1) The last two decades, however, have led to a “ghettoization” of distinctively Black names, namely, a distinctively Black name is now a much stronger predictor of socioeconomic status.
2) We find no relationship between how Black one’s name is and life outcomes after controlling for other factors. If that conclusion is correct, then the proper interpretation of earlier audit studies
using Black names on resumes is either that the impact of names
does not extend beyond the callback decision (because race is
directly observed at the interview stage), or that names are correlated
with determinants of productivity not captured by a resume.
In our data, it is difficult to distinguish between these
competing hypotheses.
The words "Something All Our Own" come to mind (the name of Grant Hill's collection of African American art).
The motivation to defy expectations has been there for a long time, and makes sense on several levels. It's the same drive, I suspect, that led to utterly unique movements like Jazz, hip-hop, and distinctive forms of dance, which really insisted on creating their own modalities and not borrowing from the pre-existing culture.
Some motivations I can think of:
One, asserting independence from a dominant culture that in turns delegitimizes and exploits your own. Why would one choose to blend in with this culture?
Two, demanding legitimacy / highlighting the fact that there are still dire punishments for choosing to embrace one's ethnicity. Hell, name choice is small beans... consider the racism implicit in having your dialect, spoken by millions, deemed unacceptable at work and school by white authority figures everywhere. Having to deal with the fact that no one will take you seriously if you speak the way you do at home, is a big part of the African American experience and must be a constant reminder that you are not accepted by those in charge unless you toe the line.
Three, an attempt at disproving racist forces that wish to deny your intelligence, creative spark, and potential. Self expression was brutally squashed since the beginning of slavery days, and only allowed insofar as it entertained those in power. The desire to actively disregard whether your action pleases the supremacist (who still doles out reward and punishment), and instead celebrate the differences that have normally only meant trouble, is a fully understandable reaction to all this.
best thing my immigrant parents ever did was gave me a super-generic sounding anglo first and last name. if anyone asks (they almost never do), i just tell them i was adopted. people discriminate based on name, that's a cold hard fact.
it's a very common first name, and a very short ambiguous and non-descript last name. it connotates absolutely nothing other than i am probably an american that speaks english.
It's interesting to see the study found no relation between characteristically black names and effect on earning power when controlling for factors.
One question I've had is why didn't parents who wanted to avoid originally European names take from actual African names, rather than minting new names. I understand being disconnected from one's ancestry, but still, this seems a different alternative.
One question I've had is why didn't parents who wanted to avoid originally European names take from actual African names, rather than minting new names. I understand being disconnected from one's ancestry, but still, this seems a different alternative.
People do things for so many reasons, or for no reason. Trying to make Black people's choices of names fit some narrative is going to fail to capture the complexity and depth of their culture.
Put another way, if people are choosing not to use White names, why wouldn't they also choose not to the use traditional names of any culture. Maybe having a "respectable" name that has a long history as a name, is also something people were choosing to avoid.
I get that. We also have many people of European descent who make up new names too --it's more recent than that by black parents, but none the less, I would have similar question. There are so many names to choose from, why come up with new, sometimes quirky names? Not saying it's bad. At some point in time all names have been "new". With Europeans it's not so much trying to find a cultural identity but perhaps find their child a unique identity. So at some level there is something similar going on.
Interestingly, in some European countries, you can't easily make up names. You have to prove they exist in your ancestral language, as well you can't make one up for the official language either.
why didn't parents who wanted to avoid originally European names take from actual African names, rather than minting new names
As an immigrant to the US I've been perplexed by this too. In the UK it's not uncommon to meet people with distinctly Black names, but they're clearly of derived from African languages. I people living in the UK and Europe also get more exposure to African names because of geographic proximity to Africa, meaning African politicians, business leaders and so on are mentioned more frequently in current affairs programming than they are in the US.
Things may have changed since I lived in the UK, but I can't recall any analog to the neonymous phenomenon in the US.
In a lot of cases they did, sort of. But they didn't take from distinctly African names so much as they took from broadly Arabic names. So Rashid, Jamal, Kareem, Omar etc. were pretty popular for a good while.
Plenty of Americans of African descent have no idea where their ancestors came from thanks to that whole slavery thing. You're asking why black people didn't pick a random county in Africa, pick a random language from that country then choose a random name from any number of cultures speaking that language.
Instead of what they did, which is draw from their own culture which is as old as America itself.
Yes, I acknowledge the disconnection from their ancestry. However, descendants of black slaves in other countries (the US is not the only country with descendants of black slaves) have not followed the same route to new unique and identifying names.
Moreover, you don't have to pick something randomly, you can look at names, read about their meanings and pick something that sounds nice to you. you don't do it in a vacuum. So, my question is why this alternative, vs, any other alternative at creating self identification?
PS never mind that in some countries you can't just make up names. You can use foreign names, but you have to prove they are viable names in the place you claim them to be used names. But that's beside the point.
And, of course, keep in mind, all names were somewhat "invented" and new at some point in time. My question is more about how/why did this method (of prefixes, among other unique qualities) predominate over other available methods?
Also, curiously, many Africans with their ancestral surnames will have a European forename along with an African middle name.
The practice of having a European forename comes from contact with Christianity. It is customary in Christian baptism to take a name of a recognized saint.
This naming convention has been a long tradition in Europe, making the names appear indigenous to that region, but in many cases these 'European' names actually originated in North Africa or the Middle East which had Christian populations before Europe did.
Yeah, it's true all biblically derived names are to one extent or another Middle Eastern or Mediterranean. It's so ingrained, it's easy to forget. It can be said that a great part of modern European thought is based on middle eastern philosophy --as well as ancient Greek philosophy. Of course some indigenous aspects survive despite the total immersion due to pervasive spread of religion throughout Europe.
Some have changed their names by deed poll, some have kept them. For instance, Zowie Bowie is now known as Duncan Zowie Haywood Jones, and is a successful film director. Moon Unit, Diva Muffin, and Dweezil Zappa did not change their names, and have pursued successful artistic careers.
1) The last two decades, however, have led to a “ghettoization” of distinctively Black names, namely, a distinctively Black name is now a much stronger predictor of socioeconomic status.
2) We find no relationship between how Black one’s name is and life outcomes after controlling for other factors. If that conclusion is correct, then the proper interpretation of earlier audit studies using Black names on resumes is either that the impact of names does not extend beyond the callback decision (because race is directly observed at the interview stage), or that names are correlated with determinants of productivity not captured by a resume. In our data, it is difficult to distinguish between these competing hypotheses.