A Letter From the Editor: A Middle Aged Mans View on Naming

General Name Discussion
1

While reading one of my favorite magazines I stumbled across the Editors usual “Letter from the Editor”, and the topic took me off gaurd. Instead of the usual musings on politics there was this little ditty:

"I come in praise of [name]William[/name]. Not myself, mind you, but my name. I have always been grateful my parents chose [name]William[/name], particularly since the runner-up was [name]Byron[/name], my dad’s name. He decided not to pass it along to his firstborn, having wearied of clueless inquisitors saying, “[name]Brian[/name]? [name]Myron[/name]? What?” In my childhood, there were legions of other [name]Williams[/name], but the name waned in popularity, as parents flocked to “creative” and “unusual” names such as [name]Free[/name], [name]Rocket[/name], [name]Banjo[/name], [name]Apple[/name], [name]Sage[/name], and [name]Kyd[/name]. But [name]William[/name] is surging back, climbing to No. 3 in the list of most popular boys’ names of 2011, the Social Security Administration announced this week. I take this as a good sign.

Giving your children unique names does them no favor. It is like sending them into life with an odd hat affixed to their heads, or a zebra tattooed on their foreheads. [name]William[/name] will cause no double takes or taunts, and has a protean ability to adapt to age and circumstance. As a child, I was [name]Billy[/name], but when my mother scrubbed me of playground dirt, brushed my hair, and sent me off to school, I became [name]William[/name]. At age 18 or so, [name]Billy[/name] evolved into the more mature-sounding [name]Bill[/name]. That’s my casual handle still, but for formal occasions, I can go to my suit closet and pull out [name]William[/name]. Other classic boys’ names, such as [name]Christopher[/name], [name]Nicholas[/name], and [name]Alexander[/name], have similar virtues. So do girls’ names such as [name]Katherine[/name], [name]Elizabeth[/name], and [name]Jessica[/name]. All have a pleasing versatility, and none will cause the bearer any woe. If you new parents really feel an urge to be creative, buy an easel and some paint. Naming your kid isn’t about you."

I have to say I agree with some of his points. Parents who name their kids things like “blanket” and “[name]Moon[/name]-Unit” seem to going for shock instead of meaning, but I cant help but be saddened by his conclusion that only old standards such as [name]William[/name] and [name]Jessica[/name] should be given to kids. What about all of the wonderful names somewhere in between?

2

I’ve always thought that it’s easier to go through life with an overly common name than a very rare, “weird” name. Most people don’t have expectations about what [name]Jennifer[/name]'s personality or interests will be, but it would be pretty shocking if [name]Boheme[/name] wasn’t artistic or [name]Eero[/name] was an average suburban accountant.

I think that believing your name to be too common is an easier problem to deal with than believing your name to be too weird- it’s very easy to adopt an alternate nickname ([name]Jessica[/name] becomes [name]Nessa[/name], [name]Alexander[/name] becomes [name]Axel[/name], etc.,) but what would you do with [name]Echo[/name]? [name]Even[/name] if you go by a more common middle name, it’s bound to come up.

At the same time, though, parents can only know their own taste- they have no idea what type of name their child will end up wanting as an adult. Parents should be happy with the name they pick, as they’ll certainly be saying it a lot. I think it’s important to find a balance between the two if your tastes lean towards the rarer names. Personally, I’d only use “weird” names that sound similar to more common ones (like [name]Junia[/name]) or “weird” names that come with more expected short forms (like [name]Ariadne[/name]/[name]Ari[/name].)

3

If we all gave our children “normal” names, sites like Nameberry would not exist. I am not even going to bother pointing out everything that bothers me about this letter, as my response would only turn into a rant.

[name]Just[/name] for fun, I looked at how many children have ACTUALLY been given the names this individual listed in his letter. Numbers combine births from the past five years in the US and include both genders.

[name]Free[/name]: 5
[name]Rocket[/name]: 69
[name]Banjo[/name]: <5
Apple: 152
Sage: 4878
Kyd: <5

We might be facing some epidemics, you guys…

4

I agree with southern.maple. The point has been made by name bloggers time and time again: the gold standard of what is considered “normal” changes with every generation. [name]Even[/name] names we now think of as classics are comparatively new – see Upswing’s latest post for the graphs to prove it (upswingbabynames.com). It’s also worth noting that the name pool has changed significantly. A much smaller percentage of the population is being given names from the top 10 than ever before. That means [name]James[/name] was much more likely to be the tenth [name]James[/name] in his class fifty years ago; now he may be only one of two, though the name itself has remained a constant favorite.

[name]William[/name]'s also been pretty lucky. His name remains in favor. Other names considered “normal” in his generation would seem downright weird on today’s playgrounds. [name]Gladys[/name]? [name]Ida[/name]? [name]Phyllis[/name]? [name]Ronald[/name]? [name]Herbert[/name]? [name]Melvin[/name]? Those would be the kids getting made fun of by [name]Rocket[/name], [name]Free[/name], [name]Banjo[/name], [name]Apple[/name], [name]Sage[/name], and [name]Kyd[/name]…though maybe not, since our generation seems to be a lot more accepting of personal differences than [name]William[/name]'s, and in more areas than just baby names. I can’t help but see that as a very good thing.

5

It is true, naming a child isn’t about you but I have heard both sides of the coin. People with the really common names hate their names because of the set sterotypes or just because they have met so many others with the same names, or people with the uncommon names hating their names because it was different and they were never able to find something with their name on it. [name]Both[/name] are very valid points and he does have some good points but if we all stuck with the same names how boring would that be? There are so many beautiful names that are not the strong classics, but are not as weird as [name]Rocket[/name], [name]Free[/name] or [name]Banjo[/name]. Girls names like [name]Theodora[/name], or [name]Octavia[/name] which are uncommon but extremely beautiful in my opinion.

I notice with the older generations that they are not as willing to branch out with the “stranger” names. My mother and my father in law are an example. They hate names that I love. They also used the classic names that are nice but comfortable and popular.

This probably doesn’t make sense but I see where he is coming from. It would just be boring if we all used the normal names.

6

I don’t think that he was saying only those names should be chosen, I think his point was on that steady classics and ones with various nicknames are the way to go, rather than “newagey” unique monikers with less room to adjust.

Things like [name]Jacob[/name], [name]Henry[/name], [name]Isabella[/name], [name]Sophia[/name], [name]Emma[/name], [name]Abigail[/name], [name]Olivia[/name], [name]Elijah[/name], [name]Benjamin[/name], [name]Natalie[/name], [name]Grace[/name], etc. are what he’s rooting for.
All of which, except for [name]Henry[/name], are in the Top 20 in 2011.

I agree with him on a general scale, but I think he’s a bit narrow-minded as well. That being said, he’s a middle-aged man, so he’s not going to share the same opinions as most of us women.

7

Open mouth. Staring at the computer screen in shock. :o That is so not right. He should come on nameberry. I agree that you shouldn’t give your child a name like [name]Moon[/name]-unit but jus using bog standard name is terrible. Where is the unique quality in this man???

8

Really interesting discussion. Of course, the writer points out the considerable advantages of a name like [name]William[/name]. But as we well know, having a standard issue name has considerable disadvantages too. And you’re all of course correct: There’s a wide and wonderful world between [name]Moon[/name] Unit and [name]William[/name], which is what Nameberry is all about.

Our first book was called Beyond [name]Jennifer[/name] & [name]Jason[/name] because when we wrote it in the late 80s, most parents just kind of unthinkingly reached for the most obvious name choices, popular or classic. And we were saying: At least put some thought into this. There are thousands and thousands of names out there and your child deserves your considered and informed choice. Luckily for us (and the next generation of children), millions of parents agreed!

Southern [name]Maple[/name], I love your argument that we need to choose diverse names to support Nameberry’s existence. Yes! Thank you!

9

It’s also interesting how he says naming a kid isn’t really about you…which is absolutely true, and something to remember, but naming a child is just the first of thousands of decisions you make for your child. And while [name]William[/name] can be versatile, so can [name]Hugo[/name] or [name]Soren[/name] or all types of unusual names. Besides, every generation re-defines normal and classic.

10

I think he makes some really good points. I concur that naming a child isn’t about you. And the great thing about classic names that stand the test of time is that they often come with a variety of nicknames. (Can we talk about how most nicknames one acquires are not normally determined by said person’s parents?) Classic also doesn’t mean most often used. I think there’s something to be said for a name that will grow with a child, keeping in mind that they will spend the better part of their life as an adult. And as such, I personally find names that screams “my parents thought they were being, or wanted to be, cool and kre8tive” (i.e. they were trying too hard) rather annoying/off-putting.

11

I agree with a lot of the comments here, but I wonder if the negative side of having a more common name is less of a negative than the potential negative side of having an unusual name. In which case this may be why some parents tend to play things more safe. So many parents it seems on name boards worry about the teasing potential of a name that I suspect they think if I choose a name that a lot of other people have chosen, it either must be a) okay, or b) not so teasable anyway because other kids will have that name too.

12

The article made me laugh, but not for the reason he intended.

I know a Jessica who’s older than the average Jessica, in her late fifties. It was a “weird” and “ethnic” name when she was small. That was her experience. It’s hardly a Catherine/Elizabeth/Margaret name - in 1946 it was sitting on the Social Security list at 506th most popular and that was it at an all time high.

It only became mainstream as a mid-century phenomenon.

I had a paternal grandmother (and an unrelated-to-her maternal great-grandmother) whose religious names were both, coincidentally, Rachel. THEIR parents couldn’t imagine pinning a name as “foreign” and “ethnic” as Rachel on them, so they became Ruth and Rose in English.

Ruth and Rose were “all-American” - Rachel was too much.

William and Katherine I’ll buy as classic standbys of the English language. There’s not many. William is on the ups, John is on the downs, Katherine is most popular as Caitlin… and Jessica? That’s just a trendy weirdo name made good. :wink:

I just mean, if we look at it, most of the “normal” names of a hundred years ago aren’t doing all that well in popularity. Does that make normal, abnormal? Which weird to go for? You start looping back to the weirdness-of-too-traditional with some of them - Martha or Mabel is an attempt to make a statement, too, surely?

13

Along with many other posters, I think I most agree with the author’s “It’s not about you” point. But like [name]Pam[/name] said, I’d like to put some thought into the naming process too.

My favorite name is [name]Verity[/name]. Nothing else comes close. It’s not exactly [name]Moon[/name] Unit, to use the running example, and it has a nice meaning and sound. But I do fret a little about having her always needing to correct people. My fiance and I just bought a house in the [name]Spring[/name] and the woman at the title office was named [name]Charity[/name]. She was telling us how people always get it wrong over the phone and her lunch orders always come with some strange name written on them. What if that were my daughter, and what if that happened every single day? And [name]Charity[/name] is even a more common word! I think these things are important to think about, really think about, and decide from there if it’s the name for your child or not. (For me, I still love the name, cannot help it)

14

In primary school I knew a [name]Verity[/name] who never had any problems. :slight_smile:

The names that this man mentions, hardly anyone is “flocking” to them. Has he seen the top names lately? [name]Sophia[/name], [name]Jacob[/name]? There’s nothing wrong with those names.

Obviously not everyone can be an [name]Elizabeth[/name] or a [name]George[/name]. Classic, always-popular names are brilliant but there aren’t too many (well, there are a lot but in terms of the English-speaking population, a decent divide would prove confusing. Also there are always debates over what’s truly classic and what’s not.) Plus, with the increasing creativity in names, having a creative name isn’t as big a deal as it once was. Who knows, you might even stand out better with a classic name. :wink:

15

I have to say, he wrote that very well. And even if you don’t agree with it, you have to say he makes good points and was very well-written. I see both sides to it. My name is [name]Erica[/name] and it was #69 the year I was born. In school, there was only one [name]Erica[/name] two years older, and one [name]Erica[/name] two years younger. Never [name]Erica[/name] A., [name]Erica[/name] B. and [name]Erica[/name] C., but everyone knows how to pronounce it and knows the name. I like that!