Especially in america. i don’t understand. Doesn’t it look terrible with your last name? you are driving me batty… I suppose [name]Lincoln[/name] is nice but the others… (do you even use the term ‘batty’…:???: )
When did it start though? is it mainly an american thing?(if it’s traditonal there then i may be won over)(Avery is more a first name i think, where i live it has been forever i think)
(Err… also in britain we say things like that(makes me batty) but we don’t really actually mean it)
And the victorians don’t count they had really weird names… like ‘angel’(works in the book only…) Mortimer, Bradley,Lawrence, and a Sidney have been used for a long time(here) so they don’t really fit in this conversation.
Who really knows why trends start? They’ve been fairly common for boys as a way to honor the mother’s maiden name, or another beloved family member who had a different surname. In the south, they’ve been used for girls for a very long time, usually as a double barrel with a more commonly recognized feminine name like [name]Ann[/name]. I’m not a huge fan of the trend, and would probably only use a surname as a first name if it was family honoring.
Why do you like the names you like? Surnamey names appeal to people on a certain level, just like names you like appeal to you on a certain level. They’re not categorically terrible or awful. Some of them (like [name]Bennett[/name] and [name]Sullivan[/name]) are quite stylish right now (and not in a bad-trendy way).
Surnamey names are very dear to my heart, I’ve just always loved them. Sometimes they have meaning (to me, those would be [name]Grayson[/name] and [name]Avery[/name]), and some of them I just like because I just like the name. We all have different naming styles, we all find different names appealing, but honestly, just because some of my favorites are surnames and yours aren’t–it doesn’t make you (or anyone else) any better than me. Or worse. [name]Just[/name] different. And no, [name]Grayson[/name] [surname] doesn’t look bad. I don’t even understand that point really–as long as the flow doesn’t sound bad (like [name]Grayson[/name] [name]Hudson[/name] or whatever), why would it be bad?
And honestly, I don’t understand your “batty” comment, either–why does it even matter? I can appreciate trying to understand the appeal in surnamey names if that isn’t really your style, but why attack the style in general? Why let it bother you? People appreciate different styles of names, why should we all like the names you like? That would be a boring world. If I named my son [name]Grayson[/name], [name]Spencer[/name], or [name]Avery[/name], it’s not like I’m doing a huge disservice to my son. In fact, I wouldn’t consider it a disservice at all. I mean, yes, I do believe names matter, they create an impression. They can enhance your appearance on your resume, they can make you stand out from a crowd. But it’s just a name. It’s not everything. It’s not like I’m interested in naming my son Sexual-Orgy [name]Johnson[/name] or something.
And yes, I do realize I’m blowing this way out of proportion, and probably venting a bit too much, but the idea that surnames as given names is bad just blows my mind. It’s a style of names, just like loving [name]Jasper[/name], [name]Frederick[/name], [name]August[/name], and [name]Henry[/name] is a different style of names.
I´m sorry but I do feel like I have to defend [name]Leona[/name] here. Though I do agree to a certain point that some surnames through time have become nice first names, I still don´t like the idea of calling a child by a specific word, place or in this case surname.That really seems to be an American thing that I just don´t get. There are so many beautiful real names in the world. Why always trying to invent new ones? But this again is just my opinion. We all do have different tastes in baby naming, like ashthedreamer perfectly made clear (which is fine-no offence).
So, I say we just call this conversation even. Different tastes everyone
See, I have no problem with that. In addition to having Bailey, Avery, Brody, Grayson, and Spencer on my list (and Everett might count as a surnamey name–I can never quite figure that one out. It sounds surnamey, but I haven’t really come across anyone with the surname Everett), I have actual “name” favorites like Caleb, Asher, Jack, Noah, and Charles on my list (not to mention all my favorite MNs!). I love actual name-names. I love surnames, too. I’m just tired of surnames being bashed as FNs. There’s really nothing wrong with them.
ETA: And it’s not really as if we’re inventing new names, here. Names like Bennett and Avery and Spencer have been around for decades, if not centuries. Avery is an old name in my family tree, going back at least five generations, maybe even more. I’m a huge fan of real names, I love seeing them used. But I’m also not afraid to defend surnames. Then again, any category can take it too far. Just like I think using Hortense is taking the vintage train to far, using something like Wlasniewski as a given first name is taking it way too far, lol.
While I agree with you about your opinion on surname-names (I don’t like them), I think it’s a little extreme to let them “drive you batty”. You like what you like and let people like what they like. I’m sure there’s plenty of people who would cringe at your naming style as well, no matter what it is.
I guess I don’t get what the big deal is. Are [name]James[/name], [name]Alexander[/name] and [name]Charles[/name] not acceptable first names because there are people with those surnames? Or is it only certain last names that are “unacceptable”? I do feel like some names transition a lot easier to the first name spot than others, but ruling out all last names starts getting really restrictive. I find it appealing as an option for honoring family. By using the family surname, a single name can act as a tribute to an entire branch of the family, who may be too numerous to honor one at a time through their first names.
I just wanted to add that when I wrote I don´t like inventing new names I ment for example new “names” like [name]Neveah[/name] (a word pronounced backwards doesn´t make it a name to me).
It is a Southern thing, indeed. The first born, whether boy or girl, took on the mother’s maiden name as a first name, hence [name]Madison[/name] on a girl. I’m glad that isn’t a strong tradition at least for my family, because my last name makes a horrible first name, especially for a girl.
I’m not a fan of the mac- and -son choices for first names, but there are a few last name choices i do like (including [name]Thatcher[/name], which doesn’t get much Nameberry love esp from the britberries), so while I can say I wouldn’t use a masculine last name (mac/son) for a girl, and probably not for a boy unless that name was in the family tree, i still am not against last names as a whole. And I’m not about to grill, oh say, [name]Jefferson[/name]'s mom to find out if there really is a [name]Jeffrey[/name] in their lineage, or point out to [name]McKenzie[/name]'s mom that her daughter’s name means ‘son of’… their kid, not mine!
There are some I don’t mind like [name]Harrison[/name] for example. But maybe that’s because [name]Harrison[/name] [name]Ford[/name] makes it work. Also [name]Jackson[/name] is fine too…even though I would personally just use [name]Jack[/name].
However, there are some that I don’t like. [name]Carter[/name] for example is one of them. That one seems too “last name-y” if that makes sense.
I also wanted to point out that using maiden names as first names has been “a thing” for centuries. Surnames have been used as first names quite literally since it became commonplace to have a surname.
Honestly, there are a lot of surnames that sound like fn’s. Or, are more popularly known as a first name. [name]Ashley[/name] is the perfect example as I know a few people with the last name, but more who have the fn.
I always love what ashthedreamer says and almost always agree, but this rang true for me as well. There are so many names that we may have once thought of as first names, but are also last names. The lines are so blurred, even more so than what gender a name may or may not fall under (or both). I would use my mother’s maiden name in a heartbeat as a first name, but it’s a name that would go over pretty easily as a first name, I think. It all depends on the name and what you’re tastes are. I figure, just because I wouldn’t use a name or a certain style of names, it doesn’t mean they’re bad names by any means. I do happen to like quite a few surnames for boys, though.
All names were made up at one point and most names evolve as generations pass and cultures mix. There is nothing wrong with it. I would rather be open minded and have a larger array of names to choose from than smaller ones. Especially when it comes to family names and names with personal meaning. If you look at the most common surnames in [name]America[/name], [name]Canada[/name], the UK, Australia and etc there are many that are also used commonly as first names. Many of these have been used for centuries! It is nothing new.
I’m a [name]Brit[/name] and I kind of like it… it’s not an American thing either, ever read any Dickens? In Our Mutual [name]Friend[/name] there’s a [name]Mortimer[/name] & a [name]Bradley[/name]; in Bleak House a [name]Lawrence[/name], a [name]Leicester[/name]; in A Tale of Two Cities there’s a [name]Sydney[/name]. These are the ones I remember right now… Anyways, not American, not new.
Oh, and [name]Everett[/name] is an English surname, derived from a [name]German[/name] given name ([name]Everard[/name]).
[name]James[/name], [name]Alexander[/name], and [name]Charles[/name] are nowhere near the same as [name]Anderson[/name], [name]Carter[/name], and [name]Smith[/name].
I understand the OP’s point about surnames as names. I don’t have a problem with it to a certain extent (using a family name as a first name or naming [name]John[/name]'s son [name]Jackson[/name], etc.) but especially now, people are getting ridiculous with their going out of the way to find a very uncommon surname to use on their child (the recent thread about Kellaway comes to mind).
In addition to having Bailey, Avery, Brody, Grayson, and Spencer on my list (and Everett might count as a surnamey name–I can never quite figure that one out. It sounds surnamey, but I haven’t really come across anyone with the surname Everett), I have actual “name” favorites like Caleb, Asher, Jack, Noah, and Charles on my list (not to mention all my favorite MNs!). I love actual name-names. I love surnames, too. I’m just tired of surnames being bashed as FNs. There’s really nothing wrong with them.