back cover or catalog copy…
Good stuff to think about, Etta!
Actually, the title “Tuck” does work for the plot. The trilogy is a new take on the Robin Hood legend, so the titles have a purpose. I love the books, but I think the titles almost sound comical. “Hood”, like “Boys in the–”
Now the name of the series: “The King Raven Trilogy” works very nicely. And they are really very good, just poorly christened
Karen, it does happen that in an effort to be creative or distinctive, those who create titles can be too obscure in thinking them up. There’s also the title built on current or regional slang that doesn’t have meaning after a few years. I wonder about the Ya Ya Sisterhood titles.
Etta
Jane,
Or maybe you would–want a general market reader to pick up a book with a catchy generic title and Christian content. It might recall for him or her something they believed as a child but had given up later.
Etta