JULY 25 — Pyongyang is special and has a litany of previous names. Ryugyong, Kisong, Hwangsong, Rakrang, Sŏgyong, Sodo, Hogyong, Changan, and Heijō — Japanese occupiers gave that one. Excites the world? Not really. And yes, it is the wrong kind of special.
North Korea requires many things to escape the curse of isolation; self-absorption in its own projected greatness through names for its capital is probably not one of them.
Which is why, middle-aged generals goosestepping to oblivion off a precipice comes to mind when I consider those at home suggesting Penang’s George Town’s name change.
Tanjung Penaga is what MPs like Fawwaz Jan prefer the island city to be renamed following a faux pas by an event’s tone-deaf organisers. Still, perspectives matter. Fawwaz is lucky nothing of economic consequence occurs in his parliamentary seat across the island. No faux pas there. Often, nothing there.
But yes, name changes.
Names — of places — are arbitrary. As such, changing them or reverting to their alleged initial names is rife with arbitrariness. The planet is 4.6 billion years old and humans have only roamed it for 200,000 years. Our species will always have reasons or manufactured reasons to change names till we go extinct.
However, if reasons are necessary, they’d go along the lines of who decides, the nature of the name and the underlying purpose.
The three-hundred-forty-year journey to the present
The Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch arrived earliest in the region, yet none saw the worth of a port at the mouth of the Straits of Malacca till the British. Francis Light negotiated — tricked? — Kedah’s Sultan Abdullah for the British East Indies Company to settle on the island.
Light landed on what became Fort Cornwallis and named the town after King George III, the monarch. Incidentally, Charles Cornwallis, before being appointed governor-general of India, led the British to defeat in the American War of Independence. While King George went mad, porphyra was in his bloodline.
Renamed as Prince of Wales Island, Penang prospered.
Penang, like Malacca, went through a prolonged period of colonial rule, three times longer when compared with the other Malayan states.
There is more of the old West in the state and heritage spills all over the island, naturally necessitating the uncomfortable question, should Penang reflect differently. After all, colonialism was buried 60 years ago.
Expectedly, names are excellent starting points for reflection corrections.
Not accidental tourists
For whom do we change names? The people, its leaders or the larger world?
Few Penang folks care too much about George Town’s name. They are however, overwhelmingly concerned about its potential and future, which brings tourism into play.
Familiarity is bred over time, that’s connected to the name.
Look north for inspiration.
Bangkok’s official name is Krung Thep Maha Nakhon but rarely do non-Thais know that. And Thailand worries not about educating tourists. Bangkok is what the world knows and 40 million tourist-arrivals annually shows Thailand respects brand recognition.
Which is why it’s Rosewood Bangkok, Pearl Bangkok, Bangkok University, Holiday Inn Bangkok Silom, Bangkok Art and Culture Centre and One Night in Bangkok.
People, Asian people, are passionately practical.
So, to the leaders then.
They can meander between reason and ego.
Sometimes, leaders adopt pet projects, making name reversions their legacy. Lembah Pantai MP Fahmi Fadzil set as his agenda to nix the Bangsar South rebrand of Kerinchi. Is the phrase Bangsar South trite and artificial? Without a doubt but it does push up property prices. Clients do feel comfortable being asked to meet at the café in Nexus, Bangsar South rather than Kerinchi.
The echo chamber is real. Unless there are real grassroots objections to rebrands there is value to consider with an open mind.
What does he covet, Clarice?
Which leads to the second filter in deciding: the nature of the name, divvied up to appropriateness, divisiveness, catchiness and acceptance.
The first is the most subjective of an amazingly subjective matter. How to weigh appropriateness? Are the people of Bestari Jaya happier with the collective amnesia of forgetting it is Batang Berjuntai, really?
Names are related to identity. To eschew the past for moral superiority stinks to high heaven. Is George Town inappropriate for our identity? This is a land mine for a multicultural society and Fawwaz knew this only too well when he opened this can of worms.
Segues to divisiveness. George Town and Tanjung Penaga are — both divisive — separated by past and present, west and east, Malay and not. Penang due to political realities is always dragged into the “Malay enough or not” debate.
Catchiness is the least problematic part of the whole analysis.
Few long for Penang’s two parts to be referred to as Prince of Wales Island — there is an international school in Balik Pulau named after it — or Province Wellesley (Seberang Perai).
A lot of old British names fell out of use easily because of pronunciation issues. Like Klang’s Port Swettenham. Probably why Leicester City back in the Premier League struggles to build a fanbase here.
Catchiness is not only about the difficulty to say the words, it’s also about how attractive the words are when put together.
Cameron Highlands for instance. There is no uproar to change it to Tanah Tinggi Cameron, even if people are OK with a major hillside escape being named after a British surveyor. Alas, it just sounds better to the ear as Cameron Highlands. So, where is the crime here?
Acceptance initially may be generational, but over time seeps into identity that to live with it is more natural than not.
There are unending arguments whether to attribute the continent’s name to Italian Amerigo Vespucci or Bristol trader Richard ap Meryk. This while most of the continent accepts the continent was not founded by Whites as there were various indigenous communities from Alaska to Cape Horn before Europeans plundered. But whether down to cruel colonial rule, forced assimilation or the ravages of time, somehow American is what they call themselves, north and south.
To argue to these Americans that they should be called something else seems to deface them rather than raise them.
Please, please tell me why
Since a chronology of names accompany places, there’s always the temptation to travel back in time or break the chain altogether with a hybrid name devoid of history.
A great example is Pakistan, an acronym. Even if Pakistan as a functioning economy is not as great.
Our country is a derivative name which has no collective past but a great future if our collective present learns to lean on each other better.
A high bar must be set before names are altered.
US Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson just on top of the list were slave owners but have major cities named after them. Should those cities be renamed?
No, for they are slippery-slopes.
Some reasonable threads to explain whose interest and the value of the names have already been exhausted above.
The extremities of Pyongyang kicked off a discussion about George Town, because statesmen ought to know it is not the name but inherent quality which steadies a boat in bad weather. The North Koreans are the gold class when talking about false obsessions and imaginary enemies.
It perplexes there are lightweights who assume it is no big deal and collect their populist points. Stoking fire for cheap votes.
The arbitrariness of the matter never decreases and if spiked with hate, antagonises without forwarding debate. Wiser minds let this one slide.
