Not at all! I love flower names for girls. Although some of them are a little too popular now.
I like some unusual ones:
[name]Azalea[/name]
[name]Calantha[/name]
[name]Linnea[/name]
I wouldn’t call it tacky and I really don’t mind the combo. I doubt most non-Berries would think anything of if. These names are so established that they don’t scream “flowers”. Siblings named Hibiscus, [name]Marigold[/name], and Chrysanthemum sound like hippy, commune kids. [name]Lily[/name], [name]Rose[/name], [name]Violet[/name], [name]Ivy[/name], [name]Iris[/name], [name]Flora[/name], [name]Calla[/name], etc are classic names
I’ve got to say, I always cringe a bit when [name]Charlotte[/name] names her girls [name]Rose[/name] and [name]Lilly[/name] in the Sex and the City movie…it’s just a bit much for me.
I don’t think using the classic flower names in a group is exactly tacky, but it just feels a little like overkill. Like a more posh and traditional way of naming your children [name]Princess[/name], [name]Precious[/name], and [name]Heaven[/name]. (Extreme comparison, but you get the idea) That said, I love when siblings share a theme in the middle name spot—be it flower names, virtue names, an initial, etc…it just feels like a softer way to link your siblings names.
Now I’m off on train of consciousness wondering if I’d have the same reaction to flower-related names…[name]Rosalie[/name] and [name]Violetta[/name] or [name]Allyssa[/name] and [name]Lillian[/name]…and the answer is no. For some reason those work for me while still having a “theme.”
A little too much for me. Reminds me of sisters I know [name]Grace[/name], [name]Faith[/name], and [name]Hope[/name]. Not tacky at all but you do feel a bit like you’re being hit over the head. But of course all my boys have New Testament names so some people might feel the same about my boys…hope not.
Super obvious ones are just as tacky as any other obvious theme, in my opinion. I do like [name]Lily[/name], [name]Rose[/name], and [name]Violet[/name] more than something like [name]Faith[/name], [name]Hope[/name] and [name]Grace[/name], or [name]Heaven[/name], [name]Nevaeh[/name] and [name]Angel[/name], just in general as names. I went through a phase where I really liked [name]Hazel[/name] but [name]Iris[/name] has been really high on my list for a while, and even that was too themey for me.
With flowers, I half expect a weird family like the one on Keeping Up Appearances, haha. Because of that show, I feel like an all obvious flower theme is meant to be a joke. That being said, I love [name]Hyacinth[/name] because of that show.
I love your girls names! [name]Do[/name] you know the genders of the twins yet?
Nope not tacky, as other posters have said it’s a very Victorian thing to do, and I would not be adverse to choosing all flower names myself, especially if you love the name; that’s the most important thing, I think, to love the name on it’s own and as a part of the sibset. I love [name]Marigold[/name] and [name]Juniper[/name] together!
The flower concept isn’t bad, depending on which names you use. [name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name] and [name]Violet[/name] are sweet and they go well together. I think those work because all are beloved standalone names that don’t scream “garden.” If you’re shy about using the theme in the first position, consider using the flower names in the middle position, as they would all go very nicely with many first names.
In my opinion, yes. Extremely so actually.
3 flower names together is a bit much, although 2 flower names and one non-flower or similar name (i.e. [name]Rosalie[/name] instead of just [name]Rose[/name]) might be a little more balanced.
I actually think it’s adorable and would probably do it myself. (My faves are [name]Iris[/name] and [name]Rosemary[/name].) However, I tend to be a little on the corny side some times!
I love [name]Rosalie[/name], [name]Lillian[/name], and [name]Violet[/name]! I agree with a lot of the previous posters… using different forms of the names tones down the theminess a bit and makes them more usable together.
I don’t think I would call it tacky, but I think it would be a bit “cheesy” for lack of a better word.
That said, overall I do think they sound lovely together, and I have certainly heard/seen far worse “themes” when it comes to sibsets. By the way, I think [name]Rosalie[/name], [name]Lillian[/name] and [name]Violet[/name] are fabulous together! [name]Love[/name] that!
A few more flower names that I love that aren’t as obvious as flower names – [name]Linnea[/name], [name]Dahlia[/name]
Hahaha. I figured by the title this was going to be something [name]Jamie[/name] [name]Oliver[/name] would do. Like [name]Petal[/name] Bloom [name]Rainbow[/name] [name]Sugar[/name] bear blah blah. You know, something over the top from beginning to end.
But [name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name] and [name]Violet[/name] as a sibset? Fine with me. I think it’s pretty. [name]Just[/name] as long as there isn’t anymore nature infused names in the middle! That’s when it gets to be too much for me.
For me, it depends on the names.
[name]Rose[/name], [name]Violet[/name] and [name]Lily[/name] work for me. Yes it might be a bit obvious, but they’re all strong names, and have different sounds.
My friend’s cousin has daughters called [name]Rosy[/name], [name]Lily[/name], [name]Daisy[/name] and [name]Poppy[/name]. All flowers (or in [name]Rosy[/name]'s case, a form of a flower name) and all with an ‘ee’ sound ending. Far too “cutesy” for me.
This is very similar to what I was going to say 
If you want obvious choices like [name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name] and [name]Violet[/name] I’d put them in the middle only. But more subtle flower names like [name]Zinnia[/name], [name]Aster[/name] and [name]Dahlia[/name] could be a lovely, quirky but not obvious combo for first names.
I think it is adorable and not tacky. The problem with using a less obviously flowery name is you may not like the name [name]Zinnia[/name] or Byrony as much as [name]Rose[/name]/[name]Violet[/name]/[name]Lily[/name]. If you really love those names you should use them. I do agree that it works because they all have very different sounds, as opposed to [name]Poppy[/name]/[name]Lily[/name]/[name]Daisy[/name]. That is tacky. I don’t agree that it is the same as naming your girls [name]Princess[/name]/Sparkle [name]Queen[/name] blah blah, there is meaning and weight behind those three names, particularly if paired with a meaningful middle
[name]Rose[/name] [name]Catherine[/name]
[name]Lily[/name] [name]Magdalena[/name]
[name]Violet[/name] [name]Theodora[/name]
[name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name], and [name]Violet[/name] is a very feminine Victorian combo…if you were using more modern names in your theme like [name]Peaches[/name], [name]Plum[/name], and [name]Apple[/name], then you would have reason to be worried.
I love ianthe’s suggestion of giving them some weight with a grand, classic, meaningful name in the middle. Other suggestions along those lines:
[name]Rose[/name] [name]Marguerite[/name] (so feminine!)
[name]Lily[/name] [name]Elizabeth[/name] (I like the flow with the L’s)
[name]Violet[/name] [name]Josephine[/name] (the combination has a certain strength to it, which the youngest definitely needs :-P)
I also like the idea of couching the more obvious [name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name], and [name]Violet[/name] within longer more elaborate names, like [name]Rosemarie[/name], Lillienne, and [name]Yolande[/name] (meaning violet).
While I agree that there are other beautiful flower names, [name]Dahlia[/name], [name]Bryony[/name], and [name]Aster[/name] does NOT have the same feminine flow as [name]Rose[/name], [name]Lily[/name], and [name]Violet[/name]. But that’s just my two cents 
Nah. I like [name]Lily[/name] though I prob wouldn’t use it. Not because it is a flower though!
This reminds me of the British TV show Keeping Up Appearances. The main character, [name]Hyacinth[/name] had two sisters [name]Rose[/name] and [name]Violet[/name]. IMHO. I think it’s a bit much. Like one pp mentioned it would be nice for middle names.