The Baby Name Wizard

RobynT--you are right; Bill Bellamy was recently the host of "Last Comic Standing." He is an African-American comedian, and he used to be a veejay on MTV. He's been on many TV shows and movies. That is the very vivid image that keeps popping into my mind with all this talk of Bellamy as a first name.

J&H's mom - Me too! Where are these Emilys? I know several Emmas that are young, one that is 22, several Emilys my age group (I'm 26), but none that are little. I believe the SSA, but where are they? I'd say I know people that range from upper lower to upper middle class. I feel like the Emilys must be hanging out in the extremities.

I know two young Emilys (ages 8 and 2) and two young Emmas (ages 2 and 6 months). All four have parents with graduate degrees. Too small a sample size to generalize, but it does speak to your questions (even if it concludes nothing!).

May I ask what part of the country? And thanks!

I'm involved with a large group of young women, many of whom have recently had babies. There are four baby Emilys among about 30 baby girls born in the past year, and no Emmas. I would say the group skews upper/middle class.

This is in Northern California, by the way.

Hmmm...interesting comments.

Looking back it seems like the kids from "weird" parents in the 80's have the names which are becoming popular now with us name freaks. And by "weird" I mean parents who didn't wash their hair or allow their kids to watch any TV or have any clothes that were in style at all.

I do think these kids with unusual names suffered. It seemed like back then the kids with the really old names either had really socially weird parents, or else parents much older (15 years or so) than all the other parents.

I went to middle school with a kid named Gaylord. And this kid suffered daily. He also wore the same clothes all week. Had to feel bad for him.

On the other hand, and I've said it before, things like really cool parents and loads of money can make up for unusual names and even make the kids stand out in a good way.

So I guess you should only name your kids weird things if you have the sort of family that can pull it off.

Cleveland Kent Evans: I was fascinated by your comments re. Emma/Emily. I found it particularly interesting that Emma is something of a replacement for Emily in the States as I would say that the exact opposite is true in the UK.

I have no statistics to reinforce this statement but in my experience UK Emma's are in their mid-late twenties and there are a lot of them! At my graduation ceremony the visiting professor even made some joke that if any of us want to get into publishing we should all change our name to Emma! Emma's likely female siblings (just to give you an idea) would be Sarah, Victoria (always Vicky), Rebecca (Becky) and Claire.

Meanwhile our Emily's are much younger (it was the top name here 2003-04) and her female siblings would be more of the Charlotte, Sophie, Lucy and Olivia variety.

Of course, national variations are to be expected but can you shed any light on why there is such a disparity in the usage of Emma/Emily on either side of the Atlantic?

(Apologies for double post but I'm on a roll!)

Cleveland Kent Evans, J&H's mom et all:
If the upper middle class academics started using Emily years before it hit the big time could I enquire as to their current nom du jour? thanks!

cb, I'm in NC, but one of the Emilys (the older one) is in Pennsylvania.

Katharine, I'd guess that Lily is the hot name for the academics. This may have changed recently, but two or three years ago, it seemed like all college professors of my acquaintance (including my own sister-in-law) were naming their daughters Lily or Lillian.

I'm in MA, surrounded by academic parents! I'd say Lily and Julia were the most popular around 5-10 years ago. The new hot names in the under 3 set I've noticed right now are Charlotte and Jane, and little boys named Harry and James.

Kristin, I agree with you about the geeks growing up had the clunker names. I think it's probably that often the parents don't have that "style sense" that comes from being socially active in the community. Does that make sense?

I know many girls called both Emily and Emma. Many of the Emilys are teens though, and all of the Emmas are under 10.

Oh, and re. the resume test, I think that one's overblown. How many times do people truly send a cold-call resume? Its usually only important in maybe your first few jobs, after that its all experience and networking. Once you know a person, their character speaks louder than their name.

Re creative spelling, I have to say that in reading past entries some of the harsh comments have ugly undertones of racism to me. The message is "if you want to succeed, you have to name your kids more like US". To me that's not OK, and if people are hiring based on a person's name than they shouldn't be in that position. I agree with Cleveland Kent Evans that most people wouldn't make such an important decision based on a person's name. If they would, they are likely to have all sorts of prejudices and you certainly wouldn't want to work for them anyway!

Cathie, I agree with you about the undertones. I don't know if it's necessarily racist, but it does feel very classist to me at times. I try to stick up for the newer names and even the creative spellings at times when I think spelling isn't a detriment to the child. I used Madeleine/Madhycyn as an example because I thought some people might possibly challenge their assumptions regarding the newer names and creative spellings.

I think it is entirely possible that kids on both sides of the aisle (very old-fashioned names and the out-there newer names) may have similar problems. Not all kids, certainly, and of course there are many, many other factors that affect a child's success in life. But, as this is a name-related website and I imagine we all want to do what we can to help ensure our children's happiness and success, these things occur to me.

I have to say, I wholeheartedly agree that a person who would make a hiring decision based on a name shouldn't be in a hiring position to begin with. But I think the point here is that a name CAN have an EFFECT on someone's first impression of a person. I don't think many people would consciously make any decision about someone based on a name (let's hope), but a name is one of many, many factors that can either consiously or subconsiously effect how you put the whole picture together. How much of an effect they have, I don't know, but I would think that they do have *some* effect, at least for some people. In addition, while I'd love it if this were a world where people in positions of power always acted ethically, let's be honest, it just isn't. No, people who would make a decision based (in part) on someone's name should not be in positions of power, but that doesn't mean that they aren't. I think names can have an effect in the job market, I'm just not yet convinced the effect is large enough to worry about.

Hyz - I do think unusual names are much, much less an issue now, than 25-30 years ago. I'm just sharing what my life experience has been.

To clarify, I don't know if unusual names are the real issue, as names that are perceived uncool. Uncool' is a pretty arbitrary distinction, such that we could never define it, but as Laura has studied these naming trends extensively, her information is very helpful.

We can all think of names we'd never heard before or again, but immediately thought, 'Wow, what a cool name!' and also names that we've heard a million times and never liked. I'm not advocating only using popular names, not by a longshot.

I just feel wary about this incessant quest for unique names driving parents so far afield into the Middle Ages or science fiction, that their child ends up with a name that might've been better off being given to the cat.

The purpose of a kid's name isn't to prove his parents' cleverness, creativity, intellectual creds, etc.

I'm not sure how the negative comments on creative spelling would be racist in the usual sense--most of the Mikaylas and Madacyns I've heard of have been white. I see how it could be viewed as classist, for sure, but I don't think that's the root of the complaint. Some of us (myself included) are both traditionalists and language geeks. Bad spelling is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Cutesy neologisms aren't much better. This goes not only for names, but any kind of branding/marketing/slang (i.e. Krispy Kreme, Miller Lite, fantabulous, badonkadonk--shudder). I could conjecture as to why this misspelling/neologism naming phenomenon appears to divide largely along class lines, but this isn't a chicken or egg issue, at least for me--it is very clear that my dislike for those names is based on language issues, regardless of who chooses them.

Summing up what Jerri wrote - certainly you're not the only person whose carefully thought out gut reaction is to give chances to poor children who had a lot to overcome. Wouldn't it be good to give your kid a "bad" name and give them an edge?

My response - I know this was meant in jest, but I wouldn't gamble my child's future hoping they might run into a person enlightened enough to not judge people based on their names. Such snap judgements are often made at the subconscious level; an overworked person who's waded through 50,000 Harvard apps would probably not even realize the reason one applicant was less attractive to them than another.

The key words in Jerri's post are 'carefully thought out'. Many don't carefully think things out ahead of time. Others think they'd behave one way in a situation, but then do the opposite. Still others have prejudices regarding 'certain' classes of people, etc.

There are thousands of great names out there. Why would anyone deliberately limit their child?

Re: the topic of "uncool" names having to do with "uncool" children, I agree with what some posters have said above, that it's much more about the family situation that the child is coming from than the name itself. From my own childhood, I can think of children with uncool names (i.e. Trudy, Eugene, born mid-80s) who were cool kids, and I can think of children with cool names who were uncool (i.e. Michael, Jennifer). The kids who had unfashionable names either came from parents who were interested in staying out of the mainstream/had diff. fashion-sense or parents who were immigrants. For the most part, the ones whose parents were immigrants tended to be as likely to be "cool" as anyone else, whereas the ones whose parents were American and farther from mainstream culture were more likely to be "uncool." My school was largely populated by immigrants, so perhaps it was more name-tolerant than most, but I didn't see a correlation b/t names and popularity, just b/t "style" and popularity, if that makes sense.

Well, what interests me is that I doubt any parents choose a name they don't think is "cool" (socially advantageous). What informs them as to what a "cool" name is what they value as real goods in society. Some people simply don't view success at the academic level as the real good (and I'm not saying it is). Some parents would think a "cool" name is one that catches the eye of casting agents, art critics, football scouts, voters, or many others. Hmmm, I guess I don't have a real point... This discussion just got the wheels turning :)

cb, I definitely see your point, and it's a good one. I do think, though, that some parents just don't think about a name's "cool-ness" or popularity when they chose it. For instance, I've known some immigrants who have chosen the names of their children based on what names they've heard of in English (i.e coworkers' names, celebrities' names), without knowing much about how they're perceived in this country, or who have chosen names that sound similar to names in their native tongues (Eugene is an example which sounds similar to a given Korean name). I'm sure there are many people who also give names because of family tradition, regardless of how popular those names are... but then, I'm sure kids who are given unfashionable family names end up going by initials or more "cool" nicknames... Anyway, the point is, yes, people have very different views of what is "cool" based on what informs them, but I don't think it would be true that all parents give their children names that are "cool" by some standard.

cb, good point, but also don't forget other bases for naming--family or cultural tradition, honoring a loved one, honoring a famous person, importance of meanings, etc. A coworker of mine just named his new baby William. The guy is William B. Lastname III, and the (male) baby never had a chance of being anything other than William B. Lastname IV. I can think of lots of examples of this sort of thing, where naming has little or nothing to do with how people outside of immediate family will perceive the name, or where the parents feel they do not really have a choice in the naming process.

Anon, you beat me to it!

Awww, I love the word badonkadonk!

(Got cut off!) Having said that, I am also a language geek, and appreciate being surrounded by others here!

I didn't want to get too long winded, but I get what you are saying. I would argue, then, that some people view tradition as the real good. Or, when an immigrant chooses to take an American name, they are most likely thinking it will be a socially advantageous name. I was thinking all parents choose a name that they view as somehow being a positive force in their child's life. Whew! ;)

I see the distinction you're making, cb, between a cool-by-some-standard name and a name that parents think will be socially advantageous. That's probably particularly true in the cases of immigrants that I mentioned, b/c I believe for most of them the choice to give an English name in the first place has to do with allowing their children to assimilate more readily into an English-speaking culture. But I'm still not convinced that people who name children b/c of a deeply-rooted tradition of one kind or another are doing so, ultimately, b/c they think that name will be socially advantageous. I think there are naming traditions that can more fully be understood in other terms, although I'm sure an idea of social advantage *plays in* to most people's choices. So, I think you're right, to some extent, but I think all naming traditions can be viewed as an intersection of various values/goals, social advantage being only one of many factors that go into the decision.

Oh, but I forgot to look at your last sentence. Yes, I think most parents (all? hard to say) choose a name that they view as being a positive force in their child's life! Positive force being a different concept than social advantage, though admittedly similar when it comes to name choices.

Sarah R, have you definitely decided against Brighton Rew? I thought that was SUCH a great name. I live in Britain where nobody would ever use Brighton as a name because it's a place; but it sounds so great with Rew, which (IMHO) not many other names do - it's a hard last name to "match".

In my mind, Brighton Rew is a really cool guy in his early 30s - passionate, socially aware, maybe a creative type like a musician or architect.

I absolutely love the name Asher, but agree it doesn't go well with Rew.

I second the Brighton Rew suggestion. I like it a lot.

A pp wondered what the upper class is naming their children. I don't know about the true upper class but I live in a part of Marin County CA where most people are upper middle or rich. Below I've listed the names of babies I've meet under 6 months old:

Boys:
Alexander
Brody (2)
Cooper
Evan
Griffin (2)
Jacob (2)
Jordon
Ronan

Girls:
Annika
Avery
Caroline
Chloe (2)
Chyce
Elena
Elliot (mn Jane nn Ellie)
Elizabeth (Lizzie)
Grace
Imogen
Jane (2)
Katelyn
Nadine
Nora
Scarlett
Tara
Tessa (2)
Virginia (nn Gigi)
Vivian

To Katharine:
You are precisely correct that in the UK Emily is the replacement for Emma, and in the USA it is vice versa. What really fascinates me is that this is the SECOND time the same pattern has occurred. In the USA Emily was also very big in the early to mid 19th century, and Emma was more popular in the latter half of the 19th century. In England it was the opposite; Emma was the early 19th century fashion and Emily rose in use later.

There are quite a few names where the typical bearer is a generation older or younger on one side of the Atlantic than another. Louise is a great example of a name much younger in England than the USA. Back when Louise Brown, the first "test tube baby", was born in 1978, I think many Americans wondered why her parents chose such an "ugly old" name, not realizing that Louise was fashionable in England at the time. Zoe, on the other hand, is a much "older" name in the UK, having been popular there in the 70s, when it wasn't usually even on the top 1000 list in the USA.

Could Samantha be another example? It's such a 70s name in the UK, but I think younger in the US.
Zoe seems to have had a bit of a UK revival about ten years ago, I know several younger Zoes.

What I notice in the UK is that ten years ago it was all Eleanor, Ella, Hannah and now it's Mia/Maya. Every second mum seems to have a baby called Mia or Maya.

Cleveland Kent Evans: I'm really interested in the national disparities between names and how they arise so thank you for replying with such enlightening info! It's weird how the Emma/Emily pattern is repeating itself. I wonder if Laura's reading because I think this would make a darn good post! (I know she did the 'Landon' post but wasn't that was more about regional differences?)...

Along the same lines as Zoe, Gemma is one that Brits are far more familiar with. Also, I noticed Samantha has been riding high in the US charts for ages - as I scanned the list it really stuck out for the simple reason that I would put a UK Samantha in her late 30's! (The same goes for Julia, although she would be nearer her early thirties)...

Elizabeth T: Lily is in the UK top ten and I checked out the US stats and I think you're right because it is literally racing up your charts!

Catherine: Thanks for your list - I always love a good list!

Wow Keren, clearly we were both posting at the same time! - great minds and all that...

(long time lurker, first time poster) I would like to add that I think Jane is a great name! I also think Anna Katherine or Anna Catherine would be nice....but not Anna Jane (reminds me of Emma Grace, a child I know).

As to the nickname issue, I - in my thirties - have known plenty of Catherines who were just Catherine w/o a problem. Seems to be more of a problem for boys and then still depends on the name. Since Benjamin is almost always Ben, that would be hard. I knew a Joshua who always had to fight to be Joshua and not Josh, the same with a Matthew who had to fight to be Matthew. Catherine, Elizabeth, Rebecca - those I have known plenty w/ nicknames and plenty who went by the full.

ooops. somehow this post was supposed to be further up on this list, oh well.

The rich folks of Marin County probably don't have the same naming taste as academic parents in college towns--young professors who are having kids aren't usually the "rich" folks, for sure... Among my campus friends having kids in the last decade, I've seen Joe, Theodore, Sophia, Helen, John, James, Graham, Corinna, Aurelia, Gwendolen... old-fashioned, formal, literary, not top-of-the-charts names.

Wendy -- I also know a baby Emma Faye, she's about 3. She lives in LA.

I am from and went to college in the northeast US. In my college class (1999) of around 350 women, there was one Emma and at least 15 Emilys. Now, I am meeting lots of baby Emmas and no baby Emilys.

Actually, the "rich" folk of Marin and the academics mentioned by Swan Ceylon seem, to my ears, to have similar tastes. In my cohort, the young professors (and I'll throw in a few grad student choices as well) have named their children (under-fives only):

Sophia (2)
Eleanora
Emerson (boy)
James
Elizabeth
Emma
Vivian
Noa (girl)
Guinevere
Francesca
Cyrus

I wish I had something intelligent to add to this conversation. I'm glad Laura's blog attracts so many intelligent people, unlike other blogs I've glanced at in the past.

This is way old news, but I had to laugh when Robyn T and others got curious about my surname. I enjoyed the attention, to be honest. Because I'm paranoid (for no real reason) about giving out my full name on the internet, here's why I can't use Mary, Meadow or Willow: the surname is 4 letters long, 2 syllables, and shares 3 of the 4 letters in Mary. It starts with M and ends with O, so Meadow is as forbidden as Mary is, while I'm still willing to fight for Willow (all it does is end with the same vowel sound).

I love reading everyone's comments and debates. I feel smarter just associating with you.

I'm in Boston...loads of colleges here, as you know! Anyway, I'd say that among the more elite, educated families, there is a healthy mix of old fashioned-yet-familiar and surnames. Here's a list of some children under 6 or so:

Boys:
Henry (many new babies with this name)
Jack (many, many, many)
Finn/Finnian/Griffin/Finnegan
Noah
Cooper
Tucker
Samuel
Nolan
Gavin
Wyatt
Grady
Declan

Girls:
Charlotte (it's everywhere)
Evelyn
Claire
Caroline
Maeve (lots of Irish families)
Anna
Lily
Maggie/Margaret
Sadie
Amelia
Quinn
Avery
Parker
Finley

Amber, I know what you mean. This site stimulates my intellect in all sorts of interesting ways. Lately I've been thinking a lot about what makes kids cool (socially adept) or uncool (socially awkward) thanks to posts on this site. (No conclusions, but I think it's largely genetic with a dash of environment thrown in.)

My husband doesn't quite get how a site about naming could generate ideas about so many different topics, but as he is addicted to The Motley Fool's board, he accepts it as my peculiar addiction. Cheers, all!

Haha, Amber, I was so close to correct!

What's noticeable to me about both the Marin and 'college prof' lists is that many of the girls' names are trad girls' names rather than surnames. That seems to be one of the major contrasts to current American naming practices.My classes of 5-8 year olds are full of names like Morgan, Brooke and Braden.

professor names: Julia, Charlotte, Henry, James, Charles

Valerie - (new poster here!) I respectfully disagree. I think there are actually quite a few surnames for girls among the educated set. In my own circle (many Ivy league grads and educators) in the Northeast, there are little girls named Lily, Anna and Amelia...and also Linden, Avery and Wynn. Although perhaps this group is steering away from surnames like Taylor and Morgan because those names have been popular for so many years and have lost that "fresh" feel.

Yes, L, you are so right that boys-- esp. those with three syllable names-- have to fight much harder than girls to resist the "conventional" shortening of their names. Odd, isn't it? Wonder if people feel more proprietary about the traditonal boys' nicknames.

Along with more unusual names, I still like the very well-used traditionals, like Nicholas, Christopher, Alexander. I know how hard it is to hang on to your own, perhaps idiosyncratic nickname, so I deeply admire the Christopher who goes by "Kip" or "Kit" (or even "Kester", reaching WAY back), or the Nicholas who is "Coll" or "Colin" for short.

Because there were such compelling reasons for us going with "Benjamin" for our little guy, we glossed over the fact that it is so well-used. It has such good associations for us historically, with B.'s Franklin, Britten, Disraeli, and Netanyahu.

But the current crop of callow actors all named Ben, leaves me cold. It's also the go-to "everyman" name for screenwriters, too, it seems. So... (continued)

Nicknames, continued:

So, the solution for a lot of us is to have your own distinctive nickname. We were very inspired by the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu is "Bibi", never "Ben" to his intimates! Not that that would work very well for an American boy!

So, don't despair, fellow parents, if your child has a name that seems to proliferate before your very eyes. There's a wealth of little-used nicknames out there... And here's a bulletin on how Banks is faring with his. The other day there was a substitute teacher in second grade, and she started to address our little guy as Ben. The OTHER Benjamin in the class put up his hand, apparently, and said
"Mrs. G., please call him "Banks" and me "Ben"-- that's how you can tell us apart!" I love it!

While I'm still thinking about the nickname thing:

Another reason they can be useful, is if you simply don't like the full name, as opposed to it being too popular.

A current example would be "Mitt" Romney. Apparently his full name is either Willard Milton Romney, or Milton Willard Romney. Named after a ball player, and a family friend, I think. So they made the most of a difficult situation, and came up with Mitt. Wouldn't be my choice, but it IS sort of sporty and certainly preferable to "Miltie", by my lights! I would have gone with "Will"...

I also like that "Demi" Moore came up with her own, very marquee-friendly nickname, although the longer Demetria is pretty too. Wish I could think of other examples where the nickname is superior-- oh, Tiger Woods. But I wish "Tiger" related more to the actual name. I like it when there's at least a tenuous connection...