I was speaking with a friend and she knows people with two kids, one named [name]Coco[/name] and the other [name]Rocky[/name], full names not nicknames!
She thinks that [name]Xanthe[/name] my ggd’s name is way out too but I think that while it is not heard often that it is a classic name of very long standing but [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] sound like they have celebrity parents who just needed a yooneek name for their kids.
I don’t put [name]Xanthe[/name] in the same class as either [name]Coco[/name] or [name]Rocky[/name] wdyt?
I agree-- there’s a huge difference between [name]Xanthe[/name] and a name like [name]Coco[/name] or [name]Rocky[/name], which is that [name]Xanthe[/name] is a legitimate name. [name]Coco[/name] is extremely cutesy and obviously celebrity inspired, and [name]Rocky[/name] is not a name (unless you’re a dog). [name]Xanthe[/name] may be ‘out there’, seeing as it is not very well known and has an unusual sound, but at least it’s a real name, and will ultimately serve her better in life than [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name].
Not even remotely in the same class as [name]Xanthe[/name], which is lovely! And it’s definitely not a celebrity name, nor does it even come off as one.
No way! I agree with you 100%. [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] are quintessential celebrity baby names. I’ll admit that when I first heard [name]Xanthe[/name], I didn’t know how to pronounce it or where on earth it had come from, but I know by now to do my research before thinking that a legitimate, historically significant name is the same as the made-up one down the street. This can lead to tragic mistakes, like so many beautiful names being overlooked because they seem trendy or trendy names parading around like classics. Research is a key component to naming any baby. [name]Little[/name] [name]Xanthe[/name] should never have to feel like her name is comparable to [name]Coco[/name].
However, you should know, that I’m on the very far end of the spectrum. It is really important to understand how the modern day American will view your baby’s name. Once you’ve put the research in, then you have to decide if the price of the legitimate but out-there name being unrecognized (or, heaven forbid, criticized) by your neighbor, while [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] are completely accepted, is one you are willing to pay.
I agree, although neither can be put in a “vintage” (see the 100-year rule) category. I have names some people think are “celebrity” when in fact they are extremely old names, many from latin and medeviel times. [name]Xanthe[/name] and [name]Coco[/name] are nothing alike.
I don’t see how you can call [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] “yooneek”. [name]Just[/name] because they’re nicknamey doesn’t mean they’re not real names, and they are spelled right. I don’t think it’s fair to knock the parents who chose those names. There are much, much worse names. [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] are normal enough, I don’t think they’ll cause the kids any trouble.
I don’t count [name]Xanthe[/name] in the same class as those names, but at the same time I wouldn’t call it a classic. [name]Mary[/name] and [name]Elizabeth[/name], [name]William[/name] and [name]Thomas[/name] are classics. I don’t think a name that most people have never heard can be considered a classic, no matter how old it is. It is a name with history (though it’s not as if [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] are ‘new’, they have been in use as nicknames for a very long time).
I think [name]Xanthe[/name] is a really cool name and I hope you don’t take this post the wrong way. I think it’s a great name that has the best of both worlds (an ancient name with a modern look and sound, perfect!). She will always be the only [name]Xanthe[/name] around, which I consider to be 100% a good thing. She will however have to spell and pronounce her name for every new person she meets, and “explain” her name to them. [name]Rocky[/name] and [name]Coco[/name] won’t have that problem.
Not gonna lie, I don’t hate [name]Coco[/name]. Mainly because of Ms. [name]Coco[/name] [name]Chanel[/name], but I digress.
I do agree that there is a vast difference between naming your child [name]Xanthe[/name] (which I know that I’m pronouncing wrong in my head) and naming your child [name]Coco[/name] or [name]Rocky[/name].
That said, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, the names are more suited to pets than to humans, but my pets have human names.
It all comes down to personal preference. None of those names are my taste, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to judge someone based on what their name is or what they named their child. I’m not going to condemn someone just because they didn’t put as much thought into naming their child as I would have. Not everybody has the same opinions, and I’m okay with that.
Now, when we get into names like [name]Renesmee[/name]? Then there will be some mad judging going on.
I think [name]Coco[/name] and [name]Rocky[/name] would be adorable nicknames, but I’m nearly completely opposed to nicknames as first names. It’s a shame.
I agree with [name]Lyndsay[/name]. The names are different, but I wouldn’t say [name]Xanthe[/name] is in a higher class and etc. While coco is commonly used as a nn for some people, it is also used as a first name. There are actually people named [name]Cocoa[/name]/[name]Coco[/name] in the black community. So for them it could have a lot of history and it might seem like a great name. I guess it just depends on how you look at it. I think it is really cool that [name]Courtney[/name] Cox chose the name [name]Coco[/name] for her daughter bc of the special meaning it had for her. She took the first two initials of her name and came up with [name]Coco[/name] for her daughter-how sweet. As far as the name [name]Xanthe[/name] goes, I have to admit that I initially thought the name [name]Xanthe[/name] was too weird a few weeks ago, but it has grown on me. I actually really like it now.