Art Titles - To Describe or Not to Describe; That is the Question

Au Courant
Needed: Your opinion
Topic: art titles
I had the most fun recently reading “How To Be Interesting (In 10 Simple Steps) by Jessica Hagy. Not only is her advice super and fun to read but also this simple little book gave me some great ideas for art titles.
Now you need to know that I really struggle with titles for my art. Either the title comes easily and simply and is perfect (at least in my opinion) or it is impossible. I have several times put a piece on Facebook to ask for naming help. The names my friends come up with are pretty fabulous and I always end up using them. But really, I can’t do that with every piece. So I’m stuck coming up with names on my own.
I started out using quotes, or parts of quotes, for names, such as “The Blue Dream of Sky”. Then I moved to names that seem to fit the piece, such as “A River Runs Through It. However, the name may determine what you see in the piece. Or the name that I’ve given the piece may be totally wrong for what you see in the work. Such is the dilemma of abstract art. After several conversations in which viewers saw very different things than I did in a piece, I decided to lean toward abstraction in the names I gave pieces. As well as in the pieces themselves.
Here are some of the names that I’ve come up with as a result of reading “How to Be Interesting”:
succulent
Swagger
Bounds (out of)
Unclaimed Spaces
Leverage
Crux
Fulcrum
Uncharted
Vistas
I’d love to have your view on names. Abstract? Concrete? Descriptive? Which is best? What do you want a name to do or say?



