The picture here is ironic, don't you think?

At last week's quiz, I asked this question:

Last summer, researchers at Carleton University in Canada conducted a mathematical exercise concluding that yes, civilization would very possibly come to an end if what actually existed?


I thought it was only mildly challenging, but EDP commented from the stage that he found it nearly impossible. If you were in attendance, you know that we made a little friendly wager then and there: I predicted that a minimum of ten teams (out of the 20 present) would write down the correct answer, EDP guessed fewer. Seven squads were correct; I owe the man $5. (Many of you guessed "God" or "world peace" or "global warming." But I do think that if I had emphasized "mathematical exercise," a few more might have put the pieces together, since the exponential growth seems to be the crux of the crisis in most z-lit.)

But that is neither here nor there (always wanted to use that phrase). I had written the question after stumbling upon this article, and I was particularly intrigued by this sentence:

"Professor Robert Smith? (the question mark is part of his surname and not a typographical mistake) and colleagues wrote…"

Well, then. Notwithstanding Prince and the leader of ? and the Mysterians—a true eccentric who claims to be a martian and a close friend to dinosaurs—I never knew this was officially possible. But I dug a tiny bit further and found Professor Smith?'s own website here, on which he immediately declares, "Yes, the question mark is actually part of my name." The photo that greets you certainly suggests that this is a gentleman not averse to being thought of as rather unorthodox:

Then he writes:

"People sometimes ask me why I have a question mark in my name. In fact, somebody does this approximately fifteen times a day. (One day, I'm sure he'll get bored and go away.) If you haven't lived with an incredibly common name, then you have no idea what it's like to be entirely invisible on Google. Not that the question mark actually solves that, but at least it differentiates me from that guy from The Cure."

The hokey humor only confirms that this fellow is not the average bear.

I am sympathetic to how unpleasant it must be to have a name as common as "Robert Smith." The guy in the Cure is just the tip of the iceberg; look at this list from Wikipedia, and our punctuation-happy professor isn't even there. I don't have this problem—I'm fairly certain I'm the only Noah Tarnow out there, but that could change as my first name grows in popularity among new births (the Social Security database has it at No. 15 for U.S. males born in 2008). So I respect his decision to change his name.

But adding the question mark seems intensely bizarre, and counterproductive. First of all, as Prof. Smith? himself points out, it's no help re: googleability. Furthermore, as that BBC article demonstrates, every time he's referred to in the press, or even a university course catalog, the publishers have to add an awkward eye-roller of a note about "this is not a typo," or risk looking incompetent. Finally, and this is something any good copy editor will tell you, there are many attendant problems to having punctuation as part of a proper name. Are we to mentally read any reference to this man's name as a question? "I'm having lunch with Robert Smith?" Well, are you declaring that, or are you asking me if you are? Does one have to up-talk every time they mention his name? Is his name pronounced "Robert Smith?"

Yes, I understand that this guy (I'm done typing the name) wanted to be distinctive, but there are many, many much better solutions. He could have changed it to "Robert Smmith." Unique, googleable. Sure, perhaps "Robert Smmith" looks like a typo at first, but after the second instance in an article, the reader will figure out it's unusual and not merely a mistake; no need for the awkward parenthetical note.

But then, would I be blogging about him? Unlikely. Very crafty, Prof. Smith? (Or is it?)

The Super Mega Ultra Hard Question: 5/22/09

YES! After too long a hiatus, it's back! E-mail info@bigquizthing.com with your answer by Sunday, May 30. A randomly selected correct response will win free admission to the Big Quiz Thing. Joy!

Among the least important Obama-related issues

Yes, this blog post is a little behind the zeitgeist curve. You've seen this video before, but watch once again.



What I want you to notice is not Chief Justice Roberts misplacing faithfully, it's not Roberts referring to the office as "President to the United States" (see 0:18)—it's what he and Obama both say, at 0:08 and 0:12, respectively: "Hussein." Yes, that is President Obama's middle name, much to his campaign's consternation at certain points last year.

I figure, hey, the dude's being sworn in for the highest job in the land; if they use your complete full name when you graduate college, you're going for the whole shebang on this occasion, even if part of the name indicates to millions of dumb-ass Americans that you're poker buddies with the 9/11 hijackers. Obama even addressed this. "Hussein" he is, "Hussein" it must be.

But watch this.:

That was 1981, when Reagan first took office. First of all, isn't it so incredibly obvious from his delivery that Reagan trained as an actor? But more to the point, notice that he and Justice Berger (mmm…Burger) say just "Ronald Reagan," not "Ronald Wilson Reagan." Even more amazing, when you think about it:

Not only did Berger and Carter skip the 39th President's middle name ("Earl"), they called him Jimmy. Not James. Jimmy's the name of a stool pigeon on a 1960s cop show. No wonder Carter had so many problems getting the world to take him seriously.

Then there's this (sorry, having trouble posting an edited version; you only need the first 45 seconds):

More fun with Warren Berger. This time, he's Gerald R. Ford—we don't get the full "Rudolph," but we get a middle initial.

Apparently, something shifted during the '80s, because Obama's not the first one to use his middle name; in fact, Reagan was the last to go the abbreviated route. Bush I was "George Herbert Walker Bush," Clinton was the full "William Jefferson Clinton," and Dubya was "George Walker Bush." Perhaps it's all an accident; maybe Bush I wanted to go full monty, cognizant that he wasn't the only "George Bush" out there, and everyone since has just taken his lead. Then again, if you go further back (check out this guy's audo clips), there's serious inconsistency: Some middle names ("John Fitzgerald Kennedy"), some with middle initials ("Dwight D. Eisenhower"), some with neither ("Richard Nixon"). Clearly, no one variation is mandated by the Constitution; perhaps it's just a matter of each individual President's preference.

If that's the case, what does it say about Obama that he chose to include the controversial middle name in what some consider an extremely sacred ritual? Was he indeed mistaken, thinking that using the full name was long-standing tradition? Or—as I suspect, but I am an Obama loyalist—is this part of his ongoing strategy to own up, as it were, to his "otherness"?
During the campaign, Bill Maher once asked a Democratic big shot about Obama's name, how as a kid he went by "Barry," and how, since he was estranged from his father, he had considered taking his mother's last name ("Dunham"). "Wouldn't you rather be running Barry Dunham?" Maher asked. Well, yes and no. Yes, that name would elicit less controversy; no, because the Republicans would've have constantly asked what this guy was trying to hide, turning "Barack Obama" into a dirty word (or phrase).

I say it again: I'm less amazed that we elected a black man, than that we elected a man named "Barack Hussein Obama." (Or that we elected Ronald Reagan, but that's another story…)