entre chien et loup

[milo]

...

But let me ask you this, if this poem was titled "Domestic Abuse" how would that change what you think about when you read it?

Thanks

Nothing - I wouldn't have read it (I'm assuming it would have been without the explanatory introduction).    As it is, I saw that as a possible interpretation and discarded it - not because it's an unimportant subject but because it's been done to death.  With "Domestic Abuse" as title I might have scanned to see if the title was ironic or even facetious, but not for an exploration of that subject.

So (and this may be your point) a title can snake-bite a poem.  It can also induce some to read through what they'd pass up with a different one - though they may feel cheated having done so.  Personally, I always (1598/1600 or so) title poems - it's part of the work, IMHO.  A useful part?

Ya, I think you may be right here.  I usually tend to avoid any titles like that both in my own reading and in my own writing as they are invariably either mawkinsh, sappy or both.

I don't know if I had a point.  I just am generally interested in listening to people and seeing what they think about subjects.  Poetry is sometimes a good vehicle for that