Sobriquets, Pseudonyms, and the Like

Why do people hide behind sobriquets? I use the word "sobriquet" rather than
"pseudonym" because to me pseudonym implies a "real-sounding" fictitious name
and I presume that nobody in real life is named Chowkidar, Kotwaal, Bad Girl,
Synic, or Bubba. To say that people use sobriquets because they do not want
us to know who they are would be axiomatic. The question is - why do they not
want us to know? One would think that if one is proud of what one writes, one
would want to be known by one's writing, stick by one's words, have the
courage of conviction to face the "music" generated by one's words. The most
obvious answer is that some people, for one reason or another, do not want to
be known for what they write. This is all the more mystifying because some of
these individuals write rather well. Why are people reluctant to reveal their
identities? Are they scared, embarrassed, paranoid, confused, voyeuristic,
"complexed", or comedians hoping not be taken too seriously? The effect of
hiding behind aliases on communication in a medium that already has a bad rep
for encouraging brazenness is to make conversation even more zesty. How many
of us write things on the internet that we would never dream of saying to
someone's face - well then, imagine the power of being able to hurl pungent
rhetoric and witticisms at people without them ever knowing who you are. What
could be more fun! An added advantage is the cacophony one can potentially
generate by writing in support of oneself under multiple assumed
personalities. Yes, I admit it - I am irritated by these pesky little
monikers!

To review some history - after all, the practice of writing under
assumed
names is nothing new. People have done it for centuries for all kinds of
reasons. Many women wrote under male or gender-neutral names because they
thought their writing would be taken more seriously. The Bronte sisters wrote
as Acton, Currie, and Ellis Bell. Others had troublesome personal lives that
they felt would impact on the popularity of their writing. Mary Ann Evans
wrote brilliantly as George Eliot because of her "unconventional" relationship
with a married man to "protect her work from the prejudice of a public that
did not consider her respectable." Agatha Christie wrote some eminently
forgettable romantic novels under an even more forgettable name that I cannot
now recall. The genre of romance writing kind of lends itself to concealing
identities. After all, only the very unabashed romance writer would care to let the entire
world know that one of her secret romantic fantasies is to be marooned in an
isolated corner of the world with a rich Arab Sheikh.

Recently, aliases have also become popular among men. Michael Crichton wrote
his early novels under the name Jeffrey Hudson - he didn't want his medical
school colleagues and teachers to know he was writing novels rather than
studying anatomy texts. The author that has reached notoriety of epic
proportions in recent years is none other than the "anonymous" Joe Klein of
Primary Colors fame. Was he anonymous because he thought the book - a
salacious account of the Clinton campaign (in retrospect not so salacious -
the real Clinton is surely more prurient!) would become more popular because
of the intrigue generated by the anonymity of the author, or was he, otherwise
known for his serious journalistic skills, embarrassed that people would think
he has a "dirty old mind". I suspect, a combination of both.

Another type of pen-name, the "takhullus" is quite the tradition in
Urdu
verse. Nom de plumes such as Ghalib, Josh, Dard, Daagh, Hasrat, and that
ultimate statement of self-defeat - Sauda, convey in some sense the shaa'ir's
own unique self-perceptions. Unlike sobriquets such as MaTha, Bubba, Bad Girl
and Woman, the takhullus, however, does not conceal identity; if anything, it
makes identity more manifest by giving us a "real" name - and more, a
statement of how the poet views himself/herself.

Lastly, what about the practice of using first names only? Are these
individuals informal or simply ill-informed? After all, has it not become
clear in the last few centuries of commerce and discourse that we need at
least two coordinates for even the most nominal identification - the first
name...and the last! Unless of course one happens to be Madonna, Oprah, or
the artist formerly known as Prince!!