Name above all names

Having enjoyed (sorry, that should read ‘endured’) a walk home in the rain listening to the album from which this blog gets it name, it seemed only logical that I make 2 points:

1) I finish work quite early on a Wednesday – this is a good thing.

2) How important are names? I mean, really, how much difference do they make?

OK, I admit number 2 is more of a question (technically, 2 questions) than a point but, as the rain reminded me that it was pretty pointless carrying a broken umbrella in your bag, I found myself dwelling on names and wondering just how significant it is what something is called.

Take the new Meat Loaf album, ‘Hang Cool Teddy Bear’. £1 in Sainsbury’s at the weekend – wow – and my current favourite album with the word ‘teddy’ in the title. Just how important is that title to the success of the album? Regardless of your opinion on whether it is hideous or heroic (there are no other options, by the way), surely we must all agree that it’s a mark of intent? You don’t name an album like that if you want people to ignore you. At least, I’m assuming you don’t, having never released an album…

Film titles can say a lot about what you can expect from the the next two or three hours of your life. Remember the Kevin Costner film, ‘The Postman’? (If you don’t, by the way, please don’t get it out on DVD but just do a quick Wikipedia visit. Please. I can’t be held responsible for your actions if you do actually put yourself through that experience.) A simple title, no confusion there – this is about a postman, I’ve got it. It’ll be about more than that though, won’t it? It won’t just be three hours of a man walking across a desert to post a letter will it? Will it?

And then there was ‘Big Fish’, which sounded like the film angling fans have been craving for decades but was actually one of the most delightfully diverse and engaging films of the year (2003). A poor title but a brilliant film. So, what do we make of that? Did the title make any difference to the experience?

What about musicians? Would Bob Dylan have been successful as Robert Zimmerman? And what, exactly, was so wrong with ‘Reginald Dwight’ that ‘Elton John’ was brought in? What did the parents say, I wonder?

It’s amazing how often names just seem ‘right’ for the person and the role they play. Take footballers – Ronaldo, Rooney and Messi all sound like impressive players, but how far up the footballing ladder can Snodgrass and Heckingbotham ever hope to get? Credit to them for giving it a go but, really, I can’t see Heckingbotham becoming a household name (apart from in his own household, of course).

And so we come to my name (Sam Lenton, in case you haven’t been paying attention). Is that the name of a writer? Would people buy a novel by ‘Sam Lenton’ or see a play by ‘Sam Lenton’? Is it more of a novelist’s or a playwright’s name? Or would Samuel Lenton be better? How about Samuel J Lenton or SJ Lenton? Or shall we just go the whole hog and be called Tracy Barker or something like that?

In the Bible, names were often very significant and there are occasions where God tells people what to call their child in order to convey a particular message or represent something (Hosea being asked to call his son ‘Lo-amni’, meaning ‘not-my-people’ would be a good, albeit unfortunate, example). There don’t seem to be many people given names that mean ‘great footballer’ or ‘future Oscar winner for best original screenplay’ though, so perhaps this is why people are moving away from giving their children Biblical names and are now plumping for all sorts of objects, places, emotions and other random amalgamations. Well, why not? Perhaps my first child (no, this is not an announcement of any forthcoming pregnancy) should be called ‘Barbafta’ from the Greek meaning ‘son of a BAFTA winner’? We could. It might make the papers. I’m sure bullying will be extinct by the time he makes it to school anyway…