Everyone knows the old axiom that people judge a book by its cover, but do they also judge books by their title? I don’t know. I suspect a great title can get readers to look further, a horrible title stops further inspection, and a mediocre title doesn't influence sales one way or the other.
The
Great Rehearsal might be the worst title I've encountered for a great book. Carl Van Doren wrote one of the top three history books on the Constitutional Convention. (In this amateur historian's humble opinion.)The book was published in 1948, when the United Nations was just starting up and Van Doren thought the 1787 Constitutional Convention was a rehearsal for writing the UN charter. This was a poor title that must have dampened sales of a fine history book. Ironic, since the book never mentions current events except in a slapped together preface.
I've never agonized over my own titles, except for
Tempest at Dawn, my own book on the Constitutional Convention. Since this was a novelization of the convention, I needed a title that didn't sound like a history book. I also liked the idea that the title reflected the turmoil in the infant country at the time of the convention.
Authors may not be the best at selecting titles, but I’m not sure focus-group driven editors are better. My title for my computer technology book was
Dinosaurs and Whippersnappers, but Wiley insisted on
The Digital Organization. I still prefer my title.
 |
| Honest stories filled with dishonest characters. |