When choosing a name for this blog, I wanted a moniker that was meaningful on a personal level, but somewhat generic and meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Some time ago, I had registered the domain name notmike.com as a joke and had set up a single page to explain succinctly why my first name is “Michael” and not “Mike,” as so many people insist on calling me.
It may seem petty to be so concerned with how others address me, as “Bill” said, “What’s in a name?” I’m still the same person no matter what I am called. In fact, my current last name is not even the one I was born with.
This nominal preoccupation is partly in deference to my mother, who named me as a memorial to her father, who had died when she was eleven. She would often correct those who incorrectly assumed that I could be properly addressed as “Mike” by indignantly proclaiming that she had named me “Michael,” not “Mike.”
Of Hebrew origin, the name Michael’s translation is actually a question, possibly rhetorical, that recognizes the awesome uniqueness of God by asking, quite simply, “Who is like God?” The ending (“ael”) is a short form of the name “Elohim,” a Hebrew equivalent of the English word “God” that is often associated with the creative aspect of God. Elohim, being plural, either implies the Trinitarian nature of God or, as some scholars believe, serves as evidence that the monotheistic Hebrew god has roots in polytheism. Indeed, how many other given names invoke such profound theological debate?
“Mike,” on the other hand, is either the standard NATO phonetic alphabet representation of the letter M, an informal clipped form of microphone, or a forklike support for a light cannon on a sailing ship — hardly a comparable foreshortening.
To presume that a Michael is comfortable with the sobriquet Mike is similar to the erroneous assumption that one can automatically choose to address a William as Bill, Will, or Willie; or Robert as Bob or Rob; Elizabeth as Beth or Liz; John as Jack; or the worst one, Richard as Dick. While many accept and even prefer these nicknames, it is prudent and courteous to take notice of how an individual introduces him or herself and reciprocally address that person accordingly. For example, I will often close an e-mail with my proper given name and be frustrated when the response e-mail’s salutation is “Mike.” Occasionally, I will correct them with another e-mail, which then generates an apologetic return e-mail. However, such inbox-clogging exchanges are usually more trouble than they are worth.
Again, this all seems extremely petty, but when one does not respect another enough to properly address them, it signifies a distinct lack of courtesy. This rule of courtesy is drilled into members of the military, especially when addressing a peer or a superior. Soldiers are under orders to address their superiors by rank, by rank and surname, or as “sir” (officers only), and they are strongly encouraged to address peers and subordinates in like manner. This is done as a sign of respect for both the individual and the office they hold. Similarly, many European languages make a distinction between a formal and a informal second-person address. The formal “you” is used respectfully when greeting a stranger or an elder, and only upon mutual familiarity is the formal address replaced with the informal. The key word here is respect.
So what does this long-winded and ultimately trivial explanation have to do with this weblog and its overall theme and future content? Absolutely nothing. However, at least its inanity fits in with the site’s tagline. My intent was merely to provide the method to the madness of why I chose “not Mike” as the name for this blog.
I found this post quite interesting. It’s neat to hear the stories behind people’s names. I don’t think it’s petty to be concerned about one’s name. It’s how we are known, we hear and see our name all the time, the least people can do is get it right.
Thanks, Eszter. Name origins can be really fascinating. In fact, I couldn’t resist looking up Eszter — Hungarian form of Esther; possibly means “star” in Persian. Alternatively it could be a Hebrew form of ISHTAR, the name of a Persian goddess….
Amusingly, one of the grad student charges of a certain Hungarian expat permagrad blogger we both know asked me yesterday whether I preferred Mike or Michael and was surprised by the enthusiasm of my response. So rather than verbalize the lengthy explanation once again, I directed her to this blog entry.
thats a very interesting post mike
My name too, and my mother doesn’t like the shortened mickname either. However, I’ve accepted the four-letter name out of laziness and apathy.
My problem goes the other way. I am a Stephen who prefers to be “Steve.” Frequently, people then assume I am a “Steven,” which makes me nuts. I have always been sensitive to this and, thus, try to be respectful of those I encounter with a similar situation to yours or mine. Keep up the good fight!
Hello! I’m Samuel Smith, i’m from Switzerland i and find your site really brilliant!