Do names spell out our fates?

Ithink I may have a hypothesis. There have been two big political stories in this country in recent weeks. One involved Jami-Lee Ross, the other Iain Lees-Galloway. Both are male MPs in early middle age, and both have made a mess of things, but that would seem to be it for what they have in common. Look again, however, at those names. Notice the hyphens.

I like hyphens. They are vital to clear expression. A black-cab driver may or may not be a black cab driver. And there’s a significant difference between extra-marital sex and extra marital sex, though both may conceivably be causes for divorce.

An insurance company once offered me free death by accident insurance. I was impressed. Free death was familiar, but death by accident insurance was a novelty. I pictured salesmen with halitosis reading me policy boilerplate till I curled like a foetus, whimpered for mother and yielded my essence to Yahweh.

So I cherish a well-used hyphen. But in names it is rarely well used.

I attended a state secondary school in southern England. There were 600 boys and 40 staff and not a hyphen among them. Hyphenated first names belonged to girls (and not to very many of them) and hyphenated surnames belonged to toffs.

We came across toffs occasionally when we played cricket against private schools, whom it was always a pleasure, and rarely a challenge, to beat. I recall one Nigel Urquhart-d’Arcy hitting the ball to extra cover and setting off running. ‘‘Looking for three, Giles,’’ he called to his partner, ‘‘coming for two, settle for one, better hurry up, oh, silly me, I’m so very sorry.’’

So when I came to New Zealand in 1987 and joined the Christchurch Football Club, I was surprised to discover that the loosehead prop for the second-grade side had a double-barrelled surname. Any search for the antithesis of a toff would have seized on this man. And that was before he took his teeth out.

But I soon discovered that double-barrelled surnames are common in this country. There seem to be two reasons. One is that strong independent women didn’t wish to see their identities subsumed into their husbands’. The other is that strong independent families didn’t wish to relinquish a pioneering surname. Both are understandable and indeed admirable reasons. But that doesn’t make them wise.

For where does the accretion end? If a LeesGalloway marries an Urquhart-d’Arcy do they bear quadruple-barrelled progeny? If not, then which child gets what moniker? How much simpler things would be if we just got rid of the nominal hyphen at source. My proposal is that every wedding between the mono-barrelled should feature a ceremonial coin-toss. The winner gets to name the kids.

With first names the story is different. The traditional Davids and Janes have gone out of fashion, replaced by names oddly spelt and hyphenated. I suspect it has something to do with the shrinking birth rate. With fewer kids being born, each is thought to need a special name to reflect their precious uniqueness.

Understandable but wrong. You don’t make a child special by giving it a fancy name. You only make it embarrassed. Far better to call it David or Jane and then let it forge its own identity. How many times did Jami-Lee have to spell out his name to puzzled teachers? And how did his classmates respond?

Of course my hypothesis is merely tentative and I do not claim that the hyphens caused the unfortunate events that have plagued their owners recently. I suggest only that they may not have helped. More research is needed.