Jane: Chic or, well, plain?

Girl Names
1

I love [name]Jane[/name]. She’s literary, she has a history, and she would honor two very important [name]Janes[/name] in my life (my favorite aunt and a beloved family friend).

My reservations when it comes to [name]Jane[/name] are threefold.

First, the length. At one measly syllable and only four letters, is [name]Jane[/name] too slight, too insubstantial next to elaborations like [name]Janet[/name] and [name]Janelle[/name] and, yes, [name]Jayden[/name]? Would you use [name]Jane[/name] as a double-barreled name a la [name]Mary[/name] [name]Jane[/name]? I’m particularly fond of [name]Winter[/name] [name]Jane[/name] or [name]Jane[/name] [name]Winter[/name]. Any other ideas for combos?

Second, the potential datedness. It’s no coincidence that two two important [name]Janes[/name] in my life are both in their 60s. [name]Jane[/name]'s heyday has come and gone. Does [name]Jane[/name] have the same fusty, grandma associations as, say, [name]Gertrude[/name] and [name]Bertha[/name]? Is she retro-chic, a la [name]Pearl[/name] and sound-alike [name]June[/name]? Or is she a classic that never truly went of style, like fellow enduring medieval favorite [name]Alice[/name]?

Third, Plain [name]Jane[/name]. According to the SSA [name]Jane[/name] hasn’t ranked higher than the top 30 for 100 years. This shocked me – how could [name]Jane[/name] be plain if she hasn’t ever been megapopular in the United States? Still, “plain” is a descriptor that’s been hard to shake. Is [name]Jane[/name] boring? Stale? A burden for a feisty little girl (let’s just assume my kids will be feisty)?

Also, what combos would you make with [name]Jane[/name]? I’m a fan of double middle names that are elaborate and even flamboyant, preferably associated with nature (particularly the sea), mythology, literature, and the Renaissance, and/or names that have connotations of strength and valor (speaking of which, [name]Valor[/name] is a favorite mn for a boy!). Think business in the front, party in the back.

Lastly, what would [name]Jane[/name]'s siblings be named? Could [name]Jane[/name] have a sister named [name]Marigold[/name] or a brother named [name]Atlas[/name]? Or would she sound best paired with other classics like [name]Simon[/name] and [name]Alice[/name]?

Thank you in advance, Berries! I’ll try to respond to every comment. :slight_smile:

2

[name]Jane[/name] is wonderful imo. Simple, lovely, and classic. I think you’re worrying a bit too much. If you don’t know any little girl [name]Jane[/name]'s, there’s your answer! She isn’t plain and common. She’s just very underestimated. :slight_smile: Here are some [name]Jane[/name] combos you might like. I tried to go for very frilly, to spice [name]Jane[/name] up a little for you:

[name]Jane[/name] [name]Valentina[/name] [name]Odette[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Anastasia[/name] [name]Genevieve[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Guinevere[/name] [name]Violet[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Arabella[/name] [name]Lavender[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Magnolia[/name] [name]Thisbe[/name]

Hopefully they aren’t too [name]OTT[/name].

3

[name]Jane[/name] is nms but I would love to see someone else use it! It’s chic and classic [name]IMO[/name]

4

I love [name]Jane[/name] all on its own. I would love to meet a little [name]Jane[/name]. i think its ready for a comeback.

5

As much as I’ve tried, I just can’t get behind the name [name]Jane[/name]. It is much too plain for a first name. I’m afraid siblings of [name]Marigold[/name] and [name]Atlas[/name] would give poor plain [name]Jane[/name] a complex.

6

I tried to like it, but it’s just so plain. I much prefer its Polish variant, [name]Janina[/name].

7

Opinion seems pretty divided between [name]Love[/name] It or Hate It (or at least dislike it).

I’m intrigued by the idea that [name]Jane[/name] is plain, particularly given its relative rarity. I thought this too, and now I absolutely can’t understand why. Is it the unfortunate rhyme? The shortness? The top 100 definitely favors two-syllable names with the emphasis on the first syllable, but [name]Ava[/name] and [name]Mia[/name] are both Top 10 and have fewer letters and less of a history than [name]Jane[/name]. [name]Anna[/name], comparable in terms of use and length, is #30. [name]Do[/name] we have a prejudice against one-syllable names? Or is there another aspect to [name]Jane[/name]'s perceived plainness that I’m not seeing?

8

These aren’t over the top at all – or at least they’re the kind of [name]OTT[/name] I love. I’m particularly liking [name]Jane[/name] with [name]Lavender[/name], [name]Violet[/name], [name]Thisbe[/name], and [name]Odette[/name]. And [name]Valentine[/name]. Basically you hit it out of the park. :smiley:

9

[name]Jane[/name] is a lovely name, timeless and beautiful. Since it isn’t super popular your daughter wouldn’t have to be one of many [name]Jane[/name]'s in her classroom. I think a double barreled name with [name]Jane[/name] is appropriate and pretty if done corrrectly. I think that her siblings would probably have to be other classics like [name]Simon[/name] and [name]Alice[/name]. Soemthing like [name]Marigold[/name] for a girl or [name]Atlas[/name] for a boy paired with [name]Jane[/name] would be not very cohesive.

10

[name]Ah[/name], glad you like them then. I wasn’t sure if you’d be on board with two middle names, but I thought that since [name]Jane[/name] is so singular, short and simple, that two middles would work in this instance. Most of the time, I don’t like it.

11

You’re right that [name]Jane[/name] would probably be the only one in her class – and again, going back to the Plain [name]Jane[/name] thing, it’s weird to think that [name]Madison[/name] is still not considered boring by most people, though I know five under the age of ten. Perhaps this is due to relatively new or newly-discovered names like [name]Madison[/name] or [name]Brooklyn[/name] or [name]London[/name] or [name]Aiden[/name] still having the perception of uniqueness, despite their actual ubiquity, whereas names that have been in steady use for hundreds of years, like [name]Elizabeth[/name] (which isn’t even in the top 10 anymore!) are seen as far more common then they actually are.

I’m thinking you’re right about [name]Jane[/name] and [name]Marigold[/name] – way too uneven. What about [name]Jane[/name] and [name]Atlas[/name]? Still mismatched? Or [name]Jane[/name] and [name]Roscoe[/name], which has more of a 40s revival vibe?

12

I know a little girl around 8 who’s name is [name]Jane[/name]. I think it’s lovely on a little girl, and [name]Janey[/name] or [name]Jan[/name] is always a nn option.

13

I think when it comes to “dated” names, seeing them worn by someone who throws your expectations makes all the difference. I thought [name]Wallace[/name] was a total old man name until I read ‘[name]Scott[/name] Pilgrim vs the World’, which has a very cool, kind of weird, 20something character named, yes, [name]Wallace[/name]. Now I see [name]Wallace[/name] as crisp, quirky, and dashing. Same thing with [name]Matilda[/name]; after meeting a brilliant teenager named [name]Tilly[/name], I completely revised my opinion of the name.

14

I like [name]Jane[/name]. It’s literary, classic, and chic, with the cute nn [name]Janie[/name].

I think the plainness has less to do with popularity (although I’d be interested to know in what countries you checked for popularity, and how far back) and more to do with, well, plainness. There’s a reason why the books were [name]Dick[/name] and [name]Jane[/name], not [name]Dick[/name] and [name]Anna[/name]. [name]Jane[/name] is simple femaleness distilled, a la [name]Susie[/name] or [name]Sally[/name], but less juvenile and more sensible.

[name]Ava[/name] and [name]Mia[/name] are short and popular, but they are not plain. [name]Jane[/name] is. [name]One[/name] syllable. Ends with n. No flourish, no fanfare. And as the feminization of [name]John[/name], it’s linked to that name, which is far more common for boys than [name]Jane[/name] ever was for girls.

So is [name]Jane[/name] plain? Absolutely. But therein lies her charm. Sweet, simple, studious, as chic as a Hepburn dress or as pastoral as a Wordsworth poem. She is the little black dress of names, appropriate for anyone, ready to be transformed by whoever wears her into something as bold, sophisticated, sweet, or relaxed as the bearer wishes.

A more elaborate middle, or even two, will definitely work here. But little [name]Jane[/name] might resent [name]Marigold[/name] and [name]Atlas[/name], or they might resent her. Best stick to more classic names for siblings.

15

[name]Jane[/name] is a lovely name! I only know 1 [name]Jane[/name], and 1 [name]Mary[/name]-[name]Jane[/name], so it isn’t overly common which is nice. It’s easy to spell and pronounce, and has wonderful meaning for you. A [name]Jane[/name] could be elegant or spunky. I say go for it! Sibling name could be [name]Viola[/name] ([name]Shakespeare[/name]).

16

Most definitely chic! [name]Jane[/name] has always been one of my favorites. The only reason people think of it as plain is that it rhymes with the word plain, so that association has stuck. The length reservation I wouldn’t worry about, as the simplicity of [name]Jane[/name] is one of its selling points and you can always use the adorable nicknames [name]Janie[/name] and [name]Jenny[/name] to make it longer. I have [name]Jane[/name] [name]Seraphina[/name] on my list - I like the long, elaborate middle name with the short and to the point first name. The only of your concerns that I would worry about is what to name other siblings. [name]Jane[/name], to me, is one of those names that is so classic that it can only go well in a sibset with other mega-classic names like [name]Elizabeth[/name], [name]Katherine[/name], etc. It would work with lots of names like [name]Sarah[/name], [name]Michael[/name], [name]Margaret[/name], etc. but would seem weird with lesser-heard classics like [name]Cordelia[/name]. It’s still one of my absolute favorites though, especially with the nickname [name]Janie[/name]!

17

Chic, in my opinion - in the company of [name]Anne[/name].

18

I really like [name]Jane[/name]. I don’t think 4 letters is a problem. [name]Plenty[/name] of names have 4 (I have sons [name]Paul[/name] and [name]Mark[/name]) or even 3 letters (think [name]Eli[/name] or [name]Ava[/name]) Since my toddler is [name]James[/name] I guess I’ll never get to use [name]Jane[/name] in the first name spot. I’m guessing Plain [name]Jane[/name] dates from an era when there were many, many [name]Janes[/name]. I do think [name]Jane[/name] is a much better sister to [name]Alice[/name] than [name]Marigold[/name].

19

Oh, [name]Jane[/name]!

[name]Jane[/name] will always be classic, feminine, and in-style. Never will it be dated, plain, or too ‘simple.’ LESS IS MORE. [name]Jane[/name] is too the point, strong, just all around lovely. I wouldn’t do [name]Mary[/name] [name]Jane[/name] as its a term for marijuana. I wouldn’t use a double-barrel name as I think [name]Jane[/name] says enough. Some middle name options:
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Eloise[/name] [name]Catherine[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Raphaela[/name] [name]Iris[/name]
[name]Jane[/name] [name]Cordelia[/name] [name]Wren[/name]

20

I love [name]Jane[/name]. I do think it’s plain, especially compared to my other favourites, so I doubt I’d ever use it. But I would love to hear it on someone else. Its charm, as missusaytch said, lies in being short, simple and sweet. And [name]Jane[/name] [name]Austen[/name] is one of my favourite authors ever ([name]Jane[/name] [name]Bennet[/name] in P&P is awesome too) which makes me appreciate the name much more.