Well, it seems I may be stuck in publishing for a while. At least it’s a place to learn. The inside story, it turns out, would be very helpful for authors to know. Let’s take titles for example. An editor sees a basic misunderstanding on the part of many academic authors. Hey, I’ve even done it myself. To correct this misunderstanding it’s important to see that academic publishers see different basic kinds of books. One of them is the academic monograph. No matter what the author thinks (I know the feeling of working on a book for years and supposing everyone else will be interested in the topic) academic books are of limited appeal. Their main buyers are academic libraries and academic librarians want to know at a glance what the book is about. The title has to say this, even before reaching the subtitle.
We’re all used to the idea of seeing books with clever titles in the bookstore. (Remember bookstores?) These are trade books. Some of them are from academic presses, but these are books that have often been worked over by editors and marketers and publicists to make them more appealing. The title can be clever, with an explanatory subtitle, because the target buyer is a bookstore rather than a library. It’s difficult for an author to admit that this tome that has consumed your waking life for years, and maybe even decades, is primarily something a couple hundred libraries only will buy. And family and friends who feel they need to support your efforts. It’s a hard reality to face, but it often comes down to title.
What are you going to call your book? My own most recent effort, Nightmares with the Bible, was written for a trade readership. The publisher, however, had the library market in mind. For success in the library market, the title works against the book. No matter how accessibly your book is written, no mere mortal will pay $100 for it. (Some of us will feel compelled to dish out that kind of cash for a title we really must read, but we are the exception rather than the rule.) I like my title, but it was a mistake. It should’ve probably gone by its subtitle, slightly modified, The Bible and Cinematic Demons. In my mind as I wrote it, I had an educated but popular readership. The publisher had different ideas, unclear to me when the book was put under contract. Now it’s time to give this post a popular title so that it will be read. And hopefully taken to heart.
3 thoughts on “Clash of the Titles”