“NAME THIS CHILD”

Evening Star, Issue 20138, 1 April 1929, Page 7

“NAME THIS CHILD”

A LIFETIME'S LABEL CHANGING FASHIONS. “U hat's in a namer 1 “ Lots,” emphatically says the small boy lit school whose doubtless well-meaning lint obviously thoughtless parents have christened him Napoleon Sebastian. It would not bo so bad if his surname was in with these grandiloquent appellations, but as it happens to bo Smithy well—there is nothing more to lie said. A boy at school cannot possibly hide his Christian names, and parents should take this into consideration when deciding the momentous question as to what the latest arrival shall bo called. Care, too, should be exercised when it comes to having a girl, if, for instance, she is called Lorraine or Pcronno, as some unfortunates have been, the date of her birth is immediately set down beyond any question as somewhere between 1914 and 1918. Hence, m 1950 it will ho quite useless lor Miss Lorraine Jones or for Miss Peronno Brown to confess to only twenty-five summers, for her name will reveal to anyone capable of doing a simple sum of mental arithmetic that she has seen .some thirty-live of them.

Before the proverbial stork sots out on liis expected visit there is usually much family speculation and confabulation as to what the little stranger shall be called, with due allowance for the delightful uncertainly as to tlio sex of the one to be named. Matters arc sometimes complicated by the fact that there is a rich uncle or aunt who, with a view to the future, must be placated, and in that casi the unfortunate infant subsequently wakes • p to the fact that he or she has to go through life bearing such combination mimes as Clarence Hector Adolphus or Hester Georgina. But often when it comes to naming the baby there is no express need for remembering rich relatives and departed ancestirs; then it is that fancy runs riot, the helpless infant being labelled for Ilf? according to the whims of his or her parents. And one© done the damage is irrevocable. There is a fashion in names, especially in girls’ names. When Dickens wrote ‘ David Copperfield ’ ho did not know that he would make Dora the most popular girl’s name in England. Then came Tennyson’s “Maud,” and Mario Corelli’s novel ‘Thelma’ was responsible for the naming (and subsequent dating) of numerous of the fair

sex. The South African War and the Groat War wore responsible for the names of many boys who had the fortune or misfortune to bo born at that' time. French, Roberts, Kitchener,' Haig. Beatty, and a score or more hero names arc no.v carried by boys ■■ami young men who, if they expressed their thoughts aloud, would say that mother and dad should have had more souse.

If an inspection is made of school rolls of the present day much information can be gleaned as to the trend of fashion in names. Heroines of wellknown novels and cinema stars mo leaving their mark on the nomenclature of the rising generation. There aru Pearleen.s and Glorias, not to mention Lora, Susa, Mena, and Norleen. Gone, apparently are the old-fashioned names like Lucy, Ellen, Martha, Fanny, *and Tillie, although the Duchess of York has put Elizabeth and Betty into favour. There arc very few Mauds to como into the garden, and olio may well echo “Alice! whore art thou?’’ At the present time it would seem as if Joan is one of the most popular of girls’ names.

As far as hoys are concerned, tho high-sounding aristocratic names ot twenty or more years ago have almost disappeared. Porcival, Reginald, Adolphus, Horace, Clarence, and Lionel will hardly figure at all on any school list, good old Saxon names taking their place. One boy in ten in these days seems to bo called John or Jack, William, Robert, James all following close on John’s heels, with Harold, Arthur, Fred, George, Thomas, and Alfred following up in the roar. Albert, Richard, Edward, and Charles seem to have gone out of favour of late. Many persons can tell of weird and’ fanciful names which they have been called upon to bestow upon the little bundle of humanity presented to them,' names . which through a little tactful suggestion on the parson’s part have iu tho end not been adopted. One local, instance will suffice. “ What arc you naming the little girl?” asked the officiating minister of tho parents just before the ceremony. “ Javelina Olympia ” was the reply, which somewhat staggered tho minister. Ho mildly, protested and asked why such names, tho explanation being elicited that tin* family had a representative who won a javelin event at the Olympic Gaines. Tact, however, prevented the life of the infant girl from being made miserable by her thoughtless parents, r •

she was eventually christened doer Olive, which seemed to satisfy overdone.

Biblical names are now quite out of favour. Luke, Matthew, and Mark are names seldom bestowed, and even Peters and Pauls are not as common as they used to be. To find an Eve, a Sarah, a Bachoh or a Miriam on a school list is uncommon, Ruth, perhaps, being the chief surviving Biblical name for girls with the exception of Mary. ~