Gorgo vs. Gogol
It's insipid but allowable to draw a link between Lena Headey's 300 hot-bod character being named Gorgo (i.e., "Queen" Gorgo) and Kal Penn's character in The Namesake being named Gogol. Especially with both films opening on March 9th...what are the odds?
Lena Headey, Kal Penn
Both names imply some kind of ogre-ish appearance or essence, but which is more problematic? I can roll with Gorgo, actually -- Headey and director Zack Snyder have made her into a strong but sexually ruthless character, and the name is obviously similar to "Gorgon," a Greek mythology term that refers to a "vicious female monster with sharp fangs and hair of living, venomous snakes," according to Wikipedia, so I guess it half-works.
But Gogol (taken from Nikolai Gogol, a respected 19th Century Russian writer) is a frightfully coarse and lumpy-sounding first name for any kid growing up in America, and this alone turned me off Mira Mair's film, frankly. Penn's character is given this name by his Indian-immigrant dad (played by Irfan Khan). He does this out of admiration, we're told, for the Russian writer.
The film is obviously about ethnic identity and the factors that sometimes dilute or degrade this, but I was very soon asking myself what kind of father gives his son a name like that? Only a sadistic or collossally ignorant parent living in the U. S. of A. would name his son "Gogol." That's worse than naming him "Ezekiel" or "Sue" or "Hortense."
The likely motive for Khan's Indian immigrant probably isn't too far from the one that motivated that ne'er-do-well dad in Johnny Cash's song "A Boy Named Sue." Khan is looking to obnoxiously (you could almost say brutally) impose an ethnic apartness upon the kid, and thereby instill a sense of native character. He doesn't want the boy to flow and groove with materialist WASP culture as he grows up. He wants him to have to deal with constant shit from his peers all of his young life. That's a pretty loathsome thing for any dad to do. It's certainly not a pleasant or informative thing to watch or contemplate.
The offshoot is that I'd rather sit through 300 a second time than watch The Namesake again....and that's saying something.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on March 17, 2007 at 1:38 PM
comment #1
jeffmcm
says ...
Isn't this question the _point_ of The Namesake?
Also I don't see how the lady in 300 is 'sexually ruthless' because she enjoys sex with her husband (possibly, the movie doesn't say for sure) and because she allows another guy to use her in a life-or-death situation. Sounds like a typically misogynist reading.
Posted by jeffmcm
at March 17, 2007 1:52 PM
comment #2
thatmovieguy
says ...
My sister had a friend who taught classes to teenage moms-to-be at a Detroit hospital. Her job was to explain to young women about caring for their reproductive systems (some of the women weren't even clear on how they had become pregnant and knew nothing of gynecological procedures or birth control). It was sometimes rewarding work, but my sister's friend was often aghast when her students would contemplate naming their children Clitoris or Vulva because those names "sounded so pretty." And you think being named Gogol would ruin your life?
Posted by thatmovieguy
at March 17, 2007 2:06 PM
comment #3
Devin Faraci
says ...
Also, Gorgo was a real person: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgo_%28Sparta%29
Posted by Devin Faraci
at March 17, 2007 2:18 PM
comment #4
nemo
says ...
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the name "Gogol" sounds all that bizarre to American ears. I never bought the idea that the main character of "The Namesake" would have such a tough time growing up with the name Gogol. That character is making a big deal over nothing. In no way does Gogol sound as weird to Americans as Gorgo (or Sue).
I see that Devin was also wondering whether Queen Gorgo was a real historical figure like her husband. Even more bizarre than her name is the fact that her husband was also her uncle! Or at least her half-uncle.
I'm surprised no one has commented on the strongest association with the name Gorgo -- it's the name of the Godzilla-like monster that flattens London in the 1961 monster flick "Gorgo". Despite its obvious borrowings from Godzilla, Mothra, and King Kong, "Gorgo" is a pretty good monster movie in its own right. Unlike its Japanese and American forebears, it seems to be mostly forgotten by anyone too young to have seen it in theaters or television back in the 60s.
Technically British Godzilla is much superior to the movies that inspired it, probably because of the special effects work of Tom Howard, who also contributed special effects on such notable films as "Suddenly Last Summer", "Village of the Damned", and "2001".
Posted by nemo
at March 17, 2007 2:36 PM
comment #5
Noah
says ...
It's no worse than naming your kid "Jett"
Posted by Noah
at March 17, 2007 2:50 PM
comment #6
gruver1
says ...
Wells to Noah: "Jett" is a common cracker name in Arkansas and Texas and Louisiana. It's an extremely cool-sounding, totally non-dorky cowpoke name in the vein of Clint or Duke or Lance. That and the James Dean history (his character in George Stevens was called "Jett") is why I suggested it to my ex. Jett hates his first name -- Trevor -- but that's another story. I, on the other hand, used to take shit now and then from grade-school friends for having a slightly dorky-sounding middle name -- Warden.
Posted by gruver1
at March 17, 2007 3:05 PM
comment #7
Noah
says ...
Kids get made fun of no matter what their name is. It doesn't matter how "cool" it may sound to one person, some other kid will find some way to make fun of it. That's life. Gogol, Jett, same shit.
Posted by Noah
at March 17, 2007 3:10 PM
comment #8
alynch
says ...
Is it just me or is Jeff simply looking for reasons to dismiss a movie these days. Not liking a movie simply because of one character's name is beyond shallow.
Posted by alynch
at March 17, 2007 3:32 PM
comment #9
alan
says ...
Unless I'm mistaken, Gorgo wasn't actually referred to by name once in the movie.
Posted by alan
at March 17, 2007 3:47 PM
comment #10
Deege
says ...
The movie is based on a book, and the lead character's name is a major theme. I don't see how Nair could have changed it.
Posted by Deege
at March 17, 2007 4:08 PM
comment #11
zoey
says ...
This is sounding more and more like Letterman at the Oscars: Oprah... Uma... Uma... Oprah.
Posted by zoey
at March 17, 2007 4:43 PM
comment #12
MovieBob
says ...
Um... in the film, Gogol's father is a native of India, and their last name is Ganguli. It's entirely possible (and, seemingly, part of the POINT of the movie) that Gogol wasn't really seen as all that awkward a name for him.
Posted by MovieBob
at March 17, 2007 9:36 PM
comment #13
jeffmcm
says ...
The James Dean/Giant thing is the single biggest reason why "Jett" is a dumb name. It's like naming a kid "Lancelot" or "Sherlock" except trendier (and trendy = lame)
Posted by jeffmcm
at March 17, 2007 10:29 PM
comment #14
Dan Revill
says ...
I haven't seen the film yet, but I know the book a little, so this may be a SPOILER, but Indian families have 'pet' names for each other that only family members know - Gogol was a family only name at first. His grandmother was supposed to give him an official first name, but some wires got crossed, and well, Gogol eventually stuck, because he did not like the name Nikolai, which the parents wanted him to use for school.
I've read that the movie is pretty faithful to the book, so hopefully it doesn't disappoint when I get around to watching it. The book is one of my favorite reads ever.
Anyhow, Wells can't be bothered with other cultures if they are not in some way "cool" in the way they name their children.
Posted by Dan Revill
at March 18, 2007 1:17 AM
comment #15
Josh Massey
says ...
A couple of years ago, a 5th grader at the school I teach at was named "Catoris."
You wouldn't believe some of the names today's (mostly) minority children are saddled with, and you can bet they will hinder the kids in 10-15 years when their resume comes across somebody's desk.
Posted by Josh Massey
at March 18, 2007 2:37 PM
comment #16
MrClever
says ...
Hey, c'mon, guys. You're a little out of line making fun of Jeff's son's name. That's not polite. I've always thought it was a fine name, though I prefer 'Trevor.' I don't care for my first name, and have gone by my middle name almost my entire life. Then, around age 32, I got tired of correcting people, then explaining why I don't like my first name... So now I answer to both names and don't identify with either. Maybe I'll change my name to 'Jett,' 'Trevor' or 'Charles' (a name I've always liked).
Posted by MrClever
at March 19, 2007 1:47 AM