In terms of style, I think [name_f]Lola[/name_f] and [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] go together really well, but I worry that the o sound is so repetitive that they run together and don’t flow well. On the other hand, [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] was a surprise suggestion from the forums that I actually really like. It’s unexpected and lovely, my only concern is that they might be too different stylistically. Or is the contrast what makes it great? I’m torn. I feel that based on sound and flow, it’s [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f], but maybe [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] has a better style as a combo. I’d love to hear which you prefer and why. Thanks in advance!!!
Update: I appreciate all the feedback! Keep it coming:) It seems to be a pretty even split so far, but I did want to clarify how I pronounce Lola Monroe. I say Low-luh Mun-row (the mon in Monroe the same as in Monday). However, I know some people pronounce it Mon-row the same way as in Monica. So I just wanted to see if anyone thought there was a problem with flow when pronouncing it the way I do.
Oh gosh I don’t know! I love both of them. If I had to pick probably [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] but you really wouldn’t go wrong with either.
[name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] is my preference. I love [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] a ton.
I think [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] works just fine, but I agree [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] flows better, and I like [name_f]Lola[/name_f] + [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] stylistically more than [name_u]Monroe[/name_u]. I can appreciate [name_u]Monroe[/name_u], but it’s never really wowed me, and [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] is a favorite, so maybe that’s what’s making me lean toward [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f], as well. Subconsciously.
I prefer [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_u]Monroe[/name_u]. Since only the second o in [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] is long, it sounds equally o heavy to [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f], so I don’t think you can eliminate it on that basis.
I think [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] is better than [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_u]Monroe[/name_u], hands down. While [name_f]Lola[/name_f] and [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] both evoke a sort of vintage glamour, [name_f]Lola[/name_f] paired with [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] is a richer and more nuanced name, both fun and graceful, vintage and modern. You want to taste the chocolate? Put it in vanilla or strawberry, not fudge. They may not both be that vintage glamour you like, but [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] has a cool vibe that goes really well with [name_f]Lola[/name_f]; and I do think the repetition of the O sound in [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_u]Monroe[/name_u] is a bit much. I think too often we peg a name as fitting into only one category, and only names within that one category can go together. The problem is, our criteria are more or less subjective, and somebody else will put that name in a completely different category because it gives them a completely different vibe. [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f] could be a modern nature name, or a throwback hippie name, or a surname, or a vintage flapper name, or a nickname name, or … a really cool name that goes well with [name_f]Lola[/name_f].
@denmama9 Thank you so much for the thoughtful response!!! You perfectly put into words what I love about [name_f]Lola[/name_f] [name_f]Sparrow[/name_f]
