Does anybody agonise over titles? (As I do)

Are they essential in setting tone?

Will your title encourage an editor to open the manuscript?

Is your title designed to make a customer to pluck the book from the shelf.

Looking at my own stuff. I wrote a weird short story “Compliments of the Season.” A chosen cliché, designed to mislead. It does, however serve as almost a 'plot key', providing the conclusion.

Or I'm working on “Fibonaccis Child” - the title hopefully creating insight for some and intrigue for others. Or should I go for a cliched bastardisation like “Twin Terrors”?

Or do you favour the Ronseal approach?

Whatever title you choose is likely to be changed by the publisher, so it's probably best not to get too attached to it.


- NaomiM

I'd second what Naomi says.

I'm not a fan of 'Ronseal' titles either - I prefer there to be a bit of mystery. Something to tempt me into opening the book and finding out what it is all about.

A cliché for a title might back-fire - a reader won't know it is ironic and tongue in cheek until they start reading the story/novel. And a cliché might make them think, wrongly, that the story is clichéd too.

I really like it in poetry when the title is also the first line of the poem. I'd like to do that with a novel, but I think it wouldn't be as clear.

You could probably pull it of with chapter headings though.

J

And yes, I agonise...

Whatever title you choose is likely to be changed by the publisher, so it's probably best not to get too attached to it.

Strange attitude. Why bother giving it a title at all? Maybe the publishers change titles because the author put no effort in to it. I don't know.

What I do know is!

I'll still go with anything that get's the book opened, any little advantage you can gain. The title is the first thing that get's read. Even if the publisher were to change it. If it was a factor in getting the manuscript to the desk and
and opened. I'll work hard on it. Sadly the world is about presentation before content.

If your positive enough you'll realise the title is what you'll be remembered by. When somebody goes into WH Smiths asking for "The book, the one with the woman with the three toes - What is it?" Either you should have paid more attention to the title, or your publishher let you down.

If it was a factor in getting the manuscript to the desk and opened.

I very much doubt the title would be at the top of an Agent's list for what to read and what not to read off the slush pile, with the possible exception of:
The crazy ones: 'Read this or I'm going to shoot myself'. The fan-fics: 'Pride and Prejudice - the honeymoon years'.
Or, that you've sent your genre MS to the wrong Agent: 'Star Man Vol.I - Search for Atari; Johnny's Little Choo-choo Train.


- NaomiM

<Added>

Personally, I quite like Compliments of the Season.

Oh yes, definitely (I agonise) - there are three threads up at the moment about just this subject, one of which is mine. My novel's called The Change - which may put agents off, but it is quite a good title for the content of the novel. I dunno. I think you can argue the off-the-wall ones in two ways: 1) They're too complex to be remembered or 2) They're so weird that something about them will be remembered (like the Ukraine Tractor one). I s'pose it's more important for novels because people will be (hopefully) recommending them by word of mouth. But then, you could also argue that the author's name should be memorable too - esp. since you are more likely to ask for the new Salman Rushdie than the title, once the author is a bestseller.
Susiex

I'll try and pull Susie in here too! Noami - get in character! Your an editor, publisher, whatever. 20 submissions land on your desk daily, you're behind, take five home for the weekend. How you gonna pick 'em?

Title! You've got nothing else to go on. And yes Susie Angela is right!

Pick one?

Me and the Hoe - Michael Scott
Me and the Hoe - Michelle Scott
Me and the Hoe - Percy Thrower

You know it makes sense!

No, Percy Thrower didn't write 'Me And The Hoe' - he wrote 'Me And The Javelin'.
But I do think an agent's more likely to pick up something that's professionally presented and succinctly described than simply by title?
Susiex

No, sorry Susie I can't agree, and I must disparage somebody in order to prove my point. I have a screenplay by another. It's called "Clone" with the logline. "A clone is produced with unforseen side effects" (Or something like that) I WON'T READ IT! I can't - I have concluded the writer has no imagination, I've read it, seen it and dreamed it before! "If had been called... Arghh! "In pursuit of my youth." or "The benefits of hindsight." Maybe I would have clicked!
If a publisher spots a typo, you've got further than most. I'm a novice here, but I do know about the music industry. What demos get listened to, and why.

How different can it possibly be? It's shocking, repeat, shocking! What can be done once you've climbed the first hurdle.

How you gonna pick 'em?

Well, for a start, I'm the Agent's assistant/secretary. The Agent is far too busy reading fulls to bother with the slush pile.
Out immediately are the ones written in green ink, printed on coloured paper, hand written, littered with typos and/or grammatical mistakes, written in rhyming couplets, envelope filled with glitter, first 3 chapters single spaced, obviously not our genre - ok, I can probably tell that from the title; at the very least I can tell from the covering
letter.
That probably gets me down to a handful. Of these, I skim read down to the end of the first page (or maybe just to the end of the first paragraph), which leaves me two potential mss, the rest I drop back into their SAEs.


<Added>

er, just to be clear before anyone starts sending me submissions, this is just a game of 'fantasy agent'.

Titles aren't dealbreakers at the submission stage. They are, very, very often changed, not unilaterally by your publisher without a word, but as one part of the whole editorial process - it happened to both of mine. But I'd never say, 'the publisher changed the title' I'd say, 'We changed the title, along with a zillion other things.'

It's good if you have a great title - all helps to grab attention - but it's not a disaster if you don't: something which is just okay, which says on the tin what the book does will do. Agents know that, when they're reading. I think it's a drawback if it doesn't have a name at all, though - the name is its identity. My agent asked for a title for the novel I'm not even going to start till after Christmas at the earliest - because until then in a funny way it doesn't exist.

As to how agents decide which ones to read, Naomi's quite right: have a look here: http://www.writewords.org.uk/forum/112_238342.asp

What makes an agent decide what to read, they'll all vary hugely, but this would be typical: They'll glance at the letter - is this the kind of book we represent? (Very often it isn't, so straight back in the SAE). The title will have to change, okay. Then the first two paragraphs, maybe a page or two. If that doesn't grab them, straight back in the SAE. If it leaps off the page, or the premise described in the letter is compelling tho' the writing's only so-so, they'll maybe read a page or three from the middle. If they're still thinking that they might want to call in the whole thing (we're down to less than 5% here) they'll stuff the synopsis and chapters in their briefcase to read on the way home. Then on Monday maybe see what a colleague thinks. Then maybe drop you a line asking for the whole thing, perhaps outlining a little of what they think works and doesn't (less than 1%). Then maybe sign you (less than 0.05%). The title really doesn't come into it.

I like Compliments of the Season, btw. Very creepy.

Emma

The gist of your post indicates you will exhaust every form of 'first impression' excluding title. At least I am I honest. I did not go to see Bend it with Beckham at the cinema, it was dismissed based on title. Despite what you say the facts remain.

In a world of Headlines and Bullet points - title is everything. If you are telling me that members don't scroll through posts and decide what to read based on title - you are wrong.

Well first impressions include things like typefaces, but unless they're really weird or unreadable or green, agents just sigh, adjust their glasses, and keep reading.

My point is that one of an agent's chief professional skills is to see through first impressions to what may - or may not - be a novel worth investigating.

Emma

I'll try and drag this back, and try to explain. Agonising and working from from title to end.

"Fibonaccis Child"

For those not familiar with Mathematics, "The Fibonacci Sequence" (Does that have a Da Vinci Code ring to it?) It's a set of naturally occurring numbers.

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,....

So in literary mirror.. A female genetic scientist who has nothing (0) and wants the one (1) thing, starts the ball rolling... slowly things will become unmanageable.

The Error?
Egg comes from a twin, likely to produce more twins, get a spreadsheet the sequence will increase more quickly.


To Compound the Error.
The initial (1) - Should have been (2) (Don't mess about with nature) Under laboratory conditions, the egg that should have split to produce different sexed identical twins, re-fuses. Appearing female, the resulting child is a hermaphrodite, self fertilizing every 12-15 months, producing a litter of two.

Horrify the error.
The (1) was a clone of the (0) - therefore, you have no new genetic input. Upon reaching puberty, the offspring are clones. How long before there are millions of the identical little suckers? To take over the world.

Question the Error.
Bring in Aristophane's myth of when we were all one being and the gods were jealous, so we were spilt-apart into man and woman - This is how we were supposed to be.

It's horror / SF but it works for me.

Can you see where the agonising oover the title comes from?