Can I get your opinion

Post Reply New Topic

Hiya, all. So I've written a book on autism science and I've been having gads of arguments with the publishers over a title. I really like the title, "Defining Autism," which summarizes the content really well, because it looks at many different biological aspects of autism. But the publishers don't like it and think some auties might find it offensive. (I'm aspie, I've been on WP for ages, and I don't think it's offensive, but then again I'm the author, so I'm probably rather biased...)

I'm just wondering, what are your opinions on the potential book title? Do you think it's okay or are the publishers right and it may be offensive to some people?

Thanks for your help.

While I find the title roughly neutral, it does predispose to strong reactions based on the content: If I find the content accurate, or at least unprejudicial, then it's all good. If I don't agree then the title becomes a greater liability.

Select the title that will sell the most copies. More importantly, do what makes you happy.

Do the publishers actually have alternative titles in mind, or are they just making a fuss to hear themselves talk?

Sometimes this is more about getting their fingerprints on the project than about adding any actual value. I worked - briefly - in the trade press for my industry, and one of the ways the publisher threw his weight around was by rejecting title ideas from his underlings. Mostly just because he could.

True fact.

Yeah, what have the publishers come up with?

I put neutral, it's content that matters and I already want to read it.

Good on you, flibbit!

I don't find the title offensive, it's pretty neutral.
But it also sounds like the title of a textbook (maybe it is? )

Aren’t you “defining autism” in the book?

You could call it "What IS autism?".

Can you summarize a little better what the book is about?

Is it about setting boundries (what is, and is not autism)?

The label "autism" has been expanded to include the whole spectrum, and therefore more people than it was fifty years ago.

But that is all mostly derived from shrinks observing outward behavior. Not, for the most part, from examining actual brain hardware.

What "biological" aspects of autism is your book about, if you don't mind me asking?

Not offensive enough, change it.

So here's a rundown of the chapters, giving an idea of the content:

1. Historical review of early days in autism research (Kanner, etc.).
2. The brain in autism. This mainly focuses on postmortem findings.
3. The genetics of autism.
4. Environmental factors that may play a role in autism. Review of things like prenatal valproic acid exposure, etc.
5. Regression in autism.
6. Epilepsy in autism.
7. The neurodevelopmental spectrum. Mostly focuses on conditions that often co-occur with autism (e.g., ADHD, depression, etc.).
8. The broader autism phenotype.
9. Intellectual disability and genius in autism.
10. Summary chapter, talking about perspectives in how we define the autism spectrum.



I wish it were that simple. The publishers have been rather stubborn. I'm working with Jessica Kingsley.



So this is their latest suggestion: Genetic, Neurological and Environmental Factors in Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Frankly, I find their suggestions ridiculously dry and boring and I think it'll chase people away from buying it.



Thanks, renaeden! I've posted just above the most recent title suggestion from the publishers. I've not been impressed with any of their suggestions.

My suggestions have included (in chronological order):

1. The Many Faces of Autism (this was the original working title)
2. Kanner's Conundrum (I liked the alliteration in this one, haha.)
3. Defining Autism

In truth, the theme of the book fits the final suggestion the best.



Well, I mean it does go over a lot of research, but I've tried to make it friendlier to the educated lay reader. So, yes and no? Definitely not a textbook per se though.



Well, yes and no. Throughout the book we look at many different perspectives on autism, since it's so complex that you really could "define" it from many different viewpoints. And in the final chapter I review an area of research known as "lesion studies" that help us to potentially locate some of the areas in the brain that may be responsible for the traits that are considered the "core." (Discussions over the ridiculous simplicity of DSM criteria aside. ) But we also stress that while certain regions of the brain may consistently give rise to autism traits, the underlying causes may vary across people. Does that make sense?



I had considered something like that in terms of title, but I veered away from it because I didn't think it was catchy enough. I know "catchy" is kind of relative and I don't think "Defining Autism" is incredibly catchy per se, but I still rather like it and think it summarizes the book well. It's also a little similar to another book "Re-thinking Autism" that I know did well in terms of sales. So that was kind of my motivation in that regards. Not that this book is the same as Re-thinking Autism.

Re boundaries for autism: Yes, it's about boundaries, but the main idea is that the boundaries we have set for autism are too strict. I try to make this clear in the chapter on the broader autism phenotype.

Re biology: There's lot of biology in the book. We review brain studies, both postmortem and imaging; genetics; environmental factors like valproic acid and maternal diabetes; epilepsy; etc.



LOL - that may be a hard sell with the publishers.

On the Origin of Atypical Species

Oh sweet Lord.... they want to replace your nice, crisp, accurate title with a string of blather like that?



They're setting the book up to fail before it's even launched. Possibly subconsciously. Where is their marketing department in this? And is there ANYONE else you can work with - a University press, anyone who might actually want your book to sell? (Without you losing money, if you have to break a contract.)

I'm trying to imagine a DJ at a university radio station (here in the US, which is the radio environment I know) trying to announce a book signing or the product launch - they'd be defeated utterly, about halfway through that word salad thing your publisher wants to foist on you in place of an actual, marketable title.

Oh my, do I have strong opinions on this. Take that into consideration...

... do you have an agent? (nope, I'm not one, just asking. It can sometimes be helpful.)

Actually only half-joking. "Defining Autism" is a perfectly serviceable title, but left literally zero lasting impression. Their suggestion of "Genetic, Neurological and Environmental Factors in Autism Spectrum Disorder" sounds like a research paper. Dry, boring and pragmatic. Which is fine if your target audience are researchers in the relevant fields. Now, reading your chapter list, that may well be the case and in that case feel free to ignore me, but on the off chance that you'd be trying to reach a broader audience than that, I'd suggest something eye-catching that's less likely to drown in the sea of similarly-named literature, and being funny and/or potentially mildly offensive is good way to do that.

https://www.facebook.com/marrieddadofan ... 50/?type=3

Love it.



I know, right??? Those were my thoughts exactly!

I mean, yes, "Defining Autism," isn't the most brilliant title EVAR, but it's succinct, accurate to the major theme of the book, and not UNcatchy.

I do have a contract with JKP for this book, although I don't have an agent. I'm going to have to look for one for my next book, which I plan on writing on the history of "hysteria" and how ancient prejudices affect how the medical profession views womens health today. I have some ideas of where to start, including University Press (although I need to have a nose around their agents list). I won't start looking for an agent until I have a solid draft of that second book though, and I'm just in the research stages.

What I'm hoping to do is to use this thread as an informal focus group to try and fight for the "Defining Autism" title. They weren't totally set against it but had reservations that the neurodiversity community would find it offensive. I'm trying to show that they may not be as in touch with the ND community as they think and they're making a mountain out of a molehill of a perfectly good title.

I hope you all don't mind if I share the poll results with my JKP contact. I won't make any direct quotes, though I may summarize some of what you all have said here.



I'm hoping the title will be longer lasting when read in conjunction with the book. It's very appropriate for the content and especially the first and final chapters that literally do talk about defining autism. So I'm also hoping that a well-designed, catchy book cover will complement the title well and make it a non-issue. (I hope? )

As far as the target audience, first and foremost it's an educated lay public. There's definitely going to be content in here that Average Joe isn't going to grasp. But then Average Joe usually doesn't want to read books about autism. Secondly, though, I hope it's also appealing to clinicians and researchers. But they are by far a minority target audience. First and foremost this is for people on the spectrum, their families, friends, and just other interested parties. But it's definitely about science, so it's more on the brainiac side.

So yes, I wanted to avoid book titles that read as professional article titles like the plague.

Nice content! Thanks for sharing.