Titles

A title has an astounding influence upon a story. It either increases the curiosity and interest, or dampens it. It is really the only fair test of what it introduces, and the one way of ascertaining what follows.

If it be poor then one can naturally expect the story to be poor. It is of inestimable importance, therefore, to select a good title.

But to be good, the title must necessarily be apt. It should ring truly of suggestiveness, and yet it must not savor too strongly of this either, or it will tend to lean toward the sensational.

The most important is that it must be specific. If it is not, then half the charm is lost. The qualities of attractiveness, originality, shortness and freshness, all of which it possesses if good, rest dependent on its aptness, suggestiveness and specificness.

If one character dominates throughout the story, then the title should be regulated as a representation of this principal character by name, or some other apt means.

This can best be seen by a thorough study of the following:

"Gallagher" ...........................Davis

"The Ambitious Guest" ..................Hawthorne

"Ligeia" ................................Poe

"A Modern Dragon".....................Wilkins

"Rip Van Winkle"..................... Irving

All these titles possess an aptness, a suggestiveness, that make them decidedly attractive. Instantly one wishes to plunge into the story proper. Our interest is aroused, and that settles the matter. We read it.

In an endeavor to follow these examples there is a possibility of going to the extreme or the sensational. This is to be avoided as well as such titles as :

"How Sarah Won the Prize."

"The Story of Elizabeth; or, Honor Triumphant."

The latter are commonplace and trashy, and an editor who is proud of maintaining the high ideals of his magazine will avoid such stuff.

The title may also be the text of the story. It is this method that is used more than any other.. It should be deduced logically from the plot, more desirably from a phase of the plot.

Some authors base their entire story on a single incident or thought. They write up the story as an afterthought, rather than select the title as an afterthought from the story.

This should really be so, for as all stories are built around a single idea, the title will express tersely and with a subtler suggestiveness all that follows.

Edgar Allan Poe is said to have claimed that his poem, "The Raven," was suggested to him by the word, nevermore. The title preceded the plot.

The kind of works where the titles have issued out of the text of the story can best be illustrated by:

"Wedding Knell" ........................Hawthorne

"Thou Art the Man" ....................Poe

"The Transferred Ghost" ................Stockton

"The Lesson of the Master" ..............James

All these stories have been successful, because they have had an apt title; a suggestive hint to all that followed. This at once interested the readers.

There is still another way of obtaining a very attractive title from a story which deals particularly with an inanimate object. This is by adhering strictly to the object in question. The title should specifically name it, making that object the dominating influence.

The titles of the following stories illustrate this very clearly:

"The Great Stone Face" ..................Hawthorne

"The Great Carbuncle" ..................Hawthorne

"The Gold Bug" .........................Poe

"The Bottle Imp" .......................Stevenson

"The Phantom Rickshaw" ................Kipling

The selection of titles is not a thing to be easily considered and reckoned. It is an adaptness of art, a little trick of the trade which reveals a tiny bit of the story in a wonderfully vivid manner. It suggests something else. What that something may be, remains to be disclosed in the story that follows.

In this way the reader's attention is attracted. His curiosity is aroused. He eagerly demands more. Consequently his demand is fulfilled if the title be good. The first impression is always the best.