The Power of Names, Like It or Not
In the August 24 Washington Post, we hear that ESPN yanked an unfortunate Asian-American from broadcasting a University of Virginia football game, the sportscaster’s trespass being that he bore the name: Robert Lee. Elsewhere in the same issue, Dana Milbank skewered ESPN (and ludicrously overdone Political Correctness in general), with a satire that suggested we should ban from the public eye Bruce Lee, Tommy Lee, Harper Lee, Spike Lee, Bobby Lee, Lee Majors, Lee Jeans, etc.
We are all familiar with the epigram, “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” spoken by Juliet in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
Really? What if the flower were named Kerblunkanoo? Ratstikittel? Skrutabucket? Wine critic: “This chardonnay has a complex aroma, a fusion of pears and peaches with a delicate hint of skrutabucket.” OK—it could become catchy. But that doesn’t change the fact that names shade perceptions. People named Hitler can attest to that. Racial, ethnic, gender, and religious slurs attest to the demeaning power of names. Actors and actresses acquire stage names to spin their personae, perhaps the most famous being the name Marilyn Monroe to replace the decidedly unglamorous Norma Jeanne Mortenson.
As if Shakespeare didn’t know. Every utterance in Shakespeare’s plays is made by a particular character in a particular situation, and there’s no assurance that the Immortal Bard himself believed any particular thing they said. Context is all. Cases in point: “Discretion is the better part of valor” is spoken by a faithless coward (Falstaff); “Who steals my purse, steals trash,” is voiced by the most hypocritical, lying, scheming, treacherous villain (Iago) in all of Shakespeare’s plays, and is a warning to any sucker who might be taken in by the machinations of a confidence man. (“The money doesn’t matter to me” is the first signal of danger from someone who is about to take your money.)
Back to Juliet. Her bon mot is a moving but specious bit of rhetoric in service of her passion for Romeo, an attempt to defang the glaring enormity of the feud between her family and his. It is part of her plaint against the fate that has put a cruel barrier between their respective families, but hardly qualifies as logic.
The Changing of “Climate Change”
In the same issue of the Post, Lenny Bernstein reports on revisions of wordings on the NIH website to delete “Change” from the term “Climate Change.” There are questions as to the purpose: was it to stealthily expand the new administration’s campaign of climate change denial, or done by career staffers attempting to dodge administration scrutiny on climate issues?
See Bruce’s article here
Whatever the purpose, it demonstrates that names matter, and you can leverage small changes in names to great effect over time.