New Post
Search
HelpRe: What Names Do You Consider Low Class?
in reply to a message by Onyx the Obsidian
None. The concept is ridiculous. I may think that some people don't have as good taste in names as I do, but that means only that -- that in my opinion, (and that's all it is), they don't have as good taste in names as I do, and it means nothing else about them as people.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Yes, I completely agree.
1
Agree 100% with Wisteria & queenv - we all have opinions; but one opinion is not better or "of more value", or, "of higher value" than that of another.
1
In hindsight, the name of the beholder means less than the character of that person.
1
Agree. 'Class' hasn't anything to do with it. If I look at 'my taste' (names with interesting history, and/or family history) versus 'not to my taste' (cutesy hyphenated names and nicknames as full names, non-family surname names (used in the UK), 'celebrity' names, altered spellings, brand names), what it really comes down to is non-trendy vs. trendy.
On this board we tend to reject trendy names - because we know that they're trendy, we know they'll look dated at some point. Most people don't know and don't care: they just consider names they hear and think sound good. I've seen a lot of expectant parents from all sorts of backgrounds thinking about baby names, including plenty of my own friends and family. None of them are namenerds. Nearly all of them at some point, regardless of background, had at least one trendy name on their list.
On this board we tend to reject trendy names - because we know that they're trendy, we know they'll look dated at some point. Most people don't know and don't care: they just consider names they hear and think sound good. I've seen a lot of expectant parents from all sorts of backgrounds thinking about baby names, including plenty of my own friends and family. None of them are namenerds. Nearly all of them at some point, regardless of background, had at least one trendy name on their list.
1
It may offend some, but it is very relevant to naming patterns, and therefore not an unwarrented discussion.
You can't deny that poorer people are always trying to sound rich, which is why they name their children after luxury items so often (Diamond, Champagne, etc.).
Meanwhile more affluent people start using a name, but as soon as it is adopted by lower classes of people, they want to find new ways of sounding "apart" from them. In the 80s, rich people would name their daughters Courtney, but in the 90s, it became a name used by less affluent people. I think that is why richer, more educated people tend to also be attracted to names that less affluent people would judge as hokey, like Jethro or Matilda -- it sets them apart (for now).
You can't deny that poorer people are always trying to sound rich, which is why they name their children after luxury items so often (Diamond, Champagne, etc.).
Meanwhile more affluent people start using a name, but as soon as it is adopted by lower classes of people, they want to find new ways of sounding "apart" from them. In the 80s, rich people would name their daughters Courtney, but in the 90s, it became a name used by less affluent people. I think that is why richer, more educated people tend to also be attracted to names that less affluent people would judge as hokey, like Jethro or Matilda -- it sets them apart (for now).
1
This post has given me an incurable gum disease.
1
I think we could say the same thing for classic names. They're just as if not more aspirational than Diamond.
1
I would say that a criterion for classic names is that they transcend social barriers and don't have the pretense that they belong anywhere, specifically "above" others.
I have no problems picturing a Sarah or a Jonathan from a poor or rich background. They don't suggest any particular class to me since they're used so broadly on every level of society. I think that is also why it is never a bad choice to use a name like this, as such a name could never seem out-of-place.
I have no problems picturing a Sarah or a Jonathan from a poor or rich background. They don't suggest any particular class to me since they're used so broadly on every level of society. I think that is also why it is never a bad choice to use a name like this, as such a name could never seem out-of-place.
This message was edited 7/29/2015, 5:23 PM
1
"Out of place" names
I love seeing names like this. Is that just me? I get super excited when a name is completely unexpected.
I love seeing names like this. Is that just me? I get super excited when a name is completely unexpected.
1
I can and do deny that poorer people are always trying to sound rich, and that that is why they name their children after luxury items. Here are my theories...
I think it would explain that trend better, to suppose that they name their children after luxury items they don't have, because they want to allude to the desired extreme value of the child as a human being, which is only metaphorically like a luxury item ... shiny, inaccessible things used as names symbolize spiritual richness, the deserving of quality and admiration, instead of being simply meant to refer to literal objects of material value.
I don't know that that is really why, because I have no inclination to name a child Armani or Chardonnay and it does sound tacky to me. But it makes a lot more sense to me than your explanation. I mean, I'd love to have twelve weeks of vacation but that doesn't at all make me think Holiday is a good name for my child ... but I could imagine someone naming a baby Holiday to, say, express the idea that she made every day special ... and I don't think poor people are more materialistic than rich ones. That makes no sense at all.
I kind of agree about affluent people using "apart" names and wanting to avoid trendy popular names, however I don't think that is a sign of high class. It's a sign of middle class ... striving to assert importance and specialness. Dropping names that get popular = insecure striving to not seem mediocre = middle class. I think people who are very socially privileged and not just affluent, still choose names that are either traditional - demonstrating that they value the culture in which they feel important - or creative, because they believe in the value of their creativity to their culture, and feel no threat from the disapproval or judgment of people reading their resumes etc.
I think it would explain that trend better, to suppose that they name their children after luxury items they don't have, because they want to allude to the desired extreme value of the child as a human being, which is only metaphorically like a luxury item ... shiny, inaccessible things used as names symbolize spiritual richness, the deserving of quality and admiration, instead of being simply meant to refer to literal objects of material value.
I don't know that that is really why, because I have no inclination to name a child Armani or Chardonnay and it does sound tacky to me. But it makes a lot more sense to me than your explanation. I mean, I'd love to have twelve weeks of vacation but that doesn't at all make me think Holiday is a good name for my child ... but I could imagine someone naming a baby Holiday to, say, express the idea that she made every day special ... and I don't think poor people are more materialistic than rich ones. That makes no sense at all.
I kind of agree about affluent people using "apart" names and wanting to avoid trendy popular names, however I don't think that is a sign of high class. It's a sign of middle class ... striving to assert importance and specialness. Dropping names that get popular = insecure striving to not seem mediocre = middle class. I think people who are very socially privileged and not just affluent, still choose names that are either traditional - demonstrating that they value the culture in which they feel important - or creative, because they believe in the value of their creativity to their culture, and feel no threat from the disapproval or judgment of people reading their resumes etc.
This message was edited 7/29/2015, 1:43 PM
1
I think you've really got something here, but I honestly believe that, more than anything, people just like the names they choose. People from working class communities are the least inhibited when it comes to name choices, imho, and there's often a stronger sense of community than there is amongst other classes and they know that no one's going to judge them. In fact, the only people who are going to judge them, are delightful individuals such as Puck here, and those people are the exact people they want to metaphorically stick their middle finger up at and they want to rebel against. They don't want the middle and upper classes' approval and they're quite happy to rebel against them because of the way they've been oppressed by them in the past. The working classes are kept apart from the upper and middle classes and, you know what, they're gonna embrace it.
(I was very clearly raised in an anti-Thatcher family.)
1
You're equally delightful if I may say.
*gags*
*gags*
1
:)
1
Yeah. You know we "just like" names for some reasons, though - reasons we don't necessarily consciously think about.
I'm assuming that the connotations and oblique associations with things like Armani, Lexus, Chablis, or Diamond are roughly the same for people who use them as names, as they are for me. (I could be wrong! I'm not intending to speak for anyone, just to offer a more reasonable guess about it than Puck has.) Anyway if I set aside the "what, as a person's name?" reaction, and my annoyance at being programmed to recognize brand names and want costly things ... they can give me a magazine-ad type atmosphere-vibe that isn't tacky or materialistic, of serenity and dignity and pleasure and privilege, that is about as cliche and dreamy as that evoked by a name like Sebastian or Genevieve. lol
Rebellion, I dunno ... It seems to me that it ought to be similar to, say, how Meadow is to hipsters. I agree that people who use a name, really honestly do think it's cool. They might also feel like it'd be uncool to use a name like Emily. But maybe not. More of a "if you don't see why it's cool, you're just a clueless tool I guess" attitude, rather than a "See how I flip the bird to your judgment" kind of attitude. Like, maybe people aren't defiant about whether someone thinks the name is tacky - they really just don't know or they don't care, or they figure that someone who'd judge them negatively for their name is too shallow and low-class to worry about.
Again, I don't know ... just going on an assumption that other people are more like me than unlike me.
I'm assuming that the connotations and oblique associations with things like Armani, Lexus, Chablis, or Diamond are roughly the same for people who use them as names, as they are for me. (I could be wrong! I'm not intending to speak for anyone, just to offer a more reasonable guess about it than Puck has.) Anyway if I set aside the "what, as a person's name?" reaction, and my annoyance at being programmed to recognize brand names and want costly things ... they can give me a magazine-ad type atmosphere-vibe that isn't tacky or materialistic, of serenity and dignity and pleasure and privilege, that is about as cliche and dreamy as that evoked by a name like Sebastian or Genevieve. lol
Rebellion, I dunno ... It seems to me that it ought to be similar to, say, how Meadow is to hipsters. I agree that people who use a name, really honestly do think it's cool. They might also feel like it'd be uncool to use a name like Emily. But maybe not. More of a "if you don't see why it's cool, you're just a clueless tool I guess" attitude, rather than a "See how I flip the bird to your judgment" kind of attitude. Like, maybe people aren't defiant about whether someone thinks the name is tacky - they really just don't know or they don't care, or they figure that someone who'd judge them negatively for their name is too shallow and low-class to worry about.
Again, I don't know ... just going on an assumption that other people are more like me than unlike me.
This message was edited 7/29/2015, 5:16 PM
1
Sebastien is having some popularity where I live, hyphenated, even. Jean-Sebastien, Leo-Sebastien, Olivier-Sebastien, which is quite a lot of name to yell at a kid venturing too near the street.
1
Meadow is not just pretty to hipsters... wait, am I a hipster? Pretty sure I can't afford to be hip. lol.
I do agree with this though. I don't think the average person is naming their children out of defiance, but rather out of a personal perception of what is valuable, classy or just sounds swell.
I think it's safe to remember that most people just don't do research on names like we namenerds do. They find something that appeals for one reason or another and roll with it.
I do agree with this though. I don't think the average person is naming their children out of defiance, but rather out of a personal perception of what is valuable, classy or just sounds swell.
I think it's safe to remember that most people just don't do research on names like we namenerds do. They find something that appeals for one reason or another and roll with it.
1
Well, hipster for lack of a better word. My understanding of what a hipster is, is distorted because I'm in the wrong generation. I mean, the contemporary equivalent of co-opted hippie culture ... Meadow is like Summer circa 1970, or like River circa 1990 ... I dunno. Nature names are hip and Meadow is just about the most over-the-top pastoral image, especially as a name for a city dweller. I don't mean hipster in an insulting way at all.
It's interesting that people "rolling with it" is still resulting in diversification, though - at least some demographics do seem to be consistently looking up names on the internet, and so they kinda do collect info about them more than they used to. Or maybe it's not that ... but where else are they getting new ideas. It's all I can think of.
It's interesting that people "rolling with it" is still resulting in diversification, though - at least some demographics do seem to be consistently looking up names on the internet, and so they kinda do collect info about them more than they used to. Or maybe it's not that ... but where else are they getting new ideas. It's all I can think of.
This message was edited 7/30/2015, 11:47 AM
1
I really like the way you're looking at this and analysing it, haha. It fascinates me the way all of these different elements interplay and affect the choices people make. I guess we can analyse it until the cows come home, but we don't really have a definitive answer I agree that it's often that people don't know or don't care, though, and honestly I just think, "more power to them". I'm certainly not going to make judgements.
1
Jethro is not even in the top thousand and the last time it was was in 1913. So any claim that richer, more educated people are now becoming attracted to it has no basis. Personally I feel that its extreme hillbilly image is going to prevent it from gaining any popularity, but only time will tell.
1
I automatically think of the Beverly Hillbillies, which leads me to think of Petticoat Junction, which means I now have the theme song to that show stuck in my head. . . and images of the Gabor sisters and their lovely accents.
And I always mix up the Gabor sisters and Charo, too.
Great, now all I can think about is the movie Thumbelina, and Charo singing "on the Road"...
geez, what Jethro will do to you. ;)
And I always mix up the Gabor sisters and Charo, too.
Great, now all I can think about is the movie Thumbelina, and Charo singing "on the Road"...
geez, what Jethro will do to you. ;)
1
You are such a snob. I like how you put your own favourites as names more "affluent" people use. Ha!
1
1
Hahaha! Oh, that is perfect (purrfect?)!
1
I totally question that "poorer people are always trying to sound rich". Do you have some sort of statistic to back this up, or is it something you just want to believe? What you are saying more indicates that rich people want to sound rich, rather than that poor people want to sound rich.
This message was edited 7/29/2015, 12:38 PM
1
Nobody has taste in names like I do. My preferences are far superior to others. So, clearly I agree with you.
Just kidding ;)
(I still agree with you, though)
Just kidding ;)
(I still agree with you, though)
1
Agreed!
You have articulated this much better than I could have. It really wasn't until I came to this site that I saw people equating names with "class", and it's still weird to me.
You have articulated this much better than I could have. It really wasn't until I came to this site that I saw people equating names with "class", and it's still weird to me.
This message was edited 7/29/2015, 12:26 PM
1