For those of you that know me, you'll recognize this as yet another of my 'wonderings'. For those of you that just stumbled across my blog, you will most likely enjoy this next article or you'll quickly judge me as being just another wacko on the internet. Either way, all is well! ;-)
The human population on our planet is predisposed to labeling each other with a “name.” Historically, it's for identification of the individual. For most of us, however, I suspect that it is simply a dominant cultural expectation that once assigned our “name,” it's to be used, honored, protected and defended.
An exception to this practice has been in the situation of marriage, wherein many cultures expect the wife to ‘assume’ the last/family name of her new husband. And there are at least a couple of cultures wherein the husband also assumes the last/family name of his new wife. And of course, in recent times we’ve seen more and more of the hyphenating of those names to create a hybrid dual-family name.
Another fairly commonly known and accepted exception to the practice is in “witness protection programs.” In those situations, the hiding person(s) are assigned entirely new names. And with this example, I will attempt to begin to make my point. Not only are such persons given new labels/names, they are forced to take on entirely new identities and completely new lives ~ all of which starts with a name change.
Most people seem to feel that such a taking on of a new identity/life is extreme, if not tragic, and something that should be done only in extreme circumstances. And yet, if that’s the case, then why is it that a spouse is expected to take on a new name when married? I wonder if it is not because ‘marriage’ has traditionally been one of life’s “changes” in which the individual’s role in life significantly changes.
In other words, isn’t it that we tend to accept that with a name change comes changes in choices, decisions, ideas, lifestyles, homes, environments, careers, families, education, religion and even culture? As such, then I’m also wondering about the possible advantages of a new model of naming.
For instance, if at the hypothetical age of 6 months, the parents of a child were to choose a ‘second’ name for their kid ~ a baby-name, if you will, that more accurately “fits” the personality and behavior of their 6-month-old. An example might be that the proud parents of a new baby girl named their tiny little 7-lb angel, at birth, “Mackenzie.” But as most parents could testify, the personality and behavior of an infant radically changes by the time s/he is 6 months old. My contention ~ why not assign that little person a new name?
In our example, what might happen if their little girl ~ who I would contend is NOT the same person as she was at the age of 2 days ~ were assigned a new name? I would wonder if in so-doing the parents of that kid might be invited to accept and perceive their child as a different person, complete with a different set of “allowable” behaviors, personality expressions, expectations, etc., etc., starting with changing her name, for example, to "Z"?
Continuing on with my hypothesis, what would happen then if the parents not only allowed and accepted but encouraged their little girl to “be” a new little butterfly at the age of 5 or 6, starting with ~ you guessed it ~ her name? But this time, rather than assigning her name to her, what if ";Z"; was given the opportunity to choose her own name?? So then, ";Z"; is gone, but ";Jessica"; appears on the scene. Get the picture?
The toughest philosophical question might be ~ is "Jessica" the same person as "Z" or "Mackenzie"? My contention is “No!” she is not. And not only is she not the same person, it’s good, right and acceptable that she is a work in progress with incredible opportunity and potential to “be” any number of “new butterflies” during her lifetime on this planet.
Adolescent age(s) is/are arguably other opportunities for new names, and identities, but let’s fast–forward a bit. "Jessica" has now graduated from High School and is “moving toward her future.” But by this time, she has become wise to the succession of names/butterflies/identities ~ so "Jessica" now becomes "Jesse-Livingston-Seagull" and decides she wants to fly with the wind! Choosing her own name, she also sets off on the flight of choosing her next set of behaviors, educational experiences, career, partner, goals and ambitions. With a little luck, encouragement and perseverance, maybe "Jesse-Livingston-Seagull" will actually fly thru the mountain. Maybe she won’t. Either way, she still gets to live the life of "Jesse-Livingston-Seagull".
Next question ~ has she now grown up and must now conform to the demands by the rest of us and forego her desire to BE "Jesse-Livingston-Seagull"? Our culture would be screaming at her and doing everything within its power to get "Jesse" to “think of her future” and make plans that will determine the course of her life for the rest of her life.
But now it’s too late, for "Jesse-Livingston-Seagull" has learned to fly! And now she determines that her name is to be "Princess Jessica Mackenzie Seagull Z", complete with self-acceptance for her new choices, adventures, challenges, failures, disappointments and successes ~ but mostly an awareness that life is at the moment, in the moment, and if at any given moment ~ in the blink of an eye ~ she wants to become a new butterfly, or even a part of a butterfly that she once used to BE, she can actually choose a new name/life and BE that person!
So, are we indeed the same person all of our lives, from birth to death? Each of us has to decide. But since this is my wondering (or what some people may call delusion or heresy), I choose to believe that any ‘person’ is in reality a series of persons, connected only by a physical being we call a biological life. How many lives/names have you already lived? How many more will you live before you pass? What’s in your name? Life… I wish you well in the pursuit of your new name(s).
Comments(13)