Writers/ copy editors/ wordsmiths: Picture a book or paper title with the following nonsense title. How ought it be physically broken? In three (preferred) or more lines. I’m aware there are rules for this sort of thing but seem to always get it wrong.

[center]a.
The Necessary Conditions for
Creative Problem Solving  
and The Booboo Method [/center]

[center]b.
The Necessary Conditions
for Creative Problem Solving
and The Booboo Method [/center]

[center]c.
The Necessary Conditions for
Creative Problem Solving and
The Booboo Method [/center]

[center]d.
?[/center]

I would probably settle for b.

-Tim

I wonder why? Do you want to explain?

I felt that c. was best. This only because the second and third lines start with the two sub-topics.

Well, c. was my second favorite, but I didn’t want to muddy the waters.

For some reason it kind of bugs me to end a line with a conjunction or preposition.  Nothing major.  That’s why I said I would ‘settle’ for b.

The first example just seems disjointed all around.

-Tim

I have always titled papers such that only the major points are on a line with the articles in between (in a smaller font, if possible).  I guess that would be d. then.

[center]The Necessary Conditions
for
Creative Problem Solving
and the
Booboo Method[/center]

(The first "The", of course, would go on the first line and be capitalized.)

This is something with which I have to deal all the time. No question but that b is the best choice. From a language point of view, I agree with Tim that conjunctions/prepositions at line ends just doesn’t look great. From a layout point of view, when stacking and centering three lines, the second one should be longer than the first or third. As for using different font sizes to de-emphasize prepositions and conjunctions, that would be a firing offense for any Art Director on my team.  

[center]The Theory of Line Breaks
According to Palewriter and Many
of His Friends and Colleagues[/center]

- PW

Well, Jack, I wouldn’t fire you for it… ;D And I’ve seen numerous papers titled just so.

-Tim

B (or D) it is! Thanks Tim, PW, and all. Something was gleaned from each response. I, like Derek, tend to apply C, but now see the wisdom of b. I was already considereing Jack’s alternative D but purposely excluded here for simplicity of dialog. Palewriter, your visual points are cogent and much appreciated. It’s obvious to me (a former AD here) you’ve dealt with a few of us. I admit I’ve purposefully bent my share of my editors wishes. I’m just thankful they were in no position to fire me or I would have been in a lot of trouble!

I vote for ‘b’ and for the same reason as Tim and PW.

It feels less jumbled or broken!

Sitran

It’s obvious to me (a former AD here) you’ve dealt with a few of us. I admit I’ve purposefully bent my share of my editors wishes. I’m just thankful they were in no position to fire me or I would have been in a lot of trouble!

I didn’t mean to cause offense, ends. As a CD, my job is to have, defend and maintain outrageous opinions. :D  I’d rather cut off my left arm than fire any of my ADs. They’re MUCH too hard to recruit.

Anyway…it seems in this case that ends justified the means. :D

- PW

[quote author=Palewriter link=board=omni;num=1071043602;start=0#9 date=12/11/03 at 00:48:03]

I didn’t mean to cause offense, ends. As a CD, my job is to have, defend and maintain outrageous opinions. :D  I’d rather cut off my left arm than fire any of my ADs. They’re MUCH too hard to recruit.

None taken.  8)

ends