I am going crazy. The last few days, I have been burying myself in academic research. The titles all go like this:
I am sick of it. Sick of IT!!!!
Such titles are fine for undergraduates, but come on folks. You're academics. You're supposed to be capable of thought!
If there were a really good reason for it, I would be happy. True, the title/subtitle allows you to combine a hook and a descriptive subtitle. But surely, that's not the only way to do things.
Titles seem to go in fads. A hundred-fifty years ago, a good title might read:
A calm and impartial exposition of
the origin and immediate cause
terrible riots in Philadelphia
on May 6th, 7th, and 8th, A.D. 1844.
By a Protestant and native Philadelphian.
Sure, you laugh at that title. Why? Why not?
Just know, I'm laughing at your titles too. And The Chronicle is laughing along. A recent article denounced the plague of subtitles run amok in academic circles.
I hereby renounce the use of the colon in titles except when absolutely, undeniably necessary. The following titles are among the last you will see me pen/type/think.
(as a side note, I'm also going to flee lists as much as possible)
FHQWHGADS: Studies in postmodern uncraft as pop-culture re-expression defense against irony.
The Man, The Machine, and The Magic Chef: Narratives of technological change and gender placement in postwar American kitchens.
Here's Looking at You, Kid: Panopticism, data mining, and the illusion of privacy after the Dot-Com Bust.
Truth, Trust, and the Textual Camera: Nonfiction on the Web (yes. I admit it. I am actually writing this paper)
Dialectic Narratives: Materialist theory and Baudrillardist hyperreality
Forgetting Marx: Neocultural dematerialism, the semantic paradigm of consensus and feminism
Seriously, if you have a thoughtful reason for us all to use those silly title/subtitles, email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I would d love to understand the reason.