I’m interested to hear some thoughts on how far it is safe to go with “wild” and over-the-top names in the middle slot. I think most of us agree that we have at least a little more freedom from society’s conventions in naming when we choose the name that the child will most likely never be called by, but how far can this go?
Different people will naturally have different views about which names they feel “cross the line” beyond usability, but in my own opinion, the first three do cross that line. Personally I would also swap Hildegonde to [name_f]Hildegarde[/name_f].
I do agree with the fact that middle names are a chance to be a bit more creative and out-there, however I’m pretty conservative/traditional in terms of the names that I like, so most of those names are a bit much for me personally. I do like [name_u]James[/name_u] [name_m]Napoleon[/name_m] though!
Thanks for the responses!
I actually really agree that the associations tied to Asterix and [name_m]Napoleon[/name_m] are far too much of a burden for me to even consider them as middle names. [name_m]Just[/name_m] in case of any confusion, the names I mentioned are not so much names I am tempted to use as examples to get your thoughts on the concept.
I know a little girl with the middle name [name_f]Irmgard[/name_f], after her grandmother. Certainly a mouthful for Americans, but it’s a common (albeit old-fashioned) name (as is [name_f]Hildegard[/name_f], btw.)
We do two middle names. The first middle name is the one we love-love-love without any other thoughts attached such as: [name_m]Will[/name_m] it be hard to pronounce? Does it come with bullying potential? Etc. It’s the inspired name, I totally indulge in my naming passion with this one.
The second middle name is a family or honor name.
It’s hard to draw a line, but if a name makes me cringe, then I won’t consider it in any spot, unless of course it’s meaningful for some reason. (Personal preference of course, not universal naming rule)
Names that tend to make me cringe are eg. over the top word names like Honeyblossom or [name_f]Rainbow[/name_f], [name_u]James[/name_u] for a girl, bland choices like [name_f]Ann[/name_f] or [name_f]Rose[/name_f].
I’m all for those limit-pushing middles. Middle names legally don’t matter in the US, so to me, if my kids really hated their middle, they could say “I don’t have one.” I really want to use a few family names, but I’ve considered doing what vc2013 is doing - one family/honor middle name, and one love-love-love, indulgent middle.
Honestly, other than Asterix (you mean like Asterisk? As in *?) I wouldn’t bat an eyelash at any of those middles. I’m actually really into Sweetpea (both as an endearment and the plant) and [name_f]Alchemy[/name_f] (would be so cool for a chemist/historian/subtle HP nod?).
I think you can definitely be more adventurous but I think it still should be a ‘real’ name and not be embarrassing to the child as they get older.
Sweetpea - I can see this being embarrassing as a teenager/adult
Asterix - [name_f]May[/name_f] work for someone who is a big fan of the [name_m]French[/name_m] cartoon, but many people wouldn’t get that association
[name_f]Alchemy[/name_f] - too much of a word not a name for me
[name_m]Napoleon[/name_m] - Actually think this is quite handsome as a middle name, especially with a classic first like [name_u]James[/name_u]
Hildegonde - sounds a bit made up. Why not [name_f]Hildegarde[/name_f]? [name_f]Agnes[/name_f] [name_f]Hildegarde[/name_f] sounds nice to me
I think that [name_m]Napoleon[/name_m] is the only acceptable mn that you listed. I believe that mns can definitely be more unique, but imo, they should still be recognizable as names and not as ordinary nouns (eg Pillow, [name_f]Sunshine[/name_f]). There are a few exceptions to that of course (eg [name_f]Summer[/name_f]), but that is my general rule.
