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

[songwind.livejournal.com]

I picked "not at all" on the title, but that's not quite true. I only picked that because you didn't have an option of "Only if it's really, really stupid." I can't think of a real life example right now, but it's possible that a book's title could be so silly, so annoying, that I wouldn't read a sequel to a book I enjoyed. I think that a title that zeroed in on my least favorite or even disliked part of a previous book would probably cause me to avoid it until I could check it out of the library.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

to avoid it until I could check it out of the library.

Snrk. Oh, the horror! Waiting to get it from the library!

[songwind.livejournal.com]

Heh. I meant, rather than being willing to spend money on it, or feeling any urgency to read it right away. Silly monkey.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I know what you meant, but it still makes you a pretty big book ho.

Which puts you in good company around here.

[songwind.livejournal.com]

Luckily for me, cadithial is an even bigger book ho than I am, so I can usually borrow any book I'm iffy about from him.