Spelling, Be

My boss in my first job out of college was a man named Bill West. He’d occasionally get annoyed when he’d give his name over the phone and the person on the other end would say, “Could you spell that, please?” Like, it’s Bill freakin’ West. What is there to spell?

I, on the other hand, have a last name that nobody can be expected to spell correctly on the first try. It’s Schaeffer, but in a world filled with Shaeffers, Shafers, Schaefers, and innumerable other variations, there’s no way for anybody to know what to do once they get past “S.”

For many years, when asked how to spell my name, I would patiently spell it out: “S–c–h–a–e–f–f–e–r.” Then it occurred to me that I could save a lot of time by just telling the person, “Put in all the letters you can.” That turned the problem into a game, which many people seemed to appreciate. (Among them was my wife Debra, who went a bit too far by coming up with the spelling Pschaephpherre.) Still, it didn’t seem fair to saddle a harried reservations clerk or receptionist with the task of puzzling out the correct spelling on their own.

After many years, I finally arrived at the most practical instruction: “Spell it however you want!” After all, unless I was engaging in some sort of legal transaction — in which case I would probably do it in writing — it really didn’t matter how somebody spelled my name. “Schaeffer, party of two, your table’s ready” sounds the same no matter how it was written down.

My wife and I have different last names, which occasionally leads to one of us being identified by the other’s name. Debra, for feminist reasons, is irked when someone assumes that her last name is Schaeffer, but she answers to it when necessary. I, on the other hand, have no objection to being called Mr. Goldentyer when the clerk at Safeway reads it off our loyalty card. (What I’m actually called in that situation is “Mr. Guh… Mr. Go… uh, Gol…,” but having a difficult-to-decipher last name is a problem that poor Debra has had to cope with much longer than I have.)

The point is that it makes no difference what people call me, as long as they and I both understand who is being referred to. My students at Chabot College, on the first day of class, would often ask how they should address me: Mr. Schaeffer? Mark? Professor? My answer was always, “Whatever you’re most comfortable with.” As long as a student treats me with respect — the same respect that I am careful to offer in return — the particular phonemes that come out of the student’s mouth hardly matter.

I would think that this indifference toward arbitrary labels would be universal, but it quite evidently isn’t. Most people, so far as I’ve seen, are offended when someone innocently misspells or mispronounces their name, or calls them something other than what they prefer to be called. I find this attitude mysterious. If someone addresses me as “Mr. Guh… Mr. Go…,” my natural response is to tell them, “It’s Goldentyer.” I see no need to snap, “It’s actually Schaeffer.” The name that this person associates with me has no effect on who I am.

The thing in my wallet that we typically call an “ID card” shows my name, my picture, my date of birth, and perhaps my gender. But those things don’t constitute my identity; they’re just handy labels that people can use to identify me. If someone gets one of those labels wrong, they’re merely making an error; they’re not changing anything about who I am. Most of the time, the error — such as a misspelling of my name — has no consequences. In cases where the error does have consequences — where I might be denied a right due to someone’s interpretation of my age, gender, or ethnicity — the fault lies in the way society treats people with different labels unequally. The labels themselves are insignificant.

Read Me 3 comments

Dance Academy (2)

(part two of two)

I recently saw a performance (well, four performances — more about that in a moment) by my favorite San Francisco dance company, FACT/SF. The piece, called “Split,” is performed by a single dancer for a single audience member, eight times a night. Four different dancers perform the show in rotation, each with a different, personal interpretation of the choreography. Naturally, then, I went to see it four times.

As you might expect from a piece that’s performed one-on-one, “Split” is largely about identity — or as FACT/SF’s director Charles Slender-White puts it, “the relationship between dissociative episodes and identity formation,” particularly among members of the queer community. In other words, it’s about the experience of finding out that you’re not who you thought you were.

Seeing the show started me on the path of thinking deeply about the nature of identity. “Identity” is a word we use all the time, but it’s not always clear what we mean by it. When I was an undergraduate philosophy major, one of the fields I studied was that of “personal identity,” which addresses questions like “If all the cells in the human body are replaced over a period of seven to ten years, in what sense can I be considered the same individual that I was ten years ago?” But that’s a technical application of the term, and not the way it tends to be used in ordinary conversation.

The news these days is filled with talk about “identity politics,” which is the idea that your membership in a group — particularly a group that has experienced oppression or discrimination — dictates your political agenda. More controversially, it holds that people who are not members of that group cannot understand your life experience, and therefore have no right to speak for you. In this context, identity can be considered simply a collection of categories into which one fits. In any political discussion, I would be considered an old, straight, white, cisgender, Jewish American man.

But does that description really constitute my identity? After all, I didn’t invent those categories. I may have some beliefs about which I fit into, but other people — or society at large — may have different beliefs. If neo-Nazis start rounding up Jews, it won’t help for me to tell them that I’ve never practiced Judaism. In practice, they get to decide my identity; I don’t.

I think that if “identity” is to have any real meaning, it would have to be something that’s inherent in me, not something that’s determined by others. And yet, when people talk about their own experience of establishing an identity, they tend to use those same externally defined categories. We’ve all heard people say “I thought I was straight, but I realized that I’m gay.” “I was assigned male at birth, but I’ve always been a woman.” “My light skin makes people think I’m white, but I’m really Black.” Of course these distinctions have real social and political consequences, but fitting into a particular group or category can hardly constitute who one really is.

So I came to ask, what’s my identity? Descriptors like “American” or “male” may apply to me in a political context, but they don’t resonate with me personally. “Straight” may describe who I’m attracted to, but it doesn’t say anything about who I am. “Old” may characterize my body, but not the being that inhabits it.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that real identity is undefinable and indescribable. I am who I am, and nothing more can be said about it.

It occurred to me that this may be why I’ve always had problems with my name. I’ve never much identified with the name Mark Schaeffer (or, for that matter, either Mark or Schaeffer). When I hear myself referred to that way, my immediate mental reaction is, “Who’s that?” So I’ve always sensed that I have the wrong name, but it all these years, I’ve never been able to figure out what the right one is.

I’ve asked friends — some of whom have changed their own names — what they think my “real” name would be. People have offered suggestions, but all of their proposed names felt equally arbitrary. It’s only recently that I’ve come to realize that all names are arbitrary. They’re just labels that we each put on a collection of cells that’s being replaced every seven to ten years. How do I know that I’m the same individual that I was ten years ago? At least I can say, “Well, I have the same name.”

But my true identity — whatever that is — doesn’t have a name, and it doesn’t have categories. Neither does yours. As I stated in my previous post, the dance is the dance. Now I have to add: The dancer is the dancer.

Read Me 5 comments