THINK BEFORE YOU USE *THAT* TITLE!!!!!

Meta
Title:	THINK BEFORE YOU USE *THAT* TITLE!!!!!
Creator:	Red Valerian
Date(s):	March 8, 1998
Medium:	online
Fandom:	The X-Files
Topic:	story title reuse
External Links:	THINK BEFORE YOU USE *THAT* TITLE!!!!!; archive link
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

THINK BEFORE YOU USE *THAT* TITLE!!!!! is a 1998 post by Red Valerian at alt.tv.x-files.creative.

The subject: story title reuse.

The post generated 73 responses about an author's "responsibility" to make sure their story did not have a duplicate title to a fanfic already written.

The discussion is an example of some the tensions that the new world of online fandom could have. Fans were no longer siloed in print zines, the fandom was supposedly small enough that all fans were expected to be in each other's business, and the X-Files fandom was still small enough that a repeat of titles was seen as careless and thoughtless.

Post topics mutated into discussion about BNFs, public scoldings, cliquish behavior, and who gets to decide the rules for everyone else.

This meta post also inspired a response fic, Think Before You Use *That* Title!!! by Jennifer Stoy and Rachel Ehrentreu and in comments to that fic, the author of the original essay referred to her "ill advised and inadvertently cruel and thoughtless original post."

The Opening Post

Red Valerian's original post:

I've been meaning to comment on something for a week or so.

There have recently been a couple of postings of new stories to the ng, but they've used very well-known titles by established fanfic authors.

I'm speaking of J [Stoy]'s "Adagio" and Rachel Ehrentreu "Damaged Goods."

Now don't get me wrong - I enjoyed both of the stories, especially "Adagio". But I do feel that it's rather unfortunate that those particular titles were chosen.

After all, JohnieRed's "Adagio" is a classic and must have been read by everyone who uses Gossamer, judging by its persistent appearance high up in the download stats week after week. For well over a year and a half now.

And ditto Caroline O'Callaghan's wonderful "Damaged Goods" in which we find out what secret Mulder has really been hiding all of these years.

I'm sure that it was an inadvertent oversight on the part of [Stoy] and Ehrentreu that they used these titles, but you must admit it's confusing for those bears with very little brain, such as myself, to have such well-known titles being re-employed by others.

So really - this is just a reminder that we should all remember to check Gossamer before we post that story with the same name as Karen or Dawson's latest.

Or thinking about it - maybe we shouldn't!

The Replies: Excerpts

[ CiCi ]:

Before we get too elitist here, I think we should remember that it's common courtesy to check your working title against the archive's listings so you don't repeat the title of ANY author's work, whether they are established, famous, sucky or whatnot. It's just as bad to repeat Jane Doe's title as it is anyone else's. CiCi, (who has used the title "Choice" once, but learned her lesson since then...)

[Gem]:

While it is a nice consideration for any author of a newer story to check various archives to see if a title they may have chosen has been used, there is no hard and fast rule against doing so.

As a person who writes, I can only say for myself that I would want to come up with as original a title as possible to set myself apart from the pack (so to speak) and so that anyone who did read it might remember it. If I named my opus "Oklahoma", I don't see how that could happen, but if I called it "Ice Skating Hippopotami", then possibly, maybe, someone might remember it :-)

A check of story titles on the archives in general might not be a bad idea to suggest, but if someone decides to use a title that's been used before, I'm not sure how much of an "infringement" that really is. Last time I checked Gossamer, there were four stories entitled "My Heart Will Go On" and that title is taken from a song by Celine Dion, so....

[ Rachel Ehrentreu ]:

I didn't even realize that I did that, I'm sorry I never read that other story before (or remembered it) and it's the title of a kind of obscure song. I'm so embarrassed and my editor didn't notice it in the final read through. But in all fairness, there are a limited amount of titles out there and sometimes one title fits more than one idea. -- Rachel Ehrentreu

[ Jennifer Stoy ]:

Can you say my face is *really* red at this point? I wish I could claim simple newbie stupidity, but that's a cop-out. I should have checked. My bad - my severe bad. My sincere apologies - maybe I should change the title of the story or something? -- Jennifer Stoy

[Mary]:

Rachel, Don't take this personally, but you do bring up a couple of interesting points that bear commenting upon.

<< I didn't even realize that I did that, I'm sorry I never read that other story before (or remembered it) and it's the title of a kind of obscure song. >>

While sorry is nice, it still doesn't change the fact that now your story will forever be confused with someone else's in the readers' minds.

I've had that problem myself, you see. When I was preparing my original story for release in February 1996, the first title I had in mind was "Family Ties". But, not wanting to use a title that was already taken, I checked Vincent's archive to discover that there were two stories called that already. Thinking through the themes of the story again, I came up with "Sins of the Fathers". All went well until first one, then a second, story were released to ATXC that were named "Sins of the Father". ARGH. One, about a rapist, generated comments on ATXC that I kept having to ignore. The second was based on a role-playing game (or something) and didn't seem to draw much attention to itself....

<< I'm so embarrassed and my editor didn't notice it in the final read through. >>

Whether or not your editor may have noticed it is immaterial. You, as the author, have the final responsibility for your story since your name will be on it. Or, to borrow from another former resident of Independence, Missouri: "The Buck Stops Here".

<< But in all fairness, there are a limited amount of titles out there >>

With over 100,000 words in the English language?

<< sometimes one title fits more than one idea. >>

While that's certainly true, I'm also certain you could have come up with something just as good (or better) that was original and unique.

[ bliss ]:

I second this emotion. Whether it's a title used by a popular or gifted writer, or a title on a so-so story (even a song story <g>), it is common courtesy to check. I know that titles are a real pain in the neck sometimes (does anyone else have problems with titles?), but one suggestion I have is to let free association be your guide. After all, one hopes that you're exercising your creativity in the story, why not do the same in the title. Avoid movie titles, flee song titles, and lie on your back to consider the ceiling, considering your theme.....

[JenRose]:

Y'know, there are an awful lot of words in the english language, and even if the same word applies to both stories, it would make things less complicated if you could add something to your title to set it apart from a similarly titled story. Sometimes this is as simple as er...colonizing <?> the title... Damaged Goods: (whatever fits). The other title, Adagio, could easily have been adjusted to be "Adagio in C minor" or whatever fit that.... My first impression (and as I can't remember if I've read any of the stories in question, do not take this as an attack on you or your story) seeing a story with a boring or unimaginative title (or worse yet, a horrendously cliche title or one named after whatever song happens to be on the top of the charts), is that the author didn't work very hard on the title, and possibly on the story. I generally will read just about everything that lands in my mailbox, eventually, so this doesn't stop me from reading a story, but a bad title is something a story has to overcome. It doesn't take a lot of effort to go to Gossamer and check, and it saves confusion.

[Murielle]:

I could be wrong about this, but I think titles aren't be covered under copyright. If you modem into your local library and run a search using only a title, chances are you're going to come up with several selections by different authors. While it is confusing, I don't believe there is any law against it. I mean, look at popular music. A person could go crazy trying to find a specific song when there are so many that have the same titles.

[Circe]:

No, titles are not copyrightable (if that's a word), but I don't think that's the issue here. I think what people are trying to say is that it's a good idea to check to make sure that your title is not already being used. That way, your story doesn't get confused with someone else's.

[BethLynn]:

Oh my god.

How heart-rending to jump an author for use of a title. I can understand the confusion - that is why the title as well as the author's name should be included.

If confusion exists in discussion of a story because of like titles, then use the authors name in the discussion.

An author's frustration when 'their' title has been 'copied', or 'usurped' may seem justified, but to continually bonk a person on the head for a 'faux-pas' as seen by some others, is belittling to all of us.

Yes it makes 'good-sense' to search titles. We all want something original and eye-catching, but, if the title you have your heart set on has already been used that does not make it unusable. I am not saying ignore the feelings of others, but do not let your own feelings take a beating at the behest of others.... Where is the joy of creating going? I have noticed an alarming trend lately toward intolerance. There seems to be an underlying expectation for all to be accomplished, published, infallible authors. (And, there ain't none 'o those.)

[Jennifer Stoy]:

Omigosh, Rachel, sister in title stealage - are you like, stunned or what? Wow. I started a - thing - by accident. The entire fuss is more embarrassing than the mistake. And I'm not even tryin' to get a reputation here.... picture me giggling uncontrollably- (oh, btw, I *loved* my title. I chose it very deliberately, there was no laziness or anything involved, to me it felt very right...) Oh, and the hopeless sadist/opportunist in me feels compelled to ask- there was stuff after the title- was that any good? <g>

[ Teddi ]:

Excuse me, but it seems whenever anyone wants to offer a tiny bit of advice, someone else reacts as if some terrible persecution is going on. No one in this thread was "jumping" all over a writer for using someone else's title. No one was "continually bonking" anyone over the head. No one claimed there was any law against using a title someone else has used. Yet, these accusations get thrown about. Look at the subject line. All the original poster (and everyone who happened to agree with this sentiment) suggested was to *think!* There were absolutely no decrees commanding that titles once used are sacred; nor will there be. All I saw really were suggestions to check the archives before using a certain title. The assumption that authors were reusing titles unknowingly is valid; because frankly, it is hard to see why any author would *want* their story confused with another. If, however, an author wants to knowingly use a title that has been used before, no one here is going to stop him or her. I really can't understand why a suggestion can't be offered around here without accusations that the person who made the suggestion is threatening to squelch another's creativity.

[Amy]:

While looking on Gossamer to see if a title you want to use has been taken is a good idea, there is no reason to rake people over the coals if they don't. Using a similar title is not plagiarism people, if it were, Chris Carter himself should be called to the carpet for Momento Mori...Deb Wells (I think) used it first, way before the ep was even thought of by CC and the gang. Check the Library of Congress records some time. Duplicate titles are everywhere. That is why Gossamer distinguishes them with the author's name. And another thing is that I hate it when people name folks by name like that. Gotta say it, it's rude, IMO, and potentially traumatizing to people. So, *think* before *you* use names!!!

[Teddi]:

If someone has a problem being named, for whatever reasons, they have the option of posting anonymously. Most writers choose to identify their stories as theirs with a name, either their own or a pseudonym. Most of them also ask for readers' opinions of their stories. Why would they not want opinions of their stories directed at them... i.e using their names? It might also appear rude to discuss story XYZ without mentioning the name of the person who wrote that story. "Potentially traumatizing"?! Sheesh!! You're kidding, right? Well maybe if your name is Fox or something....<G>

[Amy]:

First of all, this discussion has come up before. I even get mail at my archive address from people saying that I have things with duplicate titles and that I shouldn't let people do that. I, myself, was even bitched at for using a title someone else used. Yes, someone alluded to plagiarism in their post. Maybe 'raking over the coals' was a bit much, but this is a very sensitive topic to alot of people. I know too many people that someone has gone off about that have been upset enough to leave the community. Now, mentioning the story is one thing in this instance. But then they *corrected* the name of the person they got wrong later. If they don't like that people use duplicate titles, say that, you don't have to start naming *names*. In fact, the very way they worded the subject header was a bit grating. I am sorry, but I have very strong feelings about this topic. Someone once paraded my name around this newsgroup to prove a point and *I* did not appreciate it. This is all I am saying. This is a BIG issue for me, so excuse me if I sounded harsh. Yes, people know the risks of posting to newsgroups, but I also would like to think that common courtesy still exists somewhere in the XF community. Frankly, what I have seen lately doesn't give me much hope. Yeah, if you can't tell, I am pretty disillusioned around here lately. And I don't think that I am the only one who thinks it was rude to do. If they have a right to say what they said, I have the right to disagree with it.

[ Red Valerian ]:

Oh dear, I can't tell you how much I'm beginning to wish that I hadn't started this thread. And how much I regret the use of capital letters in the header. It does make me sound like I'm ranting, I will admit.

But hey - I do feel that this thread has shifted focus a little - so I just want to point out a couple of things.

As I said in my original post - I *liked* the new 'Adagio' - it's a great story. The new "Damaged Goods" I didn't read properly, as I saw it was part of a trilogy and wanted to read the other two stories first.

I'll get back to both writers on their stories.

As for naming names - to tell you the truth, I now regret that too. I had no idea that this would turn into an accusation and counter-accusation 'war' amongst newgroup readers, with the two innocent writers stuck in the middle, faces burning.

And doubtless hating me too. Not that I'd blame them.

I apologise profusely to them both.

But guys - I thought I was making a light hearted point, and I still think the point itself is valid.

It's only logical to check Gossamer et al, to make sure that our stories have original names. It just prevents confusion all round.

Once again - I'm so sorry to have caused these two writers such embarrassement. I hope they'll accept my apology.

[Casey]:

Rachel, you ought feel no need to apologize. You gave your story the title you thought it deserved, and sorry is not even necessary. Come on, people, this is *fan fiction*. These aren't stories that will be read in tenth grade language arts classes long after we're gone; it's something many people take seriously, others not so seriously, and if I want to name every single work of fan fiction I want to write "Adagio" then I have that right without feeling the need to apologize because some people might mistake my "mediocre" story with that of a well-known *fan fic* writer. A title to a story, an X-Files fan fiction story, does not belong to anybody. And if it's the principle that everyone's all snippity about, then don't read the stories where the author has the nerve to use a title that's been seen once or twice in the hundreds of works of fan fiction around....Just because a few people might have every single title of X-Files fan fiction memorized, doesn't mean *I* should be expected to change the title I gave *my* story. And if someone has a problem with *my* title, then don't read the story! Big deal. Geez....Just like us fan fic writers could come up with "something just as good (or better) that" is "original and unique" besides the characters of Mulder and Scully to write about. It's hardly fair or sensible to scold someone for "copying" another's story idea or story title, when all we are doing as writers of "X-Files" fan fiction is copying those characters. Certainly nothing to get sarcastic and uppity about. The attitudes of some of y'all here are really disheartening and for others I'm sure it ruins the enjoyment one gains from writing and having the guts to send out to everyone else a story they've worked so hard on. And to have it spit on because of it's duplicate title. I sincerely doubt Rachel or the other named writer expected or deserved to be met with such attitudes when they worked hard to write their stories; they don't deserve that, nor should they feel bullied into apologizing because a few cough-cough "professional" authors get all bent out of shape.

[Casey]:

The two writers that were singled out have said it was a mistake to use a duplicate title...they didn't catch it, they didn't check, whatever the reason, it doesn't matter. Whether they knew there was another story with that name or not, it's up to them to use or keep or change that title. Sure nobody wants their story confused with anyone else's, but to tell someone that apologizing just isn't enough for their horrific act of "COPYING" another fanfic author's title is just plain arrogant. Not everyone knows everything about the dos and don'ts of fanfic, and a private email to the authors certainly would have been substantial to point out their crime. And then maybe a public reminder, maybe not EXCLAIM, would have been sufficient for the rest of us unprofessionals out here that might have the nerve to copy your precious story title... Perhaps the originator of this thread wasn't demeaning, sarcastic, or mean-spirited about his/her "suggestion", but some of the follow ups certainly were. There's no "threat" out there to squelch creativity, and suppose that's why some of you are so upset about another author having the nerve to duplicate a title. Because like it or not you CAN'T do anything about it. Plus, it's got nothing to do with "creativity", when someone is publicly scolding people for something that could have been, and turns out was, a mistake, an accidental duplication of a title.

[Mary]:

You mention that there are teenagers posting here and that I should 'lighten up' and not make the author assume responsibility for her own work. Well, no Ma'am, I see it as just the contrary. Let the teenaged authors learn to take responsibility here and now, when it doesn't matter one way or the other. That way they'll be ready for adult life when not taking responsibility will have more serious consequences, like losing a job or breaking up a marriage.

[Megan]:

Okay, here's what I want to know...show of hands...who really does this [checking of Gossamer]?

Goes and checks?

Hmm...nobody.

On Gossamer, there are many, many stories with the same title. That's why now they list the title and the author's name as the name of the file instead of just going by title.

Isn't there something more constructive we could fight about?

[ Karen Rasch ]:

Anytime you lay anything out before the public, whether it be a piece of fanfic, a theatrical performance, or a long distance race, you've got to expect that you're going to get a reaction from that public. And, much as we'd all like it to be different, sometimes that reaction isn't going to be what you had hoped. Now, I don't believe that anyone thinks that people are behaving here in a purposefully malicious fashion. But they are calling attention to instances where they feel things could have been handled better. That's it. Period. I don't know . . . if I make a mistake I expect that somewhere along the line *someone* is going to say, "Hey, Rasch. You blew it." Believe me, I make mistakes all the time .

And I've survived.  :-)

An author can post anything on ATXC they dang well see fit. They can choose not to format text properly, they can make their chapters too large for download, they can fail to proofread or run a spellcheck, they can make Mulder and Scully behave more like Gilligan and Mary Anne than their usual deadpan selves (Wait! There actually are stories out there like that!! <g>). You can do whatever you want here. The newsgroup functions without an outside moderator.

But in making such choices, you risk alienating your readership. The same thing applies with the question of duplicate titles.

That's all. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Casey]:

I'm not talking about just [tensions at] ATXC, I'm talking about the whole community in general. If you haven't seen it, maybe you're just lucky, or maybe you don't want to, but there are people who think they know all there is to know not only about X-Files Fan Fic, but about the "rules" one must abide by for acceptance here, ranging from what is acceptable to write about, to what is wrong to expect when you're posting your first story. And maybe they've forgotten what it was like to start out and send the stories for people to read; then again, maybe not. Maybe it's hard to deal with the fact that there are so many writers of fan fic now, so many other GOOD writers, and it's better to try and chase them away than feel threatened. I really have no clue, but there is a group of vocal intolerance...lets trample all over someone and then when it ignites a response, step back and say "Oh, every time someone makes a little tiny suggestion..." as if they didn't know what was going to happen in the first place. As if their main intention wasn't to upset people so that they could remind them how *silly* it is to get so upset about such an insignificant issue.

[bliss]:

I didn't think Red's original post, despite naming names, was abusive in the least, nor did I think Red intended it to be. I think Red intended it as a reminder, with some humor, hence the upper case. My post likewise was intended as a humorous reminder because deciding on a title is my bane. I loathe doing it, I struggle with it, and fortunately, I'm odd enough that most of mine have been original, even if a couple are similar to other stories.

I can't speak to subsequent posts. I did see a few that were sharper than Red appears to have intended, and Red posted a very gracious apology, stating that this kind of brouhaha was not intended. The naming of names, as you say, was simply an effort to delineate the latest stories suffering from dupe titles, as far as I could tell, rather than an effort at embarrassing anyone.

And this brings me to my last point. When posting feedback publicly, do you not realize that you are "naming" the author"? Do you post negative feedback privately? If you're going to post in a public forum, you have to be ready with your flame retardant suit, period. That's just life.

[bliss]:

This I would agree with, given my own experiences on fictalk. Whether it's true or not, the people with whom I had my experiences was definitely given to bait and switch tactics, starting out by attacking a writer, and when others took exception to said attack, behaving as though they themselves had been wronged. Which was, in fact, manipulative as hell. What was troubling wasn't this, so much, as it was the fact that I got all kinds of private email supporting me from folks who clearly were intimidated by these parties and chose not to post publicly, despite the fact that they found the attack unfair and unfounded and generally completely uncalled for in an area purporting to discuss fanfic. That doesn't mean the parties in question, however, are a ruling cabal. It means, again, that democracy has become mobocracy. How many people can you get to post and flame me when I disagree with you. In my case, probably rather a lot. That doesn't mean that either one of us has been ousted, it just means that your supporters are noisy and therefore apparently intimidating....Despite my comprehension of the atmosphere you're attacking--and frankly, I do laud you for taking issue with it, although not necessarily in this context--I still think that you've gotten an impression that THEY are one solid phalanx of established fanfic (if that's not a contradiction in terms) writers. It's understandable that you feel there is a coterie, honestly, I've wondered myself a number of times. Maybe there is a clique. But a clique can only have the power you let it. And one letter that was grouchy doesn't necessarily mean that the poster is a part of some background group. It could simply mean the poster was feeling irritable that day, for whatever reason.

[Casey]:

The people I'm referring to are those who suggest that because someone might accidentally duplicate a title of X-Files fan fiction, that that someone is irresponsible, or that that person ought to apologize. I do disagree with the naming people, and I also believe the original poster might have known what furor the post would cause; but that's beside the point at this time. THEY are those who have received so much praise from their work, due to them because they are fine writers, but whose heads have blown up so big that they are intolerant of new writers and their mistakes, they are insulting, and they are arrogant. THEY are those who have been fortunate enough to earn respect for their work yet can't muster it in themselves to respect anyone else's efforts. THEY are those who allow some, well-known authors to get away with lashing out and publicly humiliating and insulting others, and then if a lesser-known bears his ugly head, then he's attacked. Those who not only practice but support the double standard where some must abide by certain rules while others need not bother, because everyone knows they're "better". I never said it was a conspiracy, though I wonder if some of these people would be happy if the fan fic community had stayed a small little group of the elite, the "really talented" authors that are more "professional" than everyone else. These authors don't seem to respect that hard work was put into all these stories, even those that might have accidentally duplicated a title or those that have a subject matter some find offensive.

[Casey]:

I mean, anyone could see how inflammatory the statements were, how unnecessary, and rude, yet nobody said, yes I agree titles shouldn't be duplicated BUT you need not insult that author, you need not tell her an apology isn't enough; no, because when it's someone like *that* being nasty, it's acceptable. Or at least that is how it seems. That's where EVERYONE contributes to the cliquish environment. It's perfectly fine to publicly reprimand two authors that few are familiar with, yet nobody will step up and say to someone of high stature in the ATXC community, maybe you're being a little too harsh by suggesting Rachel's and Jennifer's oversights by duplicating a title will lead to a more hard life down the road if they don't become more responsible.

[Karen R]:

I think the very thing you point to here is what those who bring issue with the duplication of titles are trying to avoid. You're right. Absolutely, positively right. Dozens and dozens of stories have very similar summaries and/or plotlines. Now, as one who used to cruise Vincent's old Ohio State site via an ftp utility (and I bring this up not to sound like the oldest fanfic reader/writer in creation--though I suppose that's possible--but to inform those who may not have been around in those pre-summary days), it's tough to know just what you're taking the time to download. If indeed, as you say, summaries & disclaimers & even plots can all begin to blend together in a person's mind, how is having one title mean 2 or 3 things any more helpful to those searching for a particular story?

[bliss]:

Debating the various points of view is also supposed to fun, not a burden, not a source of stress. Unfortunately, as in the 'shipper/NoRoMo camps, these things become so ridiculously weighted that people get nasty and hot under the collar.

I want to point something out about Mary Ruth's post, since there have been names named and examples given. One of the problems with electronic communication is that irony or humor is frequently hard to bring across without those damned smileys or other icons. It comes across as hard sarcasm or outright snarking. I've had this happen to me, I'm sure dozens of us have because I have ongoing discussions about the difficulty in interpreting and the need to take care. Maybe Mary Ruth was rushed. Maybe she intended it to sound harsh, I don't know. My take on her post was that it was irony, not harshness. I could be wrong, I didn't write it. Red's post was, to my eyes, humorous and the caps in the subject line a part of that humor. Like HEY YOU GUYS!! Again, perception, in this case as with everything else in life, is key.

I'm not defending or attacking anyone. I'm sadly agreeing with you that there is a definite clique perception. I'm questioning whether or not that's accurate. But I'm old and world-weary (older than you, Karen, hah) and human nature being what it is, I doubt that any clique could hold together in this kind of free for all. Think mobocracy if you must consider it anything and remember that the mob generally sinks to the lowest common denominator, t'is true, t'is pity, t'is pity, t'is true.

And let's move on, for heaven's sake, before we become guilty of the same kind of persecution to which you refer.

[ Kipler ]:

I never go and check and therefore, have no right to feel even the least bit snarked when anyone uses the same name for a story that I've already used. It's a ridiculously apathetic philosophy, but hey, it works for me. ;D... If I've learned anything in cyberspace (and in teaching 13-year-olds!), it's that flame wars crop up not because of ideas, but because of the *tone* with which these ideas are expressed. It's a very tricky business, trying to state your feelings in black-on-white words - to a widely varied audience - without putting your foot in your mouth.

If I play devil's advocate and pretend I'm offended by both sides of the "title" debate, here are my reasons:

1) My not checking a title is more about obliviousness or ignorance than it is about rudeness (which sounds deliberate and haughty). And...

2) My posting in defense or opposition to any other opinion expressed here is more about my belief system than it is about my being part of a clique (which sounds childish and petty).

But I know that neither side *meant* for me to feel either childish or rude, so it's not a big deal.

[Foxzphile]:

Ok, I read this whole thread. I checked Gossamer against my still yet unposted fan fics...I only found one that matched. And guess what???? I'm not changing it. My $.11 worth,