What's in a name?

What's in a name? And, what makes something offensive?

I thought about the answers to these two questions over the past month or so as the situation/controversy arose over the Schenectady-based food truck which is known for their tasty pulled pork. Unfortunately for them (at least lately) they are also known for their quirky name, The Wandering Dago.

The business, in two recent occasions, has lost prominent gigs (around the Capital in Albany and at the Saratoga Race Course) because their name has been deemed offensive. To some. 

Anyone taking a peek at my last name can see I am from Italian descent. As such, I have heard it all. Enemies (and even friends) over the years have called me dago, guinea, guido, and for good measure, wop bastard.

While there are ethnic slurs for the Irish, Polish, Japanese and French, we Italians seem to be blessed with several different ones from which to choose. While I was growing up during the 1970's, usage of the names mentioned above was much more prevalent. And, accepted. I never really thought much about it. As such, I wasn't offended when I heard them used, even when I was the target. Well, I could have done without wop bastard.

Dago? Never bothered me a bit. I know some Italians who consider it almost as an ethnic term of endearment.

So, when I first heard of the Wandering Dago name, prior to the controversy, I just smiled. When later heard the business was booted from Albany and Saratoga, I shook my head. Political correctness run amok. And I hate political correctness.

Then came the news Wandering Dago owners Brandon Snooks and Andrea Loguidice were going the legal route, filing suit against NYS Office of General Services (who denied them in Albany) and New York Racing Association (ditto in Saratoga). Given the current financial situation in the state, along with NYRA's announcement last week they lost $10.3 million for the first half of the year, I am sure the defendants are thrilled.

I am not a lawyer, so I won't debate the merits of the suit here. I am generally against frivolous lawsuits, and I guess this can be considered to fit into this category. Snooks and Loguidice are seeking about $343,000, which is what they estimate they lost by not being at the two locations. This does appear to be reasonable.

But, is it also reasonable to ban someone because of their name? Some people will be offended by anything. Years ago when the first Hooters came to the area, there was an uproar. I, along with many, snickered when the manager of the local spot (in Crossgates Mall) said he didn't see the problem, as he considered it an homage to owls. If that was the case, there must have been a boatload of owl lovers, because every male who walked by the place slowed his pace and took a long look inside.

Similar issues have arisen lately with a new beer joint called Jugs and Mugs in Albany. Given a look at their logo, it appears the name is not about ceramics. Offensive? Depends on who you ask. Some are already trying to keep them from opening their doors.

Which brings me back to the Wandering Dago. As I said, as a paisan, it doesn't bother me a bit. The owners seem like hard workers, and from what I have been told, put out a pretty good product. But, who am I to say what will or will not offend someone?

To these eyes, what is equally important, is what is the intent of those who named the place. I see nothing from Snooks and Loguidice which would indicate they have any malicious intent here. But again, it doesn't mean their business name won't honk you off. Your choice, I suppose.

But, it also doesn't mean they should have been prevented from selling their goods. I don't see any Sno-Kone Joe vs. Mr. Ding-a-Ling type nonsense here. What I see is a business which was, after originally being given the OK, having the plug pulled on them because of the knee-jerk reaction on the part of public officials.

Wonder how they feel about owls?

'Til next time, keep on smiling.