personally, i have given a lot of thought to this topic during my lifetime. for the first 18 or so years of my life, i was practically the only one i knew whose name was “different” (read: not ashley, mary, sarah or any of the other fine, but very familiar names out there). consequently, i never liked giving other things names (pets, cars, imaginary friends, etc.). it’s a lot of pressure. what are people going to think of the name? what does this name signal to those who hear it? looking back, having a different name has helped shape who i am, how i look at the world, etc. that might sound like an exaggeration, but it’s true. for example, i’m comfortable talking to all kinds of new people in most situations, and have been since i was young. i had to be. people would (and still do) ask me how to say my name. ask me how to spell it. again. ask me where it came from. is it a family name? i think you get the idea. but while i found it a source of insecurity when i was younger, i now see how it helped me learn how to communicate effectively. nonetheless, i value the significance names can have and the messages they may convey.
we always hear of first impressions being of the utmost importance, and names are like the precursor to the first impression. a “bad” name (of course, what defines this is subjective) can cause a grimace, evoke a bad memory or worse, prevent someone from ever getting to know more. granted, the latter doesn’t always happen with people, but that brings me to the real reason i’m writing this post.
because i take naming so seriously, it means i analyze names a lot when i hear them. the names of movies. new menu items. new colors in the crayola spectrum. and possibly more than anything else, band names.
recently, a friend introduced my partner and i to a really great band, but we almost didn’t give them a chance because of their name. i do consider myself to be an extremely open-minded person, but it really seems like nine times out of ten, a bad name signals a terrible sound. so when i heard the name dr. dog, i was a little hesitant (read: a lot hesitant) to give them a chance. finally, and i honestly don’t remember why, i decided to. then i realized how much their name troubled me. it doesn’t seem to convey a band that sounds like the audio-doppelganger to the beatles white album or perhaps the long, lost cousin of magical mystery tour. i don’t mean that they ripped the beatles off though. not at all. it’s like they are truly reminiscent of the beatles yet completely original. we (william and i) both tried to find the piece of the particular beatles song that we were sure was being copied. but we couldn’t. they capture the essence of the beatles without losing their own sense of “self” as a band. that’s only the beginning. they’re totally worth checking out. but anytime i go to recommend them, i’m a little afraid of what the reaction might be – because i remember my own. and i’m afraid they won’t be given a shot – because i almost didn’t give them one.
admittedly, i don’t know the story behind the name, and i haven’t really tried to find out. i don’t think that’s vital to what i’m saying though. the point is, a lot of people might miss out on their music because of a first impression the band never gets to expound on. this may be purposeful. maybe dr. dog is trying to weed out the superficial types (and that’s a lot of people). maybe there’s a really great inside joke behind the name. i don’t know. but what i do know is that it’s rare i hear a band that strikes me as much as this one. and i think when that happens, i want to share them with as many people as possible. there’s so much out there, it’s hard to listen to everything. we have to base our decisions to listen to new music on something. sometimes – a lot of times, probably – on the name.
