I will focus on the passage on page 224 that starts out with "For, things to matter more than their names..."
I found this article very interesting soley on the fact that it had to do with names. When one things of their own name, nothing more but a mere "i wonder what that means" comes to mind. However, in the mind of Vinayak, he searched for not only the meaning, which he found, but he was able to discover the historical and political background of the name "Vinayak. On page 224 he even states, "the spirit of Savarkar' was now living through me and, by extension through the doesn hundreds of other Vinayaks." This caught my attention because i think back to how other King's and Queens named their boys the same name as their ancestors (ie: King Charles I,II,III..etc). Perhaps they wanted a legacy, but to Vinayak, his name was given more meaning. He even says in the beginning of the article that in the Indian culture it is imperative to name a child later on in their life so that it could match their personality. In the American culture, parents name their children even before they are born without any regard to how their child will "fit into" their name. I guess in a way the spirit of Savarkar can be living through Vinayak because of his name. However, i still believe a name is just a name unless you make something of it. If someone was to name a child Gandhi, it does not automatically mean that Gandhi lives through that child, unless the child were to carry on the teachings and beliefs of Gandhi. This article pretty much made me realize that maybe i should think more about the background and meaning behind the name of my child (i will LATER on have in the future) rather than naming him/her something that is just popular at that time.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
i agree that the article poses the question of whether or not something "fits" into their name, or whether or not a name should "fit" the thing it names. i think we do this with people; for example, when we say, i don't know very many nice marthas (i do though). or maybe i am the only one that thinks this way? the idea is that you start to think things about the essence of something through something as arbitrary and superficial as a name. but i also think we do it when we define things--any thoughts on this?
Post a Comment