Gogol vs. Nikhil

The topic of today's blogpost:  Gogol or Nikhil?  Was it wrong of Gogol to change his name, or was it for the best?

Well let's take a look at both sides:

For one thing, he did change his name without even knowing the true reason behind his original name.  He goes through his childhood and teenage years knowing his namesake as some pathetic writer with mental instability issues.  It doesn't help that the original Gogol starved himself to death and probably died a virgin.

When Gogol is finally told the real reason behind his name, he feels instantly "awkward [and] oddly ashamed" (124).  He tells his father that "[he] should have told [him]" (124), suggesting that, had he known the whole story, he might not have changed his name.

To me, it feels like Gogol is his real identity.  This whole "Nikhil" business feels kind of forced.

However, if he feels braver and more confident as Nikhil, then shouldn't he be allowed to choose?  Nikhil sure seems to be more of a badass than Gogol, which can be taken as a good thing or a bad thing.

I have to admit that I'd been more of a fan of Gogol myself-- up until the last part of Chapter 6, at least. When he meets Pamela, she seems to make a lot of assumptions based on his heritage.  She assumes that because he's Indian he must never get sick and says that "[she'd] think the climate wouldn't affect [him], given [his] heritage" (157).  However, Lydia intervenes, insisting that he's American, not Indian.  He was born in America.

There are certain stereotypes and assumptions connected with Gogol's heritage.  Your heritage is something that you're born with, not something you choose.  It doesn't determine who you are as a person-- you choose who you want to be.

Therefore, why shouldn't Gogol be able to choose his name?  He shouldn't have to stick with the name he was born with if he doesn't feel it suits him... right?


So Gogol or Nikhil?  What do you think?