What’s in a Name?

What do Blade, Chassi, Fighuar (pronounced Figwaa), Ruger and Xenith have in common? That’s right, they are a sample of baby names from the current era. A section of our society, moreover, far broader than mere celebrity circles alone.

In modern western civilization there are numerous hot-button discussion points as to what is best for our children. Some of these divide us along partisan and ideological lines while others tend to garner a greater degree of concensus among the citizenry.

After last week's Simpleton Article on a similar subject I thought it would be useful to speculate on how naming a child could impact on his or her future.

But another category does exist. To be precise, the issue of how to responsibly name a baby is obviously too extraneous to inspire a partisan divide let alone a concensus. Yet, in an insidious kind of way, the neglect of this role can stigmatize the young on a long-term basis.

There’s a lot in a name. If you call a child Blade, for example, he or she may well have a heart of gold and end up doing a lot of good. But one could be forgiven for wondering whether neurosurgeon and would leader would belong on its list of potential future occupations*, even in spite of the obvious opportunity for wordplay provided by the former.

Of course, it is the parent’s right, and the parent’s right alone, to name their child. And it is not really for an outsider to assume limitations on a child’s future prospects. So, rather than be overtly negative, let’s take a more balanced approach to the phenomena at large.

The first category we will look at is probably the most subtle: a surname substituting as a first name. Increasingly, family names such as Tremaine, Sutton, Proctor and Baxter are starting to be used as first names. This can lead in some cases to the ‘no first name’ situation, such as Proctor Clarke, or to the ‘reverse name’ scenario, like Sutton James.

Overall, though, while potentially a little quirky, the surname filling in for the first name is relatively common and can be seen in every group of people from AFL footballers to the ruling elite of the new world order.

The second category is arguably the one that raises the most eyebrows: the noun substituting as a name. This is not wholly modern, the name Rock Hudson coming to mind. But it is far more common these days. And for more licientious.

So what does it mean for a child named Chassis? Of course, the possibilities are virtually limitless, but the obvious one is that he is destined for the dirt-bike circuit. But I wouldn’t write off drag-racing.

What about a child with Stone as a first name? Ditto, the virtually endless possibilities thing, but don’t be surprised if he or she is mild-mannered and eccentric with artistic tendencies.

It is from here that we move onto category 2.5, a sub-category if you will: the intangible noun doubling up as a name.

Whether it be Xenith, Heaven or Benevolence, it’s going to be hard for the outsider to separate the person from the name. In the case of Xenith, everyone’s going to want to knock him down a peg or two. With Heaven, if you can separate her (surely not his?) name from the image of docile angels plucking harps from atop the clouds, then you’ll have done well. And Benevolence? Well, at the very least there’s a bit of pressure to live up to the name.

Now it is time for us to head into the uncharted waters that are category three: the completely made-up word-name.

Some of these sound at least somewhat like a name. Caxton is one such example doing the rounds at the moment. Such names provide a piecemeal idea of what the future could hold. In Caxton’s case, there is a strong chance that he could be competing with Chassis on the dirt-bike circuit. Or, if public life turns out to be his thing, he might well take up a post as youth councilor at the local shire.

But it is the other type of made-up name, the one that has no name-like sound to it at all, that is hardest to read. Names such as Puntdade offer virtually nothing to look into, Phempous and Blatrott equally so. And only the foolish would look too much into them at this stage of the game.

Overall, while there is obviously a lot in a name, there is a lot more in an upbringing. Needless to say, if you name your child Blarkus, to name a mere example, it is not the name as such that stigmatizes the child, but rather the possible upbringing provided by people who would call their child such a thing.

This isn’t to say that names such as Walter or Horrace are a sound bet these days, as to pluck names from previous generations would require the child to grow into the name over a certain amount of decades; a kind of stigmatization of its very own.

There is no direct science with regard to responsibly naming a child, but there is certainly a lot to consider. For the sake of the young one it is probably better to err on the side of caution rather than risk branding them for life. But if you opt for Wartrood, or any other modern-alternative name, well, as long as he or she is happy and well-adjusted, everything else is secondary.

* If you are a Blade and you dream of becoming a neurosurgeon or world leader, it would only be my pleasure to be proven wrong.