What Makes a Good Title/Cover?
Oct. 5th, 2008 01:07 pmRecent comments have gotten me thinking: What makes a good title for a poem, story, or book? What makes a good book cover?
What makes a good title for a poem, story, or book?
A good title should be relevant. It should indicate the work's topic/theme as precisely as possible. It should not be misleading; there's no use hooking a reader with a cool concept that isn't in the work.
A good title should be clear. It should contain words that are pronouncable and comprehensible. It should have a discernible meaning. Titles which are relevant are likely to be more clear than titles which are irrelevant.
A good title should be memorable. It should stick in a reader's mind. Titles which are clear, distinctive, and concise tend to be more memorable than titles which are confusing, general, and/or lengthy.
What makes a good book cover?
A good cover should be legible. Plain or lightly ornamented fonts and layouts are easier to read than elaborate ones. It doesn't matter how pretty that stuff is if nobody can read it. Legible from a distance is even better.
A good cover should be inviting. It must make the reader want to find out more about what's inside the book. To accomplish this, it must give some kind of foretaste or teaser of the content. (See above for discussions of relevance and clarity as these also apply here.)
What's the point of all this?
What are your thoughts on titles and cover art?
What makes a good title for a poem, story, or book?
A good title should be distinctive. It should not be easily confused with other titles; ideally, it should be unique. This makes it easier for people to find when they search for it. Titles which are overly colorful or metaphoric may be distinctive at the cost of relevance and clarity.
What makes a good book cover?
A good cover should be eye-catching. It must snag the attention of casual browsers and cause them to focus on this one book out of hundreds. Bright colors, high contrast, vivid imagery, and a sense of motion or action in the illustration are all conducive to this.
What's the point of all this?
A book cover's job is to make a reader pick up a book. Whatever does that is effective. Whatever fails to do that is ineffective. The job of the cover text (front and back) is to make a reader open a book. Once the book is in hand, the reader must be enticed to venture further. Once the book is open, it is up to the author's content to hook the reader and complete the sale. Everything else is just aimed at getting to that point. It doesn't matter how good the content is if the setup is so poor that nobody ever gets that far; and it doesn't matter how good the setup is if the content flops.
What are your thoughts on titles and cover art?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-05 06:45 pm (UTC)Feedback
Date: 2008-10-05 07:14 pm (UTC)Let's see, "When Diplomacy Fails" refers to a common saying about how wars get started, which tells the reader it's a book about war(s). It's succinct yet catchy. The subtitle simply adds detail (short military SF).
Cover illustration is dramatic, with armored soldiers spilling out of a ship. That brilliant white light off-center is very eye-catching, and the lines of motion draw the viewer's eye down to the lower right corner where a close-up face is visible. Minor quibble: the American flag is barely visible and not congruent with established motion. Probably nobody will notice or care.
The cover text is clearly visible in plain type and colors that suit the background. Minor quibble: the background at the top is so intricately detailed that even the very plain serif font fribbles a bit when placed atop it; a sans-serif font might have worked better.
But the cover works. I'd pick up this book, even though military SF isn't my most favorite subgenre, because it looks promising enough that I'd want to scan the table of contents for favorite authors and check the story blurbs for especially fascinating premises.
Re: Feedback
Date: 2008-10-05 08:14 pm (UTC)And one touch I like is that all of the soldiers appear to be clones.
Re: Feedback
Date: 2008-10-05 09:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 08:00 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 08:06 am (UTC)There is no reason why the 2 editors' names should be capitalized and italicized AND bigger than the title. It conveys a sense that these two people are giant egomaniacs, because their involvement is more relevant than the content itself.
The only time an author's name gets top billing consistent with the title is when the author is someone like Stephen King (or perhaps Issac Assimov). A really big name, that is. And their name should never be bigger than the title. The same size, yes, bigger, no.
If one or both of these editors is a big enough name that their name alone will get people to buy the book without knowing anything else about it, then their name should be possibly as big as the title. But not more emphasized, as it is here.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 03:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 06:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-05 09:01 pm (UTC)I look forward to talking with you more in the future.
Cheers! Ricco
Thank you!
Date: 2008-10-05 09:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 02:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 07:36 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-06 03:24 pm (UTC)