I have felt that the very best names to give children are names that are (more or less) timeless, widely recognizable, and are names without strong images or associations - names that children can make their own. While I may like all kinds of names, I haven’t imagined giving any actual future children names that do not meet these requirements. I would want my children to get to choose the image their name has. For example, an [name]Elizabeth[/name] could create any type of name image for herself based on her personality as she matures. Her name could be perceived in many different lights based on what she was like. But, a [name]Judith[/name], or a [name]Persephone[/name], or an [name]Ellie[/name], or a girl named [name]Spencer[/name] would not have as easy of a time as an [name]Elizabeth[/name], or a [name]Julia[/name], or a [name]Victoria[/name] in creating a name image. Does that make sense? I feel like I’m not expressing it exactly the way I mean to express it.
Regardless, now I’m not so sure I have been right. It’s a very limiting approaching to naming.
Kind of interesting you say that… in another thread I suggested that it’s important to consider the impact of the imagery the name provides. But I do think imagery is important. No image is always solely bad or solely good every thing is a bit of both.
For example: [name]Persephone[/name] can be perceived as queen of the underworld, as a beautiful well loved daughter, or a bit of both. I think we all grow to fill our names and as we discover who we are our name molds with us and peoples expectations of said name change with us too. I don’t know if I’m making sense. I think trying to find a name devoid of imagery usually leaves me with a name I find sort of bland.
I sort of disagree. I mean, I understand what you are saying but I think [name]Judith[/name], a name you gave for example, could be anybody as easily as [name]Elizabeth[/name]. In all honesty, all the names you provided make me imagine a kid who could be anybody. Of course, certain names do tend to make me think “that person will probably be this way…” because of an old association, but once you get to know somebody, you realize that they really are their own person.
I think names that I would not give a child are word names like [name]Clover[/name], [name]Sunny[/name], or [name]Wren[/name], just because I feel like those kids would be expected to be a certain way–like a tree hugging or excessively happy person. But names like [name]Lydia[/name], [name]Miriam[/name], [name]Judy[/name], [name]Bellamy[/name], [name]Rowan[/name], [name]Benjamin[/name], [name]Elliot[/name] as a girl…like, I think those people could be ANYBODY. It’s very rare that I automatically assume somebody is a certain way because of their name. But that’s just me.
I agree with you on this. I wish I didn’t care what other people thought, but I do when it comes to naming. You can tell by my signature that this topic has run thru my mind a time or two. I’ve seen people discriminated against because of their names alone and I wouldn’t want that for my future children. It’s not fair and it’s not right… In fact, it can be counterproductive. A girl named [name]Spencer[/name] might be a more diligent employee than an [name]Elizabeth[/name] or a more compatible friend than a [name]Victoria[/name], etc. But, alas, we love to categorize people. I guess because it’s easier than breaking down barriers or perhaps due to past experiences.
It does create quite the conundrum for parents deciding on baby names.
