Fussing over titles

[mrissa]

I was talking to Michelle about my books, and she brought up an association that has worried me before. timprov suggested that AKICILJ was a good principle to use, but it seems to me that it's opinion more than knowledge. So here we go, and please feel free to elaborate in comments:

[Poll #423689]

Note: please do not get abusive about titles. I have an acquaintance who said things to me (about a different title) like, "Did you pick that title because you want people to ignore your book?" Behavior like that is one reason this person counts as an acquaintance and not as a friend right now. If you think Sampo is a horrible title and you'd never read a book of that name, there are far better ways to express that sentiment.

Comments

[mkille.livejournal.com]

Little Black Sambo is a perennial librarianship example. For example, is it OK to get Julius Lester's version--called, I think, Sam and the Tigers--because even though it's not at all offensive, just knowing its source might offend people? Is it OK to have Little Black Sambo somewhere other than the children's collection, because of historical significance? That sort of thing. So I'm surprised to hear that it might not be the bonfire of potential controversy I've been led to see it as.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I'm not surprised that a profession would use something as an example of controversy consistently enough to give it greater significance. I doubt that anybody cares much about Madonna's Sex any more, but I could see where community responses to that might be instructive to a novice librarian.