The shaming of names

'Ah, how nice to see Oscar coming back again! After Wilde's disgrace, it must have been the name that dared not speak itself'

Miles Kington
Sunday 12 January 2003 20:00 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Every January people like to look back at the previous year and ask questions about the popularity of names. Is Darren more popular as a boy's name than Wayne? Has Kylie retained her place in the poll? And so on. The reason that journalists get interested in this sort of thing is partly that there is nothing else happening and partly that it is actually quite interesting to see how fashions in names move.

So I have been puzzling over the report issuing from the Office for National Statistics which states firmly that the most popular boy's name in Britain last year was Jack and the top girl's name was Chloe. More than that, these two have been the top names since 1994, topping the leagues every year. (This I have taken from a piece in The Independent written by Arifa Akbar, which I think is a much more memorable name than any of the ones mentioned in the piece.)

The reason I have been puzzling over this is that I don't know anyone called Chloe and only one teenager called Jack. But then, of course, I don't mix with many under-10s these days, and the ones I do know are called not very fashionable things like Tom, Jessica, Peggy, Eve and Oscar – ah, how nice to see Oscar coming back again! There must have been a long period after Wilde's disgrace when Oscar was the name that dared not speak itself...

The curious thing about the list of top 10 British boys' names for 2002 is how many of them are biblical, which is the word that people use when they don't really want to say "Jewish". Joshua, Thomas, Daniel, Matthew, Luke and Joseph are all in the top 10. And the even more curious thing is that when you look at the American list for the same period, their selection is even more biblical. The 10 most popular boys' names in the US last year were, in descending order, Jacob, Michael, Joshua, Matthew, Andrew, Joseph, Nicholas, Anthony, Tyler and Daniel.

Tyler? I hear you cry.

You hear me cry the same thing.

I have never heard of anyone of either sex with the first name of Tyler, certainly not in the New Testament, so how it got into the top 10 is a mystery to me, unless it is one of those American names which are clearly so home-grown – such as root beer and chitterlings – that they are never going to be exported. Names, I mean, such as Woodrow and Dwight, Rufus and Christabel.

There are also some oddities in the top 10 American girl's names for 2002, which are as follows, starting with No 1: Emily, Hannah, Madison, Samantha, Ashley, Sarah, Elizabeth, Kayla, Alexis and Abigail.

Kayla? I hear you cry. And Madison?

You hear me cry the same thing. You also hear me crying, Hold on, surely Alexis is a boy's name? And Ashley, too, come to that...?

But no – no use going down that path. Names started becoming bisexual a long time ago. Ever since I met a married couple who both had the same first name (Robin) I have become open to the fact that names can be swapped nearly as freely as fashion items. Francis and Shirley and Evelyn and Courtney can be boys or girls, and the fact that girls called Francis spell it Frances doesn't really make it a different name. Add in the masculine names derived from shortening female names (Sam for Samantha, Charlie for Charlotte, etc) and things start to get very blurred...

The website where I learnt those top 10 American names of 2002 has an additional luxury service. It lets you go back to any year you want in the past and find out which were the top 10 names of choice then. So I time-travelled back to 1965 and found these top 10s. Boys, first: Michael, David, John, James, Robert, William, Richard, Mark, Thomas, Jeffrey. Top 10 girls in 1965: Lisa, Maria, Kimberley, Michelle, Patricia, Susan, Karen, Sandra, Deb/Elizabeth (tied 10th place).

Pretty conventional for the flower- power, hippy days, wouldn't you say?

But let's fly further backwards, to 1941, and see what boys and girls were called then. Here are the top boys of 1941: Robert, John, James, William, Richard, Charles, David, Thomas, Ronald, Donald. Top 10 girls: Mary, Barbara, Patricia, Carol, Linda, Judith, Sandra, Maria, Betty, Nancy.

Interesting, eh? Especially the rhyming pair at nine and 10 in the boys' list. More thoughts on this tomorrow. If you want your name included, just send a blank cheque, signed legibly.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in