Coming up with a good title for your book is a tricky business. There was an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education a few weeks ago about the convention of “Vague General Title: More accurate but perhaps less interesting subtitle.” Sadly, the working title of my own draft book falls squarely into this mode. It’s hard to avoid it while also staying away from the grandiose, the misleading, the glib or the overly cheesy. Not all disciplines face this problem to the same degree. My other half is an old fashioned analytic metaphysician, for instance, and when you are developing a new property mereology to solve problems in ontology then you can get away with a book title like Objects, which might in other respects seem rather general.
One persistent trend is books titled “American [Whatever].” American Dynasty, American Skin,
Given the prevalence of this kind of title, maybe I should re-name my own book — which is about blood and organ donation in the U.S. and Europe — to American Kidneys.
Ah, but you’re presuming that the publisher will let you keep your title/subtitle. Mine first requested a change in the title, then decided that the subtitle by itself would be even better. So my colon went the way of all punctuation marks.
How about
American Spleen: Kidney Donation In Europe And Otherwhere
How ‘bout simply naming your book “Blood and Organ Donation in the U.S. and Europe”?
I’m only half joking.
I thought I was the only one who had grown weary of the non-fiction book naming convention that is so prevalent today. It would be refreshing, I reckon, to see the occassional book titled using 1950’s style rules (though maybe awfully uncommercial).
The “Vague general title etc.” book naming convention does seem to work well. There’s no other way to do it that I can think of. But BOY OH BOY is it unoriginal.
Wasn’t “American Skin” the name of a novel published in the UK by an American novelist a few years back?
I thought the title thing had been decided long ago:
Lincoln’s Doctor’s Dog
nuff said
From the Chronicle’s “New Scholarly Books”, I find that Kim Evans’ celebrated dissertation, “Call Me Queequeg”, has been adapted into a book for the University of Minnesota Press simply titled, Whale! So I wonder whether the coming trend is one-word titles with exclamation marks, like in musicals. Transplant! or some such. Think of how many titles could have been improved by this method.
Atlantic Transplants
Dying to Live
Glands Across the Water
Can We Have Your Liver, Then?
Two Nations Divided By a Common Lung Wish
When I worked in publishing there was (at least at my firm) a rash of titles of the form “Between X and Y”, sometimes varied to “From X to Y”. Scans well, includes the words you want and leaves the contents open. BTW, I think Welsh Skin sounds rather good, though I can’t decide whether the genre is porno, murder-mystery, or celebrity autobiography (Catherine Zeta-Jones?).
On principle, I never buy a book bearing the imprint of the “Vague Grandiose Title: slightly less vague subtitle” formula, especially if the author has a middle initial.
Still, if you must, how about: “Get Organ-ized: How to spill your guts and make a million”? But I prefer “Venting Spleen”, which would play nicely on the Romance language connotations of ‘selling’ (vendre etc) and ‘bellies’ (ventre etc), as well as conjuring visions of innards being ‘vented’ from one’s cavities (hey, I’m warming to the subject). And presumably your book will be mildly critical of someone, somewhere so the title will also have its usual English connotations.
“American Organs” - for that special double-entendre appeal.
I’ve always been fond of the “Rocky and Bullwinkel” form of titles- for the most simple version, just drop the colon (no pun intended, given it’s about organs!) and put in an “or”. But, it’s better if you can make the first part serious, the second a bit funny. Another under-used style today is the long baroque title- try putting as much of the introduction or preface as you can in the tile, seems to be the style.
“Jigsaw Men”, in allusion to the similarly titled Larry Niven story.
Where does this idea that vague grandiose titles are a recent phenomenon come from? The fifties, which P.B. Almeida suggests was a less commercial time, was the heyday of these titles (and these kinds of books): “The Lonely Crowd,” “The Organization Man,” “The Last Landscape,” “American Dilemma” (well, that was the forties), “The Image,” etc.
Bret Easton Ellis, “American Psyco”
My dissertation title has no colon and no subtitle. Several people in the department (history) told me in a patronizing tone that it was “charming” and “old-fashioned.” Me — I thought it was just clear. However, a couple colleagues in English recently told me that their advisors had expressed the opinion that a clever title (of the type in question, vague:subtitle) was every bit as important as the content. WTF?
Of Blood and Guts
The Kidneys: A Euro-American Dynasty, From Humble Beginnings to Power in Massachusetts and the Nation
My first thought in response to “American Skin” was, Oh yes, the Bruce Springsteen song.
As for the book on blood and organ donation in the U.S. and Europe, perhaps it would be interesting to play off the fact that while these nations are technologically advanced, there are some things for which they still haven’t been able to make good artificial substitutes.
“Accepting No Substitutes: Blood and Organ Donation in the United States and Europe.”
There’s already a book on the subject called “life from death,” another called “twice dead,” a “raising the dead.” Any title about getting life from death ignores that blood donors are alive and increasing numbers of organ donors are as well.
“Spare Parts,” “Courage to Fail.”
If the title is to be taken from something unrelated, I like “Organs Across Bodies.”
Why don’t you and LA collaborate on a book and call it Parts?
It seems to me that the mereological properties of organ transplants would pose enough problems to fill a big thick book.
Hmm… Perhaps I should stop visiting websites randomly.
I have no idea where I am. Sure, I could simply raise my head to look at the name of this place, but I don’t want to, because that would be logical; that is not my way.
If there’s someone actually reading this, then you leave me no options other than to shake my head in digust.
I mean, what I’m talking about has nothing to do with whatever is going on in here. I’d know what’s going on “in here” but I still don’t want to look up. I might, go blind or something along those lines.
If I were to go blind, then I wouldn’t be able to use my computer to randomly post comments at websites I know nothing about any longer.
And that would be just WRONG.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review