It's request hour here at WBNW, with this post going out to the listeners...er, readers who asked for some "one-hit wonders." Those are the baby names that made the U.S. top-1000 name charts one year, never to be heard from again. Where did they come from, and where are they now?
I've run the calculations and I now have the definitive list of the names that appeared on the charts exactly once from the 1880s through the 1980s, and never since. Any guess how many? 860 names. It's a big number, but not really surprising given that we're spanning 110 years of baby naming style. The list reflects passing fashions, creative spellings, historical moments and waves of immigration. It's a fascinating collection of styles ranging from what-were-they-thinking to why-didn't-I-think-of-that. Today I'm going to describe the one-hit wonders as a group, and I'll highlight various discoveries over the coming weeks.
Before we delve into stats and methods, a few choice names:
- Euclid and Pliny
- Sable and Ermine
- Profit, Worthy and Wealthy
And now, the fine print. My first step was to classify the one-hit names into three broad categories:
1. Data entry artifacts (E.g. Infant, Christop, girls named Melvin)
2. Variant spellings of more common names with the same sound
3. Pure one-and-done names
There were plenty of judgment calls along the way. Were there really boys named Lottie? Is Darlyne pronounced the same as Darlene? The totals I arrived at: 47 artifacts, 157 variants, 656 straight one-hit-wonders.
Due to quirks in my data sample, the distribution of one-hit names skews heavily toward the earliest years in the range, the 1880s-90s. The biggest reason is that far more names made the top 1000 in those years than any others. How can more than 1000 names rank in the top 1000? The answer is ties. For instance, in 1980 the top 1000 girls list actually numbered 1002 names, with Lashunda, Mariel and Rae tying at #1000. (147 babies bore each name.) But that's 1980. 1880 America was a smaller country, and babies born then only made it into our data if they survived long enough to get 20th-century Social Security Numbers. The smaller data set means a smaller range in popularity and more ties at the bottom. So the 1880 girls list features a whopping 1102 girls' names, with a 158-way tie at four babies apiece. I considered skipping the 1880s for this reason, but frankly the names of that time were too much fun to ignore.
And now for a few more names:
- Welcome, Constant, Bliss (all boys)
- Sweetie, Lovie, Doll (any guesses which are boys?)
- Icey, Nicy, Spicy, Vicy (girls; Dicy appears in multiple years' lists)
To be continued....
Comments
And a Lois Barbara will fit in with *her* peers fine!
If Lois is a fitting-in kinda kid, she can go by Loey, or even Lola--can't get a lot more trendy than that. Oooh, or Elba (L-Ba). But the great thing is, she'll still have a good solid historical (Biblical even) name for her PhD and for her office door.... so I say good choice!
Philippa--Thanks for the heads-up on Laura's NPR appearance. For those like me, who missed it, here's the link:
http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2007/09/20070914_b_main.asp
I also like Lois a lot - it seems feminine but also business like - a perfect name for a girl who will be able to anything! My favorite is Louise, though - I'd always just loved the sounds of it. But back to Lois - I think Lois Barbara flows well and is a good name.
I think Lois is great. And I love the suggested nicknames. You could also call her "Lotus," which is a little much as a given name, but cute as a nn. Of course, Irene and Lola starts to sound pretty mismatched. May I ask what Irene's middle name is? I am NOT a fan of Barbara. To me, Lois can either be very frumpy or chic and elegant... I think this mostly depends on the person wearing it, but Barbara, for me, also pushes it MUCH more in the frumpy direction. But then, so what if a name is a little frumpy? If you love it, hopefully your daughter will love it, and if she wants to nickname herself when she's young, she will. I don't see any obvious nickname potential, as long as there isn't any with your last name in combination. Congratulations on your decision! I'm glad I got to be a part of it! (I've been posting for a long time under various names.)
Dicey was the nickname of one of my ancestors, Laodicea Langston, in the Revolutionary War era. (Which is a Biblical name--one of the seven churches of Asia in Revelation--but I've always thought it was an odd choice since Laodicea was the only church that has only bad things said about it.)
Question... Dicey as a nn. for Laodicea seems like it would be pronounced "DEE-sy" -- is it? Likewise, Nicy as a nn. for Denise should be pronounced "NEE-sy." Is that how you're envisioning the pronunciations? I saw Dicey and Nicy and thought "DIE-sy" and "NIE-sy", as in Dice and Nice. Anyone have info on common pronunciations?
Now that I look back at Laura's list, she spells it Dicy... and part of the reason I assumed those pronunciations (apart from their spellings) was that she listed them with Spicy and Icy. Spicy! I can't imagine that one as a name! Icy seems like a viable nickname for something (Isis, for one).
Irene's Mom- I love Lois. I may have missed this but what are you thinking for a middle name? Loey and Lola are great nns for Lois and honestly I don't think I have EVER known a Lois personally. AND THAT IS A GREAT THING!! The only Lois I know of is Lois Lane and how could you go wrong? She is a beautiful, sucessful comic book/tv/movie character.
I have a good friend named Lois, and I've known a few others over the years. Maybe it's a regional thing? I'm from NY and I think it's a lovely name. I remember reading a book or play in a hs English class, in which there was a character named Lois, and the teacher was very insistent that it be pronounced "Loyce," rhyming w/ Joyce. There happened to be a Lois in the class, who gave her a big argument about it. [Not suggesting that pronunciation; just telling the story.]
Dicey, Nicey, Icey, etc. would all have been pronounced in the huge majority of cases as if they contained the word "ice".
English is a rather unusual language in that the "long" sound of the letter "i" normally became the "eye" sound. Most other European languages use "i" as the spelling for the "ee" sound. Before Americans had a lot of exposure to the way other languages pronounced names that contained "i", they tended to use the "eye" pronunciation. Up until the middle of the 19th century, Maria was usually pronounced "mah-RYE-uh" and Nina was pronounced "NINE-uh" in the USA. It's only with increased exposure to immigrants with names like Maria that the pronunciation of that name shifted to the more "general European" one of "mah-REE-uh". Mariah is actually a spelling that developed to indicate that the parents wanted what was the older American pronunciation of the name.
Thanks guys! We're going with Barbara as a mn because there is a childless aunt Barbara on both our sides and we love the idea of honoring both of them. Irene's mn is Cordelia.
I love the nn's suggested. Irene's nn in our family is... The Reenster. I don't really now how it evolved, but it fits.
Dh is a comic book fan so Lois is a name he loves, and I can get on board because it has real history behind it (like Irene).
Oh, and the ten names that 80% of the boys in England shared made me smile, because all three of my brothers have one of those names!
I have a problem - hypothetically. There is a name that I would love to use for my future daughter. Sadly, I have been using it for a cyber-handle for several years. Actually, the handle is 2 names strung together. I like them that way. My husband even kinds of likes it.
So, can I use it? Do I need to change my cyber name before the time comes when I can name my daughter?
I'd have to say no problem. Irene was my "alias" for years and my running buddy's was Loretta. Our daughters' names are now Irene and Loretta. I guess test driving them cemented how much we liked them!
"Expect Baby Deborah, Valerie, Brenda and Kathleen to come your way soon!"
I already know a Brenda who is 2 years old. Her 3 year old brother is Ricky, and her 1 year old brother is David.
I think they "fit" well with my daughter, Deanna, who is 2 years old.
Beth - I don't know if I like Ashlette per se, but I do always get a kick out of hearing new names, even when I hate them, which I often do. The depths of human creativity amaze me!
My question is, why do you (not just Beth, but many of you) seem to feel that a name made up in the year 2007 is somehow less valid than one made up in 1707? It seems to me that modern names may fit better in our culture and even sound better to our ears - we speak an very different language than that used even 50 years ago - if you watch old movies you know what I'm talking about. The rhythms and letter combinations that appealed to people then may not sound as appealing now.
Personally, I think giving a child a dowdy, old-fashioned name because you are trying to either make a statement or because retro is 'cool' amongst your social circle has the potential to marginalize a child as much as a kre8tive name does, if not more so.
As an aside on the rhyming sibling name issue, the Orson Scott Card books mentioned by the Letter K have brothers named Alvin and Calvin, and Calvin (little brother) grows up resenting Alivn terribly, complaining that he didn't even get his own name, just a knock-off of his brother's. This rang very true to me.
Names have such a huge psychological impact, it's no wonder we tie ourselves in knots trying to pick out the perfect name for our children!
The very fact people on the boards are reacting to "Lois Barbara" as a dowdy old-lady name -- while Hazel, Amelia, Violet and other names popular in the early 20th century climb the charts -- just shows that the notion of "so-old-it's-cool" is constantly changing with time. I think the mid-century girl's name is going to be the next big thing: Jane, Helen, Sally, Ruth. And Lois Barbara (which I like a lot) has exactly that vibe.
kristin dawn, you make an interesting point about contemporary names fitting in with contemporary language/speech. Personally, the reason I don't like many contemporary names (the ones that don't have much of a history behind them) is precisely because they so closely mirror contemporary culture. I don't think they're bad names, I'm just very turned off by names that I see as dated and tied to the decades when they were so popular. i.e. Mildred sounds bad to my ears and makes me think of an 80 year old, but Elizabeth doesn't make me think of any particular decade, and I can easily see an 80 year old and a newborn and a 60 year old and a 20 year old with that same name. That's just my preference... I like names that have been fairly consistently used throughout the past century, because I don't like the idea of my daughter's name ever sounding like "an 80 year old's name." But Madison and Aiden have their place in our culture, and while I don't personally like them, I think they're perfectly valid names.
Maybe those weren't the best examples, because I realize that neither Madison nor Aiden were recent creations... but you know what I mean!
LKB - That makes me think of a 45 yr old Ashley I know. She loves her name, because she says it makes her sound younger. Maybe 100 yr old Mildreds like having a name that sounds like an 80 yr old? :)
LKB, I agree that avoiding names that will shortly be date-stamped is desirable, but don't you think this sudden upswing in babies with old-fashioned names is going to peter out just as quickly as any trend does?
Hazel is popular largely because Julia Roberts named her daughter that. Mabel was the baby on Mad About You. Violet is the Bennifer baby. Ava is Reese Witherspoon's daughter. And as for Amelia, it fits in with more modern sounding baby names. In other words, even though these names have been around for a long time, they're as trendy as Jayden! While Elizabeth, on the other hand, is truly timeless.
It just seems like these oldie names are becoming an exercise in one-upsmanship - I can give my baby a more geriatric-sounding name than you!!
I think the Mary-Blank phenomenon originated back when practically every Catholic girl was being named Mary.
I couldn't get Laura's NPR thing to play on my computer. Can anyone give us the quick highlights?
Maybe some of the popularity of "oldie" names is a reaction to our somewhat youth obsessed culture. I, personally, think it's very sad how very hard so many people try to stay young. Aging is a beautiful, natural part of life that I am not afraid of, and I don't want my children to be afraid of either. With me, choosing "geriatric" names is kind of a way of saying old is OK by me. (Like my Mamaw always said, "Getting old sure beats the alternative.")
I also don't want to pick a name just because it's an old lady name, which is why I like Lois. It's biblical and it's firmly grounded in pop-culture, which I think removes it from the decade specific trap.
Hope I made sense!
One thing I don't think has been mentioned yet for Lois associations is Lois Griffin from Family Guy. It's my first thought, and I expect it would be the first thought of anybody in their teens and twenties at this point, moreso than Lois Lane. Not likely to be something your daughter's age group would pick up, but probably a lot of their parents would. Still, I think it's an all right name--not my style or my favorite, but still nice. I don't care much for Barbara; it is a little frumpy to my ear, and makes me think of Hanna-Barbera cartoons moreso than any particular person.
Kristin Dawn: you say, "Hazel is popular largely because Julia Roberts named her daughter that."
Hazel already on the rise when she named her daughter that at the end of 2004.
Popularity of the female name Hazel Year of birth Rank
2006 465
2005 517
2004 680
2003 680
2002 767
2001 750
2000 893
1999 915
1998 940
Julia Roberts's choice may have sped up recent use, but it didn't necessarily originate it. I know that Laura has talked about impact (or at least assumed impact) of celebrity naming in the past--and lots of times the celebs are following the same trends we are!
I agree with Kirsten, I think that many of the old lady/old man names that are so popular now will sound somewhat dated a decade from now. I was struck when someone said "Julia" was a timeless name. Well, sort of. Most Julias are either over 70 or under 15. Our kids will probably go back to Julie as sounding "fresh" or come up with something else. I did have a friend Julia at college (30s now) and remember thinking her name sounded so pretentious!
My guess is that the new names will cycle just like the old ones do. A few may never come back, but one day the "new" names of today will be a generation's way of honoring their grandparents. :)
Speaking of unusual names someone that passed away and was in the news today (in his eighties) had the name Burdette. Never heard that one before.
FWIW, I think Lois is cute with Irene. And I'm a big fan of honoring family with a middle name, no matter how weird it is. It adds character and meaning!
Cathie - Did Julia's personality have anything to do with the perception? I really do think of Julia as timeless, maybe just because I've seen it used in early 19th century lit.
Growing up a Valerie in the 1960's, it was clear to me that the name was already dated- in England at least- i.e. most people bearing that name were older than me. I remember Leslie Dunkling discussing this in a book and saying that the ideal was to have a name ahead of the curve and then people would assume on seeing your name that you were younger than you really are.... hmm... which buys into all the ageism someone was already mentioning today.
Maybe the resurgence of Valerie for babies is one reason why my name seems more appealing now- to me, as well as to others.
kristin dawn, i do think that the upswing of names like hazel and mabel will peter out quickly, leaving them sounding nearly as time-stamped as madison and aiden. what i was saying is that my preference is towards the truly timeless names... ones that are consistently popular from decade to decade... not just old names that have a resurgence in popularity. but my argument for names like hazel and mabel (and for names like emma and sophie) is that although they are going to be dated to this generation, they seem *more* timeless than madison and aiden because they can also be dated to another recent generation (the babies named emma and sophie may likely have great grandparents named emma and sophie) . anyway, it all comes down to preference, and i do think it's incredibly snooty to say that modern names aren't *real* names. i happen to like the timeless ones, myself... the ones that never drop below the top 1000 on laura's charts, and the ones with the least drastic fluctuations.
At least Lois Barbara will probably be the only one with that name in her class at school. I was K-12 substitue teacher last year, and I always found it refreshing to hear names that were a little old-fashioned and not so trendy in the younger grades. It was fun to hear names like Cora, Nancy, and Kathleen (my mom's name) for girls under 10!
I have an aunt Lois and just ran across another over the weekend. I remember her because I thought it was so unusual that her name was Lois. She was our waitress at a grill and bar and in her early to mid twenties with trendy clothes and long hair. It sure is a contrast to my aunt Lois! I had never really thought about my aunt Lois' name until I heard it on someone younger. I say go for it!
Of course, the problem with "timeless" names is that they may start to either surge or drop in popularity. Look at Mary, for example: it was a "timeless" name until the 1950's or so.
Both of my sons' names (Eliot and Graeme) were on Laura's list of timeless names, but I've seen Eliot mentioned quite a bit more lately, so I wonder if it will stay in the 400-range.
I just noticed that Elliott and Brynn (my daughter's name) are used in the Pottery Barn catalog as names for their furniture collections. They tend to use fairly trendy names, so I wonder if this is an indication of a jump in popularity. This could be a new rule for me--stay away from Pottery Barn names!
I think the names that are most likely to truly sound timeless are those that have been extremely popular for a long time, or those that are so odd or unusual that they will never be tied to any era.
Ok, fine, Julia Roberts was merely riding the Hazel popularity trend, whatever. Though I remember a band called Sister Hazel during the mid-90's that might have kicked it off.
I don't have anything against names from any day and age, as long as the name sounds pleasant and does not harm the child as it goes forth in life. I don't care if you name your child after a celebrity's dog if it sounds nice. Naming a child primarily as a statement of your own personal beliefs, (i.e., I hate today's cheap obnoxious culture evah-so) no matter how much grief it will cause for the child, gives me pause.
All I am saying is, this huge movement towards old-fashioned names is just as much of a trend as the Madison-Emerson thing. If you think you are bucking a trend by naming your child Hepzibah or Dwight, you aren't. In fact, you're being uber-trendy, trying to out-trend the trend. And everyone you tell your child's name to, will know it.
*Kristen Dawn:I agree 100% with your point that "giving a child a dowdy, old-fashioned name because you are trying to either make a statement or because retro is 'cool' amongst your social circle has the potential to marginalize a child as much as a kre8tive name does, if not more so."
You are right on. The people I know who have given their children such names are definitely trying to appear way cooler than they are. It would be one thing if the parents of little "Bertha" were confident and settled in their skin. (Not the actual name used, just examples!) But unfortunately, these couples are insecure and trying way too hard to keep up with what they perceive to be cool. They are, to use a term from the 90s, "posers" to the extreme, and sadly are bestowing some pretty tough names for their kids to pull off.
What is trendier than that?
I'm pretty sure Niecy as in Nash is pronounced NEE-sy.
Cleveland Kent Evans: That is so fascinating that I had to tell my husband! (He's into history.)
*MJ: That is so funny/true about the names in Pottery Barn. Two of my daughters names have appeared in PB a few years after I gave birth. It's most entertaining. I'm always saying to my husband: "Look - there's a lamp/rug/bedroom set with her name. It's a sign. We have to buy it."
Check out JCrew as well: my friend is having a girl and she emailed me the following list she calls her JCREW baby name list (perhaps it will give one of you an idea!):
Ava, Anya, Audrey, Amelia, Avery, Annabelle, Alexia, Bella, Ella, Stella, Betsy, Bridget, Catherine, Caroline, Camilla, Dani, Darcy, Emilia, Etta, Erin, Harper, Hadley, Jenna, Janey, Jennifer, Lia, Laurel, Lucia, Lucie, Lidia, Lyndsey, Lilah, Madison, Parker, Rafaella, Sophie, Sofia, Sarah, Sadie, Sabrina, Suzanna, Tenley, Whitney.
It's actually a pretty decent list of names!
Just wondering: have the people so concerned about finding a name that isn't "date-stamped" found the fountain of youth? We're going to live to age 70,80,maybe 90 and then we'll be dead. Are you worried that your great great great grandchildren will be flying around in their spaceship cars saying "Poor Great Great Great Grandma Madison. Her name was so 2007."
One last post (lots of opinions from me tonight) --
The mother I know with the daughter named "Bertha" is always saying: "I met these old ladies at the park and they LOVED Bertha's name! They couldn't get over it!" And I just want to say: "That's fantastic. Those old ladies are going to be dead in about 5 minutes. That leaves the rest of the world under age 99 who think Bertha is horrible and that you made a cruel choice."
I have a name that has to be added to the "icey" list. Pricey. I have met two of them in a really small town. One I know well, explained that it is an old name that used to be common in the area and is a family name. She had a great aunt or soemone named Precious as well.
Kristen Dawn - have to disagree with you about a couple of those names you mention. In our family Hazel is a name that has skipped a couple of generations but daughter has always pinned it for her first child, and Violet has been popular for around half a decade or so here in NZ. You may be confusing popular with Hollywood media, which is of less interest to many people interested or searching for names. Incidentally - your throwaway 'whatever' comment in your second posting because someone proved that Julia Roberts didn't actually start the Hazel 'trend' isn't particularly nice - being proven wrong isn't a great experience for anyone, but dealing with it in an adult manner sure helps...
Nina - jayden/kayden/charlysse/madysunn etc are far more cruel, being as they tag forever a child in both time and as cheap & dumb, whatever their life achievements. Bertha may not be the most beautiful name but it certainly doesn't hold the contemporary baggage the other name styles do.
Tansey - Oh, I agree that the bizarro spellings of the names you mentioned may not be the best choice either. My point was that the couple chose the "Bertha"-type name simply to be "cool" -- it was more about how THEY look rather than taking their child's future into consideration. (Again, the name wasn't actually Bertha, I just used that as the example.)
(Goodness! re: your "cheap and dumb" comment!!!)
Also, Tansey -- I don't think Kristen was referring to the use of old family names. I believe she was describing the trend, and it is a trend, to randomly use dowdy/old-fashioned names for the sake of looking "cutting edge". (If I may speak for you, kristen!)
I completely agree that ridiculous spellings are far worse than really old-fashioned names. Helen and Dorothy are much better than Mickinzi and Jaydyn (or anything else along those lines)!
I think it comes down to this - whatever name you choose it will be on some sort of fashion wave, just like the clothes you choose. Now I happen to think Bertha sounds pretty - all connotations aside. There are dowdy names I don't think sound pretty, such as Gertrude, but I wouldn't say they couldn't sound pretty to anybody. And I really find it hard to believe that any name that doesn't have some horrible real meaning, like say Liar or Swindler, is not being cruel to your child. And anyway, it's pretty easy to get a name change in the USA.
And, wow, I can't imagine thinking the opinions of someone whose life is coming to a close is irrelevant. There was a time when those folks were revered and their opinions, based on their more thorough life experience, were listened to with respect.
If a child is reared in a loving home, taught to be an independent thinker, and trained to feel confidence because of legitimate acheivements, no name is going to hold him back. IMO.
If I can throw my two cents in here, I think there is a huge naming constituency who pick names for their kids because they *gasp* just plain like the name. (Obviously none of us on here who over-analyze every name to death!)
Now, what that says about someone who likes Jayden versus someone who likes Millicent is down to what we (individually) perceive as the societal implications of said names. The mom of Jayden might think the mom of Millicent is cruel for naming her kid that, and vice versa.
The over-arching name trends that Laura so eloquently discusses here and in her book boil down to individual decisions made by each set of parents. Those decisions can be informed by the trends (choose to go w/ trend, away from trend, etc) but can also just be cases of "oh what a pretty name."
I doubt anyone chooses a name by examining which one might be the most pretentious...and besides, what is pretentious for one person is another person's cup of tea.
Kristin Dawn, I'm liking your staunch defense of newer names, though like LKB I do tend towards the "timeless in any decade" (i.e., potentially boring) names. I will say that to me, a name like Nevaeh made up in the 2000s and a name like Lodensy made up in the 19th century are equally absurd.
Nina, I think of "date-stamped" names as ones that are so trendy they'll be gone in 15-20 years, not a lifetime.
It's a drag when your old family name (mine is Caroline, alternating with Elizabeth for first daughters for 10, count 'em, 10 generations) shows up in the J Crew catalogue, but so be it. But I agree with the poster who said that honoring a family member is its own meaningful thing whatever the name is. Lois Barbara is also out of time-synch in an interesting way. I knew a Maud in college, now in her 40s, who had that name when nobody had old-fashioned names, and it was just fine.
I know it's snobby, but truly, the kre8tive spellings make me wince. I joked to my mom that my daughter would be Karyleighn.
Kristin Dawn has said much better was I was trying to say that was labeled as about old fashioned, dowdy names.
I just tried to remember when I was naming mine, that I'm not the one who is going to have to live with it. So, I tried to take into account things like: okay I live in the buckle of the Bible belt, in a very conservative area, so I cant go wrong if I pick a Bible name. Hannah is pretty popular, so there you go. Hannah is not my very most favorite name in the world, but it's a name that my daughter will be able to live with, that will age well, etc. And in my way of thinking there are so many ways to make a kid feel unique and special without resorting to giving them some oddball name because it's "uncommon" or super "old". Granted, Hannahs an old name, but trust me it has gone to the young ones to the extent you think of a little one when you hear it.
I just think names are a bad way to make a statement, personally. I know most people on here disagree-which is totally cool-to each their own-
but it does disturb me that so many people here avoid names that are popular-as if the cruelest thing you can do to a child is give them a name that isn't weird.
I know that non-standard spellings can be bothersome, but I think people are overreacting by using words like "cruel" and "cheap." I know a lot of adult Jacquelynns, each of whom seem to use a different spelling. They all like their names as far as I can tell. An extra "y" or a doubling of a letter is not going to ruin a kid's life. A few decades ago, the trend was to replace "Y" with "IE," e.g., Kathie, Sherrie, Lizzie, Vickie, Tracie, etc. I'm sure people were saying, what's wrong with the standard spellings? How are we going to know how to spell that? But the Vicky with a "y" was not treated any different than the Vickie with the "ie." Eventually the trend for these type of names died out.
So now we replace vowels with "Y." Both variations and cutsy and harmless. Even the crazy name snobs will treat little Aiden and Aidyn exactly the same when they meet them at their child's school. And that's a good thing. So on the cruelty scale, spelling your daughter's name Krystyn ranks very low.
Post new comment