: Is it okay to have a character who doesn't actually have a name? The character in my book doesn't have a name. I mean, he probably does, but its not used by any other character in the book,

Vote Up Vote Down

This is at least the third question you've posted about revealing the name of a character. I think you're obsessing over this tiny point way too much. Just give him a name and be done with it.

Most stories start out identifying the main characters' names in the first few paragraph, usually in a totally nonchalant way. Often at least one main character is named in the first sentence. Lots of stories start with a statement like, "George lived in a small apartment in Chicago with his wife Sally."

If there is some good reason in your story why the main character's name should be unknown or a secret, okay fine. Otherwise, just give him a name and move on. Just start the story, "Fwacbar, the Dark Lord, thought he was the only man alive" or whatever, and get on with the story.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

According to the wiktionary, a "name" is "any nounal word or phrase which indicates a particular person, place, class, or thing." Implications:

"The Dark Lord" is a fully valid name.
There is no reason whatsoever why a character should not have more than one name. As a matter of fact he can have as many names as intelligent entities who are referring to him or her.
I don't think multiple names can be ranked. They refer to the same thing, and there is no reason why one should be better or more powerful than the other.

Additionally, recall that a number of languages have rather "telling" names. Indian and Turkish names, to my knowledge, can usually by literally translated, for example into phrases like "The one with the skin like moonlight", the same goes for a number of Gaelic names and so on. These names are in league with the likes of "The Dark Lord", we just don't understand it because we don't speak the language.

My point is: We name things. All the time. I'm not even sure our brains can process thought about things that we haven't previously named, even if that name is horribly clumsy such as "that weird wiggly thing on the other side of the road".

tl;dr: You do name your character. It just so happens that your name is not a canonical first name such as John or Mary. However, in my opinion, that is not a problem. Consider Moby Dick. The first line of this book is "Call me Ishmael", indicating that his real name is something else. Yet, to my knowledge, nobody has ever complained about this.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

The answer to this and your other similar question is the same: Your Mileage May Vary. If you can get it to work, go for it. There's no rule about it one way or the other.

In Susanna Clarke's Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, the main villain is always referred to as "the gentleman with the thistledown hair." He's never given a name at all. The book has done very well, so it doesn't look like that was a dealbreaker.

(0)