Posts
I've seen many things in critique forums, but only rarely do I see people critiquing the title*. For novels, chances are the editors will change it anyway if it's pants. But the same isn't true for shorts, where they often get published with the original author-chosen title. If the title is pants, it's important for critiquers to say so.
Often, it isn't that the title is completely silly. It describes the story well enough. It's just that for shorts, you're competing against the other stories in the table of contents. You want your story to be the one the reader chooses to read first (even in print markets, I don't start at the beginning and read through... I'm not alone in that).
Several months later, you want the reader to remember that title and be able to find it. Call your horror story "The Vampire" and the battle is lost.
It isn't easy to define what makes a distinctive title. It'll vary from reader to reader**. But then, that's what public critique is for... getting a range of opinions. So next time throws you a short for critique, spare a moment on the title.
-
* And most times I do see such critiques, it's to tell the author they can't call their vampire romance "Twilight". Though avoiding popular titles is a good thing to mention, it's not the only thing.
** You're welcome to give examples of titles you've loved in the comments (loving your own title doesn't count).
2 ink splashes:
Very well said. I can't start writing without a title (most of the time). If I get that wrong the rest is downhill from there.
I've gone both ways. Sometimes the title comes first. Sometimes I pull it from the story.
Post a Comment