I saw an article the other day entitled "What's left of our right to vote". I am interested in what gets people thinking one way or another. I was struck by the presumption of the title. I am often struck by the angle or slant that writers and people speaking take. An article or book needs a title. It functions like a name. If the writing is to be referred to, we need some name or identification tool to alert search engines or librarians to what we are searching for.
There may already be research on the influence of the title of a piece. I see writing from many sources. The greatest number of writings come from using the Foxfire browser, which has been programmed to show me articles for a wide range of publications and writers. Each suggested article has a name. If my wife and I agree to name our new son "Muscles" or "Champ", that name may well influence how he comes to see himself and how he is treated by others. I have read that some governments have tried to control the naming of children and outlaw names like "Trash" or "Clumsy" or "Barbarian".
The same factors come into play with a title. Of course, writers and playwrights and marketers for a movie want to use superlatives, calling their new film "World's Best Mystery" or some such. I think modern citizens are ready to dismiss exaggeration unless friends warn them: "No, it really is the best ever. Brenda and I were transfixed. We couldn't stop talking about that movie." I have heard of various artists trying to avoid setting a tone with the title and using less descriptive words like "Painting 77". Doing something like that seems related to wanting to avoid picturing or describing a beautiful young woman or a scary dark night. I think there may be some tries at poetry and writing in that direction but I think less description or pre-set works better in visual art or music.
