Page 1 of 1

Bad Title

Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:59 pm
by Reave the Unjust
If you had a problem with some of the SRD's book titles, count yourself lucky.

It could be a lot worse:

Image

Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:50 pm
by Farm Ur-Ted
What's the sequel? Slappers of the Monkeyh?

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:55 am
by sgt.null
Chakras of the Chikenz

Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:24 pm
by Holsety
But The Dying Earth is such a cool title that it acts as a counterbalance to this book.

Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:22 pm
by aliantha
I'm not so sure about that, Holsety.

And the series title is "Tschai"? Like somebody's hawking up a hairball? Wow. :lol:

Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:09 am
by Holsety
aliantha wrote:I'm not so sure about that, Holsety.

And the series title is "Tschai"? Like somebody's hawking up a hairball? Wow. :lol:
Perhaps your ability to discern awesome titles needs adjusting.

Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:30 am
by CovenantJr
Good grief.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:34 pm
by Wyldewode
Hmm . . definitely a strange title.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:09 pm
by MsMary
What the heck is a Wankh?

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:13 pm
by Wyldewode

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:29 pm
by I'm Murrin
Found through wikipedia, there's an interesting message from someone who, on hearing that they were changing the title from Wankh to Wannek in a UK release, complained that it went against authenticity to the original work.
Should a literary masterpiece published in America surrender both its title and content decades later at the whim of contemporary British gutter slang? I cannot imagine it. Surely the least of Jack Vance's work will long endure past the demise of off-color terms in any local dialect, even that of Her Majesty.
(Link)

I think that the response in this thread shows pretty clearly that those in favour of the change had a stronger case.
Although honestly, Wannek is terrible as an alternative. It's just... weak. Doesn't work at all.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:31 pm
by Holsety
Murrin wrote:Found through wikipedia, there's an interesting message from someone who, on hearing that they were changing the title from Wankh to Wannek in a UK release, complained that it went against authenticity to the original work.
Should a literary masterpiece published in America surrender both its title and content decades later at the whim of contemporary British gutter slang? I cannot imagine it. Surely the least of Jack Vance's work will long endure past the demise of off-color terms in any local dialect, even that of Her Majesty.
(Link)

I think that the response in this thread shows pretty clearly that those in favour of the change had a stronger case.
Though the quote sounds like a Vance fan :)

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:37 pm
by I'm Murrin
Indeed; but if the first response--of americans, not just brits--to seeing that title is ridicule, then there's obviously something wrong, and his/her argument (that it's just pandering to a passing British thing) is flawed. The title is clearly standing in the way of the book's reception by new readers.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:40 pm
by sgt.null
then change it to...

the Servants of the Spank

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:18 pm
by Holsety
Murrin wrote:Indeed; but if the first response--of americans, not just brits--to seeing that title is ridicule, then there's obviously something wrong, and his/her argument (that it's just pandering to a passing British thing) is flawed. The title is clearly standing in the way of the book's reception by new readers.
First off, I think it's worth mentioning that the guy who's arguing is probably doing it in good fun. Vance fans I've seen online are big fans of arguing or talking about things over-elaborately and taking little or nothing seriously.
Over and above my own distaste it seemed a duty to provide counter-testimony if only so as to enlighten future literary historians.
I can hear him chuckling as he said this, I know I lol'd.

Well, from my POV I would say that while the publisher certainly has the right to change the book's title, especially since Vance ultimately assented. At the same time, I think that had Vance not wanted to change the book's title and really cared about it, it should have remained as Wankh - I am personally an ardent supporter over the author's words being kept as intact as possible, even if it is to less people. Meh though. I do agree servants of the wankh is pretty dumb in the first place unless it was supposed to be funny.
Know that I was present on one occasion when this very subject was brought up, perhaps not for the first time, but certainly one of the early times, and very clearly not the last. I personally heard Jack respond unwarmly to this very change as impertinently suggested by an early (and as I am now informed, short-tenured) member of the VIE team. This individual would not let it rest. He, a Brit, brought it up again and again until Jack clearly tired of the topic and gave a very reluctant ascent, if memory serves...something to the effect of, "I don't give a damn". I further recall that this very Brit, Alan Bird, was so bold as to even proffer suggested alternatives, two-syllabled every one.
Oh, and I will say that I think that since "servants of the wannek" is not necessarily a pulling title itself, wankh might be a better choice for sales ("Hey, look, a book with WANK in it, haha let's take a look at the back and see if it might be interesting.")