[This message has been edited by tnwilz (edited September 19, 2008).]
 

I know sometimes I will bypass what may be a very good book because I don't like the title.

Sad, but true.

Pal...puttin in her two cents
 

Personally, my favorite type of title has the following attributes:
-Catchy; rolls off the tongue (nothing like Kiki's Snails Flog Gelatinous Poop)
-sets an appropriate mood for the piece (Lord of the Rings; My Sister's Keeper, etc.)
-the last part is the trickiest, in my opinion. I love when a title makes sense when you first start reading. However, later in the story, the reader discovers the title actually was referring to something completely different. I love this whenever I've experienced it. (The only example I can think of right now is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince)

Just my two bits.
 

I agree with you that a good story title is important. I laugh, though, because I personally find good story titles difficult to invent. For me, I find I have to let the title come to me rather than me trying to puzzle it out. Sometimes the title comes easily and right away, other times the story has to sit on the shelf for a while with some random title (I have one that has been called Eggplant for the longest time. Really! I finally titled it something better, but still not perfect. Sigh.)

I do think, to further your thinking, that an apt story title is important, particularly in the speculative fiction genre. The title is the beginning of that contract between author and reader, and it's an important start. I think one thing a story title does is it helps identify the sub-genre. Your reasoning on reader behavior is correct at least in my case. I don't read horror, just one of those things. If I got several pages into a story and then figured out it was horror I would be very aggravated indeed.

I do think that story titles that have one meaning at first and another, deeper meaning later or in retrospect are pretty nifty - but I think that most story titles don't accomplish this, nor is there a need for them to. I get aggravated with authors trying to be too smarty-pants in this regard.

(edited to remove a story title)

[This message has been edited by KayTi (edited August 25, 2008).]
 

[This message has been edited by tnwilz (edited September 19, 2008).]
 

Yeah, that's why I hope for one of those intuitive leaps/sparks for story titles. It's the only hope.

But meanwhile, in case you were wondering, cooking is one of my hobbies, and thus I usually mention food in my stories - as I'm always wondering how people go about their daily lives in these far-off futures or manned spaceflight environments that are the typical sci-fi fare. Now that I write, I get to put it all in there. Atmosphere. Yep.
 

Where a flashy title will help its the prose and plot that carry the day, and Robert Heinlein proves my point.
It is popular opinion that he wrote the best short story in Sci-Fi history with...

All you Zombies

The story had nothing to do with zombies at all but is instead about time travel. I hate the title and would have advised him to change it.
Of course, most of my titles are either puns or have a double meaning. I've learned that turns some people off, but others do like it.
That's my two cents for the day.
 

but it does help when Robert Henlein is there to back you up.
 

Other good titles:

"Jury Master" - Robert Dugoni

"In her Defense" - Stephen Horn

Any quesses what theses were about?

I do like titles that tell me something about the story. I agree that a good title can replace a lot of text.

Right now I have an unfinished story on my hands titled "Plant Girl," which I stuck on to have something to identify it with, but didn't intend keeping because it seemed so cliche and stale---but, so far, has acquired two different meanings. I'd still like to change it, but I'm afraid I may be stuck with it.

*****

Of course, as writers, if we're lucky, we'll encounter a species called editors, who'll see fit to change the titles as they see fit, no matter what kind of fits we throw.

I'm reminded of a story involving Theodore Sturgeon and the publisher Ian Ballantine. Sturgeon wrote a classic novel for Ballantine, More Than Human---but wanted to name the novel "Baby Is Three," the original title of one segment of it. Reportedly, they argued back and forth about it, Sturgeon holding his ground, until Ballantine finally said, "I'm going to name it More Than Human or I'll kill you."

Most title changes won't be that intense...but keep it in mind...

[edited to correct some italicism problems]

[This message has been edited by Robert Nowall (edited August 25, 2008).]
 

From the viewpoint of a slush editor: If your story can't stand on its own without the title to 'explain' something about it, then you haven't done your job.

I read quite a lot of slush stories. I read more than 50 last week. I very rarely pay much attention to the titles. The story has to draw me in and explain itself in the first couple of paragraphs, sans title.

If I could pick and choose the slush I decided to read, I'd probably pay more attention to title. And I would be disappointed if the title misled--as in Heinlein's example. But it's the writing that'll get the story/book sold and seen and bought.
 

I remember being sent a story to critique (early on, so it was years ago) that had a title so intriguing I was excited to read the story. And I ended up very disappointed. (And probably gave a harsher critique than I should have because of my disappointment.)
 

One downside is that I wind up haunted by titles, without stories attached. For, my God, for twenty-five-some years now, I've been bothered by the title "The Peace of Two Islands." I could never get past the middle of an opening scene, and I've tried a dozen times or more over the years.