New name for sound reasons

Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
My View - The Sun Daily
July 5, 2016

IT IS encouraging to read that parties at odds over the (re)branding of the second KL airport have come to some understanding "that there is no need for a name change".

Given the many other issues of priority affecting air travel, it is a public discussion that we can do without.

While not being a party to the controversy, what boggles the mind is the headline attributed to the MAHB (Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad) chief: "You don't change your child's name, do you?" – a line of thinking used in defence of retaining "klia2".

The reality however is that the name of a child does change, and in drawing a parallel to the issue at hand, chances are the headline may well reflect a poor strategy. How?

Those who grew up in the kampung, and still have the kampung in their hearts, will be able to recall several name-change episodes.

One would have been when the child's name was deemed to be burdensome making the child sickly more often than not.

Following many failed attempts to give the child relief from such torments, one option would have been to settle for a different name. The rationale was to "lighten" the sickly burden.

In several cases, the change worked well, perhaps it was more psychological than clinical, but then it was a meaningful name change nevertheless.

There were other reasons too, especially when the names in the local (Malay) language implied some obnoxious meanings in other languages, especially Arabic.

The change was done to avoid public embarrassment. In addition, there is a saying from Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) to name children with "beautiful" names because they will be called by that name in the hereafter.

Indeed, it has been narrated: "When a man came to the Prophet (PBUH) with a name that he disapproved, he would change it."

This included names with insinuations of excessive adulation or self-praise, apart from those with awkward innuendoes.

Similarly for informal or pet names that carry funny and derogatory implications. I recall one person nicknamed "Mat Hantu Raya". Such names stigmatised him for life and put him in many embarrassing predicaments. In such cases, a name change is almost mandated for the sake of decorum and civility.

While it is permissible to use nicknames, they must be intended to show affection, kindness, or friendliness and not the contrary.

In my recent trip to northern Iraq, I learned that the Kurdish community has similar concerns.

A senior professor confessed that her present name is not what it was initially. When she was a young child, her grandmother unilaterally changed it to make it sound more "glamorous".

This was during the time of Saddam Hussein when such practices were said to be acceptable. In short, it is all right to change the names of children and adults.

The latter is more often done in the world of entertainment, where "marketing" or "branding" in efforts to be popular and glamorous come into play.

One of my favourite singers in the 1960s, Engelbert Humperdinck, famous for his singles Release Me and The Last Waltz is a good example. He was named Arnold Dorsey at birth and struggled to be successful in the music world until he changed his name to that of the German 19th-century composer of operas such as Hansel and Gretel.

Under the new name, Humperdinck sold enough records to achieve "the rare feat of scoring two million sellers in one year." Humperdinck enjoyed his first real success in July 1966 in Belgium, where he and four others represented England in a song contest.

A year later, in 1967, Release Me and The Last Waltz topped the UK music charts, thanks to the name change.

All these go to show that the Humperdinck case may well be like AirAsia's case where a name change is not only possible but necessary.

In the final analysis, the question is whether the decision made is based on established principles or merely on lines like whether you would change your child's name.

In that context, one wonders if the stance taken by MAHB and Ministry of Transport would remain steadfast should the suggestion to rebrand "klia2" to the current prime minister's name in recognition of his huge contribution to the growth of the low-cost terminal?

And, what if KLIA is to be rebranded after the fourth prime minister for similar reasons? The conclusions going by the logic that "child-names don't change" is rather obvious. I have my reservations.

With some four decades of experience in education locally and internationally, the writer believes that "another world is possible".