Anyone 'let go' of a long-time favorite... Then regret it later?

I’ve loved the same name since I was twelve, and it’s always been quite simple to just say that that will be my future son’s name. My husband is on board with it, too.

Lately, however, I’ve been reconsidering. The other names we tend to seek out these days are quite different: much more unusual than this classic name. So I’ve been second-guessing it, wondering if perhaps I should let my long-time favorite go in favor of something that’s more to our taste as adults, and that would feel more balanced next to our other favorites if we do end up having more than one. I value unusual names and tend to think our child would appreciate having something that sets them apart (I did), so it would be a slightly hypocritical choice.

I’ve been paying more attention to how often I hear/see the name used by others, and how it makes me feel when I do – which is not great.

The downside, of course, would be never getting my little ___________ and regretting it later.

Of course, if we only have girls this issue would take care of itself :wink:

I think that [name]Charles[/name] mixes well with anything and wouldn’t blink if I met brothers named [name]Charlie[/name] & [name]Jasper[/name] or [name]Charlie[/name] & [name]Vernon[/name]…

So I do think that you shouldn’t forget [name]Charles[/name] because you think it doesn’t blend with unique names.

Personally I don’t still love my teenage favorites because my taste & values have changed over the years. I still have a soft spot for [name]Esme[/name] & [name]Maisie[/name] & [name]Sloan[/name] but would never use them. I don’t like the pop culture reference on [name]Esme[/name], the cutesy nicknamey quality of [name]Maisie[/name] or the severe unfeminine quality of [name]Sloane[/name]. Also for me these 3 names were very unique when I was young & I was all about unique.

I think [name]Charles[/name] nn [name]Charlie[/name] is a beautiful classic boys name. I agree with @taz I think if your “new” style is old classics that are a little less common [name]Charles[/name] would be great in a sib-set.

I don’t have kids and the only childhood favorite I’ve had to put to rest is [name]Lucifer[/name]. (Yes, I know. I just love the sound and the look of the name. It’s totally unusable however). So I can’t really speak with any authority on how it would feel not to get to know the little boy you’ve always imagined. You could always keep [name]Charles[/name] a mn. That way if you get buyer remorse (and I would assume it would be fairly soon after birth) you could call him by his mn, and you will never really be putting it aside completely.

It’s more likely something like:

[name]George[/name] & [name]Ezri[/name]
[name]George[/name] & Aizeti
[name]George[/name] & [name]Bijou[/name]
[name]George[/name] & Nilaya

Our other boys’ names are a little more compatible.
That said, I’ve never been one for sibsets – I don’t need them to ‘match’ or ‘go,’ I just don’t want it to seem obviously unfair (a la [name]Seraphina[/name] and [name]Allison[/name], or something).

Really the bigger issue is not sibling names, I’m just using the rest of our list to re-examine [name]George[/name]. If what we can really get behind are more obscure, ancient (or ancient-sounding) names (with more accessible nicknames), then [name]George[/name] may be holding too fast to an old dream that wouldn’t end up feeling as fulfilling.

We have an exotic-sounding last name (rare even in its home country), so we can go either way with firsts. [name]George[/name] ______ would be a balance or exotic and familiar, where Aizeti ______ would be all exotic.


Lexiem, switching it to the middle spot may well be our best option. I’ve grown attached to some of my more obscure, heavy options (like [name]Apollo[/name] and Tycho) as middles, but that was with the plan of using [name]George[/name] as first. Tycho [name]George[/name] ______ would work just as well as the reverse.