Naming Conventions
"Swedish MPs are calling for legislation on babies' names to be changed after a Gothenburg woman was refused permission to call her son Staalman (or Superman)... But MPs say the law is inconsistent as the names Tarzan or Batman are allowed."
Superficially a cutsey, quirky story, but it raises some interesting ideas about the concept of naming.
Would you name your child after an apparently minor aspect of their birth, thus defining how they will be viewed for the rest of their life?
Is an unusual name a blessing or a curse? Does it emphasise individuality and encourage (/force) the child to grow up tough and resilient, or is it just a cruel burden placed upon the child by idealistic parents who underestimate the conservatism of much of the rest of the human race?
Aren't Superman, Tarzan et al copyright? If I want to name myself or my offspring after a registered trademark, for example, can I just go ahead and do that? Mr & Mrs Hg present their new-born son, Tesco?
Who'd want to name their son after a cartoon, even a superhero? Wouldn't it be better to name him after a real-life hero, someone of substance rather than fantasy? Worst of all, what if the young man turned out not to be super? Would that be ironically amusing, or a harrowing tragedy?
As I write, I'm realising that Ursula Le Guin's Earthsea stories - of which a repeating theme is the power and purpose of naming - have had a more profound effect on me than I realise. A name isn't just a label, it's an essence, an epitome.
To quote from the Amazon review of A Wizard Of Earthsea, "... in the act of naming the world around us we actually create that world."
Is it that simple?
Posted by Hg on Friday 01 October 2004 at 06:38.
Received 5 comments so far.
Oh, you know how I feel about names, as over-influenced by the Earthsea books as a child. I have mentioned to Pete that our firstborn shall be called Jarvis, but he wasn't entirely co-operative. I understand that, in the aftermath of childbirth, he'll be more easily persuaded.
Seriously, now, I always wanted a more unusual name; but then, I also wanted straighter hair, and I'm sure that, were my wishes granted, I'd want the opposite instead. So cursing your offspring with either an unusual or a usual name probably makes no difference. Little Jarvis would be brought up in the same environment even if he happened to be accidentally named Bob, so the chances are that, in present circumstances, he would turn out to be geeky and/or musical anyway. So does our name influence our environment more than our environment influences our name?
Comment by Karen on Friday 01 October 2004 at 12:10.
We called our daughter by the Gaelic (or Celtic, depending on your origins) for Jane.
She only owned up recently to being bullied at school because it was 'unusual' - it means Jane, ffs.
But now she loves it because it gets remembered. Useful for networking etc.
P.S. You have one day to pay me an anniversary visit. (And they said it wouldn't last - Pah!!)
Comment by Mr.D. on Friday 01 October 2004 at 12:49.
In Ghana all children automatically receive a name indicating which day of the week they were born on. Wednesday is regarded as a day of ill-omen. The percentage of the prison population born on a Wednesday is significantly greater than those born on any other day.
I've often wondered about this. I have a friend called Hatred. Her mother got pregnant as a teenager at school and her father threw her out of the house. Despite this he insisted on naming the child. "She shall be called Hatred because into hatred she is born and with hatred she shall live."
She seemed rather balanced and together despite this. I wonder.
Comment by qB on Monday 04 October 2004 at 21:26.
Is that the percentage of the Ghanaian prison population, or the world's in general?
"Wednesday's child is full of woe..."
In writing, "Hatred" sounds like some kind of Old English name, but say it out loud and it's difficult to get past THAT meaning.
Comment by Hg on Monday 04 October 2004 at 21:42.
the ghanaian. there's a triple interplay of meaning in names, at least. that intended by the namers, that perceived by third parties and that of the namee. and think of the biblical story of the naming of the animals. giving dominion over all things.
Comment by qB on Tuesday 05 October 2004 at 08:45.
http://www.hydragenic.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hydragen/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1368
The previous post was Coach & Horses.
The next post is Amish In The City.
All original material on this site is © Hydragenic, 2002-2008. Extracts of other people's work are used for the purpose of criticism, review or news reporting, in line with the "fair dealing" (or "fair use") principle.
