New Post
Search
HelpRe: Names from Game of Thrones; suitable for a real person?
in reply to a message by maire
I like Bran, Janos and Sandor. I think Eddard is inevitably going to be called Edward but most people. Renly makes me think of renal, and that's it. To be honest, a lot of these seem -too- high fantasy to be used on real people, or seem like confused or badly spelled versions of existent names.
From the girls, I like Arya. Sansa is nice enough, but reminds me of Sampsa. I have heard of Yara as a name in its own right, but it's pretty insubstantial.
Bare in mind that Game of Thrones is something which is going to age horribly. I'm not a fan (I really don't like the treatment of women as sources of gratuitous nudity and I hate the author of a Song of Blah or whatever, I can't remember his name, the original books... with his pretentious and holier-than-thou attitude and weird beliefs that he's the best and most original thing to happen to fantasy fiction. I read something which was probably from a fan, but might have been from the horse's mouth, basically ragging on Tolkein and his 'simplistic' world-view and black-and-white morals. First off, Bob (we'll call him Bob for convenience unless someone can give me his name) is not the first guy to use ambiguous morality and antiheros and what not, so he and his fans can stop pretending now - it's neither new nor original. And they ragged on Tolkein and since I read the Hobbit when I was six or something, borrowing my mother's book mainly because she told me I'd like it and it had a picture of a scary dwagon on it, and since aforementioned book is the first book I can remember completely and utterly loving to an obsessive degree (outside of The Very Hungry Caterpillar and a book about puppies with finger puppets), J.R.R has a special place in my heart. Yes, that's probably the first thing that fandom. Because I'm petty. And on that note, sorry for ragging on your fandom in this weird aside.
My point is that books with any inter-generational staying power are pretty rare, and I don't think this series has it - let alone tv shows. I dunno... I just think that in 20 years time, someone called Daenerys is going to end up with a name that's dated horribly, but just made-up enough to be awkwardly identifiable as a name taken from a "2010s-fantasy-revival" fandom.
And to be honest, 20 years down the line, will you still like the name/series? That's the clincher, really, especially with the very high-fantasy sounding names.
I do like Janos, though. As long as it's said right. None of this 'Jah-noz' poo.
From the girls, I like Arya. Sansa is nice enough, but reminds me of Sampsa. I have heard of Yara as a name in its own right, but it's pretty insubstantial.
Bare in mind that Game of Thrones is something which is going to age horribly. I'm not a fan (I really don't like the treatment of women as sources of gratuitous nudity and I hate the author of a Song of Blah or whatever, I can't remember his name, the original books... with his pretentious and holier-than-thou attitude and weird beliefs that he's the best and most original thing to happen to fantasy fiction. I read something which was probably from a fan, but might have been from the horse's mouth, basically ragging on Tolkein and his 'simplistic' world-view and black-and-white morals. First off, Bob (we'll call him Bob for convenience unless someone can give me his name) is not the first guy to use ambiguous morality and antiheros and what not, so he and his fans can stop pretending now - it's neither new nor original. And they ragged on Tolkein and since I read the Hobbit when I was six or something, borrowing my mother's book mainly because she told me I'd like it and it had a picture of a scary dwagon on it, and since aforementioned book is the first book I can remember completely and utterly loving to an obsessive degree (outside of The Very Hungry Caterpillar and a book about puppies with finger puppets), J.R.R has a special place in my heart. Yes, that's probably the first thing that fandom. Because I'm petty. And on that note, sorry for ragging on your fandom in this weird aside.
My point is that books with any inter-generational staying power are pretty rare, and I don't think this series has it - let alone tv shows. I dunno... I just think that in 20 years time, someone called Daenerys is going to end up with a name that's dated horribly, but just made-up enough to be awkwardly identifiable as a name taken from a "2010s-fantasy-revival" fandom.
And to be honest, 20 years down the line, will you still like the name/series? That's the clincher, really, especially with the very high-fantasy sounding names.
I do like Janos, though. As long as it's said right. None of this 'Jah-noz' poo.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Well I'm not looking to specifically reference the Game of Thrones series, it's more a question of DH and I being stuck on what to name this baby and feeling out new names we haven't considered. Regardless of the characters, I really enjoy the sounds of Rickon, Renly, Theon, Tyrion, and Jorah. Could these names stand alone without a reference to a fantasy story?
PS. I'm not that much of a fan, I just watch the TV show.
PS. I'm not that much of a fan, I just watch the TV show.
1
Well, as I mentioned in my own response, you may want to look for connections to real names ... Tirion is a Welsh unisex name, and Theon is close to Theron. They sound like real names, too.
1
Hmmm, yes, I agree with this! ^
Okay, I've taken on board what you said :) - from the five you suggested, I guess Rickon and Theon work if we're saying 'names which don't scream fantasy', which was my initial problem. Rick has a root to, say, Richard-like Rick, and Theon could pass as having the same 'Theo' root as countless other names. This is a made up etymology because as far as I know Theon isn't a 'real' name and doesn't have any such roots, but if we're taking them as name-names in their own right, it could pull it off. It also sounds a bit like a cool name for a scientific particle or atom. Theon - the gooooood particle. No, I like that, because I'm lame. Rickon struggles a bit being taken as a proper name in its own right, but maybe I just can't see it because it isn't my style. I guess it could work.
Tyrion. I'm sorry... please, please, please forgive me... looks ugly. It looks... really rather ugly. I tried not to sound brutal, but every way I try phrasing it skirts around the problem that Tyrion has no depth to it. It's as shallow, meaningless, un-aesthetic and faddy as Tinley and it looks trendy and made-up. I'm not sure if there's any other way you can spell it to get the sound you like, but avoid it looking faddy. I have a real problem with it - I think it is very much the most problematic-aging-badly-cheesy-fantasy-type of the bunch. Renly still screams 'renal' at me, and I have many of the same problems with it. Jorah is very fluffy and fantasy-esque, but okay, I guess. I'd still go with the first two if anything.
Much as Adenydd suggested going for ones which sound like existing names, have you thought about using these names as 'inspiration' and searching for names which have the elements you like in these names, but are established names which not only lack the fantasy issue but might not, maybe, age so badly? I know that's a poo idea, but you did say the problem was that you were struggling for names.
Okay, I've taken on board what you said :) - from the five you suggested, I guess Rickon and Theon work if we're saying 'names which don't scream fantasy', which was my initial problem. Rick has a root to, say, Richard-like Rick, and Theon could pass as having the same 'Theo' root as countless other names. This is a made up etymology because as far as I know Theon isn't a 'real' name and doesn't have any such roots, but if we're taking them as name-names in their own right, it could pull it off. It also sounds a bit like a cool name for a scientific particle or atom. Theon - the gooooood particle. No, I like that, because I'm lame. Rickon struggles a bit being taken as a proper name in its own right, but maybe I just can't see it because it isn't my style. I guess it could work.
Tyrion. I'm sorry... please, please, please forgive me... looks ugly. It looks... really rather ugly. I tried not to sound brutal, but every way I try phrasing it skirts around the problem that Tyrion has no depth to it. It's as shallow, meaningless, un-aesthetic and faddy as Tinley and it looks trendy and made-up. I'm not sure if there's any other way you can spell it to get the sound you like, but avoid it looking faddy. I have a real problem with it - I think it is very much the most problematic-aging-badly-cheesy-fantasy-type of the bunch. Renly still screams 'renal' at me, and I have many of the same problems with it. Jorah is very fluffy and fantasy-esque, but okay, I guess. I'd still go with the first two if anything.
Much as Adenydd suggested going for ones which sound like existing names, have you thought about using these names as 'inspiration' and searching for names which have the elements you like in these names, but are established names which not only lack the fantasy issue but might not, maybe, age so badly? I know that's a poo idea, but you did say the problem was that you were struggling for names.
1
All your comments are fair enough. I haven't decided anything. I agree, Tyrion does come off rather trendeigh. I thought that Rickon, Theon, Renly, and Jorah sounded the most like real names, and them being more minor characters in the show I thought the reference wouldn't be such a big deal. Good idea to look for real names with sound elements similar to those names.
I know these GoT names are really "out there" but there are several real names I've suggested that my family and friends see as just as wild and bizarre (i.e. Llyr, Caspian, Ruarc, Rudyard, Alaric).
Picking a name is hard (when there are two people who have to agree!).
I know these GoT names are really "out there" but there are several real names I've suggested that my family and friends see as just as wild and bizarre (i.e. Llyr, Caspian, Ruarc, Rudyard, Alaric).
Picking a name is hard (when there are two people who have to agree!).
This message was edited 5/25/2012, 7:58 PM
1
I believe the article about George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire that you are referencing was a review of the series, not something that Martin himself put out. Martin is obviously not the first author to employ grey-scale morality, but it is an interesting feature of a high fantasy type series. I certainly don't think that all readers of a Song of Ice and Fire would "rag on" Tolkein's Lord of the Rings; on the contrary, I think many readers enjoy both series. Tolkein is clearly a pioneer of the fantasy epic.
Also, interestingly enough, A Song of Ice and Fire has already been around for more than 20 years.
Also, interestingly enough, A Song of Ice and Fire has already been around for more than 20 years.
1
Hmmm, yes, maybe. It's never, ever been a thing up to now in the U.K and has a near non-existent following in non-Anglophone communities I'm accustomed to, so I wouldn't know if it was new or not and I made an assumption. I was too lazy to wiki. It's still an existent and continuing series, and I don't reckon you can aptly judge the long-term fanbase potential when an author is still putting stuff out and thus naturally feeding his fan-base, if that makes any sense at all. It sounds nasty, but the real proof is if it continues after the series has ended or the author suffered an existence failure - if old fans still reread and new fans are continuously attracted to the series, a la Tolkein, then it speaks for itself, but many such series truly do fizzle out. I mean, look at Terry Goodkind for one. He did kind of shoot himself in the foot by using his series as a soapbox and relentlessly pursuing weird black and white biased morality (just... weird) and weird jingoistic support for the Iraq/Afghan wars, in poorly veiled parallels, but it was a pretty long-lived series and support for the first books was pretty lively... and now I think it's ended or might as well have done and nobody talks them about them, ever, and if they do it's all blasé and passed tense. Then again, his weird shouty politics has made the whole thing awkward, and he probably killed it with the evil chicken bit, but I still think that's kinda the pattern of fantasy and sci-fi.
Philip K. Dick? He wrote Do Androids dream of Electric Sheep?, the book which Blade Runner was very loosely based on (obv). Both the film and the book were huuuuuuuuge (again, obv), the former more than the latter but it must have fed people picking up the book. That still has some pretty hefty impact and pop culture references, but you have to admit it's aged and diminished a bit in itself (book and film), and that was, what, late sixties and early eighties respectively?
Philip K. Dick? He wrote Do Androids dream of Electric Sheep?, the book which Blade Runner was very loosely based on (obv). Both the film and the book were huuuuuuuuge (again, obv), the former more than the latter but it must have fed people picking up the book. That still has some pretty hefty impact and pop culture references, but you have to admit it's aged and diminished a bit in itself (book and film), and that was, what, late sixties and early eighties respectively?
1
Has it?
Wikipedia says the first novel was published in 1996, which makes it 16 this year, so definitely not more than 20. Unless there was a predecessor to the novels, which I don't know about. Though, with (at least) two novels left in the series, I do think it'll break that 20 year mark. Whether it has more staying power, I don't know.
Wikipedia says the first novel was published in 1996, which makes it 16 this year, so definitely not more than 20. Unless there was a predecessor to the novels, which I don't know about. Though, with (at least) two novels left in the series, I do think it'll break that 20 year mark. Whether it has more staying power, I don't know.
1
My mistake...
Oh, I was mistaken. The publish date was indeed 1996...Martin began work on the series in 1991, and for some reason that was the date that stuck in my head. I was so sure I didn't even check! Oops!
I don't know if it'll have staying power beyond the last novel and a few years beyond that. It seems to fit into a nice niche in fantasy, gritty and not too far-fetched. It's not the same revolutionizing classic that Lord of the Rings is, but I think it could remain relevant and popular within the fantasy genre.
Oh, I was mistaken. The publish date was indeed 1996...Martin began work on the series in 1991, and for some reason that was the date that stuck in my head. I was so sure I didn't even check! Oops!
I don't know if it'll have staying power beyond the last novel and a few years beyond that. It seems to fit into a nice niche in fantasy, gritty and not too far-fetched. It's not the same revolutionizing classic that Lord of the Rings is, but I think it could remain relevant and popular within the fantasy genre.
1