I know there’s been polls on this before, but I have a bit of a different reason for the question, so I hope this doesn’t seem repetitive.
While we’ve mostly landed on the name Forrest, and I prefer that spelling because it seems more like a name, I obviously am not a huge fan of the fact that the name originally popularized because of the confederate war criminal, Nathan Bedford Forrest.
But the name also was still used before his time…so I’m conflicted.
Do you think the confederate tie is too dark to use that spelling, or has he mostly been forgotten?
i prefer forest! and i live in latin america so this is the first time i’ve heard of that connection
when i think of forrest i associate it with forrest gump
I can’t speak for the US but I can tell you that most people outside of the US would have no idea of the Confederate connection. And, looking at the US charts, it has been in the top 1000 for some years now, so it must have some degree of acceptance. That said, knowing about the connection does take the shine off the name for me.
Thank you!! It’s good to know that it’s not an immediate connection — it hadn’t occurred to me either until I read the Nameberry name bio, and I live in the [name_u]South[/name_u] where he would’ve been devastatingly relevant.
I think it’s helped my discomfort with it to find figures who had the name before him, like the surgeon [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] Dewar, who served as president in the [name_u]Royal[/name_u] College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, and some others. While they may not have left as large a stain on history, they do show that the name was used well before his time. I’m still happy with the [name_u]Forest[/name_u] spelling, though! It’s growing on me but feels less aged, which may be a good thing in the grand scheme of things.
i live in the south, and while i’d never made the connection by myself, once it was pointed out, i felt very icky when anyone used that name when the alternative forest worked perfectly fine. i love the woodsy feel of forest, the flannel and s’mores vibes.
Thats true! In the end, I suppose both names were used before him — so I wouldn’t be compromising on the vintage feel by dropping the r.
I’m also starting to wonder if maybe it’d be more wrong to let his figure own the name, as if saying it should die with him is more honor than he deserves — but I think at the end of the day I might be more comfortable with Forest too.
i did hear about that connection a while ago which turned me off of the forrest spelling. my cousin has a son named forrest and i don’t think anyone but name nerds or people with lots of historical knowledge would know about it. most people hear names spoken aloud rather than seeing them spelt so i don’t think anyone would think of it. either spelling is fine in my opinion. i would probably use the forest spelling if i used the name though because of the connection but, i don’t think it should put you off the name.
[name_u]Forest[/name_u] and [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] are different names to me. One’s a nature name, one’s a name-name I prefer [name_u]Forest[/name_u]. But I’d never assume anyone choosing [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] named their child after the general, and therefore I think it’s fair game. It’s not nearly so strong or specific an association as other unsavory historical figures.
I think looking at them written, Forest Oleander (the chosen middle) is starting to look better to me than it did initially. We have a more modern middle, and while both Forests are more popular in the 1890s than they are now (which is my typical preference), Forest definitely feels like the more modern of the two, so it might be a better match. I appreciate everyone’s thoughts!
But then with potential sister [name_f]Opal[/name] if I have a girl down the line, I’m less sure which combo works !
I am from the Midwest, and I never would have connected the name [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] to a confederate general. In fact, I don’t even remember his full name & I just read that in your post I highly doubt that most people would make that connection, even in the [name_u]South[/name_u]. I think that [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] is certainly a usable name (and personally, I prefer [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] to Forest).
But of course now that you’ve made the association, it’s really a matter of whether that association bothers you. It seems like maybe it does, so [name_u]Forest[/name_u] is probably the better option. Also, I think that [name_u]Forest[/name_u] works with [name_f]Opal[/name_f] just as well as [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] does.
Thank you! I don’t know if it’d bother me so much (I know the name wasn’t for the general) but I worried other people would assume that’s the namesake — which bothers me. Basically, I’m worried it’d bother other people or the child to bear it.
But it seems like that’s not the case. Now I’m just torn in general.
I live in the southern US and was unaware of the connection. To me, same as you, [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] is the more intuitive spelling as a name. I think you will be fine and there wouldn’t be an instant bad association. Go for it!
my one association with forrest is forrest gump, which is a great character and a beautiful movie. imo forrest is more intuitive in terms of naming, with a vintage vibe, while forest is simply full-on nature aesthetic.
I prefer [name_u]Forest[/name_u]. But I’d never assume anyone choosing [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] named their child after the general, and therefore I think it’s fair game. It’s not nearly so strong or specific an association as other unsavory historical figures.
I highly doubt that most people would make that connection, even in the [name_u]South[/name_u]. I think that [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] is certainly a usable name (and personally, I prefer [name_m]Forrest[/name_m] to Forest).