Baby Name Survey: How important is "timelessness" when considering names for your child?

1. Timelessness is a quality I definately look for in names. I just think a name is something you're going to have for your whole life. I like names that transcend time. Name trends, like fashion trends, sort of fade out. And unlike a pair of legwarmers, you can't just chuck a name in the bag for the Salvation Army. A name is for life. I just figure, hey, 10 years down the road those names aren't going to be 'cute' and 'cool'. It's like the 60s kids with names like Sunshine, Petal and Peaceful. They were pretty groovy at the time, but as the kids grew up those names were considered outdated, weird and the byproduct of a hippy drug culture. I just wonder if in 10 years names how trendy names like Ryder, Kennedy and Madison will be considered. I like to think long term. Names like Catherine and James have been around for a long time - they're not names that are going to go 'out of style' because they're classics. I just like the security of timeless names. They're beautiful now and will be for decades to come.

Additionally, I find timeless names have generally prove themselves. If they've lasted the last century, they're likely last another. New names like Neveah haven't proven themselves to me yet.

2. I, personally love Timeless names and Classic comebacks. They're pretty similar to me - I think they can cross over. I think those names are generally really beautiful. And I can imagine them just as easily on a child, adult and senior citizen. I think that they're the most versatile - many can be sophisticated, intelligent, playful or charming. I think they're also the kind of names that endure. They're going to be just as great in 2070 as they are today.

3. I personally think Modern Trendy are the worst to go with. Firstly, I tend to dislike a lot of them - I don't like the way many of them sound. I want my child's name to be something I'll love forever. I'd fall out of love with trendy names just as quickly as I fell out of love with bellybutton rings, leggings and neon nailpolish.

I don't think the 'oddball' are that bad. I like some oddball names. Usually they have a story behind them. Its after something or somebody that means a lot to the parents. Or they've traditional cultural names (Greek, Turkish, Thai, whatever). They're not necessarily something I'd pick - I do lean more towards 'boring' and 'safe' names but I think they're fine.

The problem with 'ahead of the trend' name is that something can happen and you're totally off trend. And instead of names like Walter and Doris being the new Mackenzee and Greyson, it's, like, Gemmalynn and Candylee. But overall I'd prefer a lot of them to modern trendy names.

1. How important do you think timelessness/agelessness should be when considering names for a child?

I think that if they are timeless then it is an advantage, however, it really shouldn't matter. What should matter when naming your baby is that you love the name, it means something to you, and that it isn't stupid or something the kid will get bullied for. Agelessness isn't first priority for me.

2. Which of these categories of names do your favorites generally fall into? Which ones do you think make the best choices for a child?

a) Modern Trendy Names: Names that were either invented or discovered in our time. (examples: Madison, Peyton, Camryn, Nevaeh, Kayla, Caitlin, Brayden, Kade, Hunter, Riley, Cole)

b) Classic Comeback Names: Classic names that may have seemed "old-ladyish" or "old-mannish" a generation ago but are definitely back in style. They have the advantage of sounding stylish, but the disadvantage that if they once sounded like old-people names, they'll probably sound like old-people names again someday. (examples: Stella, Ruby, Hazel, Emma, Clara, Sophia, Eleanor, Henry, Jack, Julius, Zeke)

c) Ahead-of-the-Trend Names: Names that seem almost ready to come back in style but haven't quite yet. They currently seem "old-ladyish" or "old-mannish" to most, but choosing one of these could make you a trendsetter, and when your child is an old man, his name might sound younger than he is. (examples: Dorothy, Sylvia, Gloria, Lois, Ruth, Walter, Arthur, Lawrence, Gilbert)

d) Behind-The-Trend Names: Names that were most in style one or two generations ago. They might sound a bit dated, but they have the advantage of being very "normal" sounding while ensuring that your child won't be one of five in her kindergarten class. (examples: Jessica, Heather, Diane, Lisa, Cheryl, Brian, Scott, Eric, Todd, Jeremy, Jason)

e) Timeless Names: Names that have been in use relatively consistently for the last 100 years and can't be dated to a specific decade. (examples: Elizabeth, Katherine, Miriam, Rachel, Caroline, Lydia, James, William, Victor, Samuel, Grant)

f) Oddball Names: Names that are so uncommon they can't feel typical of any era and thus have some of the timelessness of the category above. (examples: Demetria, Rosamund, Evadne, Gawain, Abdiel, Piers)

B) Classic Comebacks probably, my kid's names are Jacob James and Lily Belle.

3. Which of those six categories above do you like least or think makes the worst choice for a child?

Oddball names, to be obvious, haha! They can be nice but often the parents just seem to be trying too hard.

Good survey!!

1. How important do you think timelessness/agelessness should be when considering names for a child?

Extremely important. Could you see a CEO of a Company named Kaedyn or Miley?

2. Which of these categories of names do your favorites generally fall into? Which ones do you think make the best choices for a child?

a) Modern Trendy Names: Names that were either invented or discovered in our time. (examples: Madison, Peyton, Camryn, Nevaeh, Kayla, Caitlin, Brayden, Kade, Hunter, Riley, Cole)

The only ones I like from a are Caitlin and Cole for a boy.

b) Classic Comeback Names: Classic names that may have seemed "old-ladyish" or "old-mannish" a generation ago but are definitely back in style. They have the advantage of sounding stylish, but the disadvantage that if they once sounded like old-people names, they'll probably sound like old-people names again someday. (examples: Stella, Ruby, Hazel, Emma, Clara, Sophia, Eleanor, Henry, Jack, Julius, Zeke)

I really like b. I adore the name Stella, and actually every name in there. I really like the classic comeback names.

c) Ahead-of-the-Trend Names: Names that seem almost ready to come back in style but haven't quite yet. They currently seem "old-ladyish" or "old-mannish" to most, but choosing one of these could make you a trendsetter, and when your child is an old man, his name might sound younger than he is. (examples: Dorothy, Sylvia, Gloria, Lois, Ruth, Walter, Arthur, Lawrence, Gilbert)

I like this category as well. The one I have to say I am not to keen on is Gilbert. Just something about it isn't appealing to me. I love Walter, my great-grandfather (well one of them) was named John Walter.

d) Behind-The-Trend Names: Names that were most in style one or two generations ago. They might sound a bit dated, but they have the advantage of being very "normal" sounding while ensuring that your child won't be one of five in her kindergarten class. (examples: Jessica, Heather, Diane, Lisa, Cheryl, Brian, Scott, Eric, Todd, Jeremy, Jason)

From Behind-The-Trend Names I like Jeremy. It's one of my favorites, the others sound too washed out to me. Nothing wrong with them, but they are a bit "safe".

e) Timeless Names: Names that have been in use relatively consistently for the last 100 years and can't be dated to a specific decade. (examples: Elizabeth, Katherine, Miriam, Rachel, Caroline, Lydia, James, William, Victor, Samuel, Grant)

I think I found my style. I love every single name. I adore all of the names you listed.

f) Oddball Names: Names that are so uncommon they can't feel typical of any era and thus have some of the timelessness of the category above. (examples: Demetria, Rosamund, Evadne, Gawain, Abdiel, Piers)

I love the names Rosamund and Demetria, but I don't think I would name my children them, it's not "safe" enough for me, haha.

So over-all, I go with the timeless names.

3. Which of those six categories above do you like least or think makes the worst choice for a child?

Category A. Although I do love the name Caitlin and the spelling and I really like Cole, people make bad choices when using those names. They end up naming their little girl Cole or Peyton or even Hunter. I had a girl in my class this passed year named Hunter Taylor. What was her mother on!? So I would say every other category, except maybe f, is a safe one to go with. You're child will end up with a nice timeless name that they could land a good solid job with.

1. I think timelessness is very important when naming a child. And I agree with what you just said, I know I'd make a guess about their age based on their name.

2. My favorites usually fall into: e) Timeless Names: Names that have been in use relatively consistently for the last 100 years and can't be dated to a specific decade. (examples: Elizabeth, Katherine, Miriam, Rachel, Caroline, Lydia, James, William, Victor, Samuel, Grant)

3. Worst choice for a child: f) Oddball Names: Names that are so uncommon they can't feel typical of any era and thus have some of the timelessness of the category above. (examples: Demetria, Rosamund, Evadne, Gawain, Abdiel, Piers)

♥

1. I'd definitely take it into consideration, but I wouldn't necessarily reject a name just because it was very much of a certain period. I remember my best friend in primary school had a sister called Marilyn, and when I think about it, that was a bit of a frumpy and dated sort of name for the time, more suited to someone at least a generation older than her. And yet I don't remember her ever being teased about it, or ever having any comments on her name except positive ones. The glamor of Norma Jean Baker must have rubbed off on the name permanently!

2. I'd say my favorite names for girls are classic come-backs - the old-fashioned names that are now back in vogue. For boys, I'd say half of them are classic come-backs and the other half are oddball.

As to what makes a good choice for a name - well, timeless names are always a safe bet. Maybe even too safe? Unexciting, but they wear well and probably get better with age.

Classic come-backs seem really great at the moment, but maybe that's just because it's what fashionable right now. We'll have to wait and see how our kids' names seem in 30 years!

I think oddball names are great personally, and I really applaud parents who are bold enough to use them. In a way, they are timeless names as well - not classics, but the flip side of classic. Unlike the timeless names, they will never be dull. And although people keep commenting that oddball names will get teased/bullied and be unhappy, surveys show that owners of oddball names have relatively low levels of bullying and tend to have higher than average appreciation for their names.

3. Personally I loathe the modern trendy names - most of them have a really ugly sound and I don't think their appeal will last. They will become dated and almost immediately start sounding :old-fashioned". I would say this is the worst sort of name to give your child.

1. I don't think that timless/ageless names are THAT important. I can see the benefit from it though. I've never looked at my favorite names in that perspective (as in, what comes to mind to others on how old that person may be, just by hearing the name). I do prefer names such as Elizabeth and William. Both are names that you can imagine as a baby, child, adult and grandparents. But it's not a must in baby naming. A boy named Riley could probably pull it off as a CEO in his time.

2. My favorite names (Camilla, Grant, William, Elizabeth, Anna, Cara, etc.) definitely fall into Category E: Timeless Names. A few of my other favorites also fall into Category B: Classic Comeback Names.

I think the best choice for a child would have to be from Category E. I just think the names can really suit a child well and won't call attention for teasing, nor be plain or "following the crowd".

3. I don't think any of the six categories would be bad for a child. Every parent has different taste, along with different dreams for their child. It also depends on your culture, where you grow up and the area you live in. From the six, I'm not too fond of Category A: Modern Trendy Names (although I love Riley for a boy). They aren't that bad of names, just not my taste.

Very interesting survey!

=)

1. I think its somewhat important. I can see any name for pretty much any child but not all names age well. EX. Claudia, to me, sounds like an old women but is also cute on a little girl. Gracie is cute on a little girl but wont be when she grows up.

2. Alexis - a. modern trendy

Grace(for a middle name) - a. modern trendy. This was a hard one to put in a category!

Ella - b. classic comeback

Mary (for a middle name) - I think... e. timeless names

Maeve - c. ahead of the trend, i guess. this name has never been to popular.

Elizabeth(for a middle name) - e. timeless name

Reagan - a. modern trendy

Juliette - b. classic comeback, I think.

Gavin - a or b.

Liam - a - modern trendy

3.I think the worst is F. oddball names. Along with made up names I cant stand them! They drive me insane!!

PS. Its funny you used William and Elizabeth as examples of name that never go out of style, because those are my parents names! :)

First I have to say that my name is Greta and I'm not 90 LOL

1. How important do you think timelessness/agelessness should be when considering names for a child?

I don't care if its a "newer" or trendier sounding name, I think timeless classic names are whats important.

2. Which of these categories of names do your favorites generally fall into? Which ones do you think make the best choices for a child?

d) Behind-The-Trend Names: Names that were most in style one or two generations ago. They might sound a bit dated, but they have the advantage of being very "normal" sounding while ensuring that your child won't be one of five in her kindergarten class. (examples: Jessica, Heather, Diane, Lisa, Cheryl, Brian, Scott, Eric, Todd, Jeremy, Jason)

and also a bit of E. I love the names Hallie, Holly for girls, and William, Brandon for boys so I'd say a bit of both!

3. Which of those six categories above do you like least or think makes the worst choice for a child?

Choice A. Modern trendy names. I can't STAND them their horrible.

1. I think that it depends on the parent and how they feel. For instance, if you gave them a name that was unique when they were born, it will most likely be unique when they are older.However, I also like the names Joshua and Max which are popular. I think that it depends on how you look at things and your reasons for naming your child that matter.

2a) Modern Trendy Names: I think that it is fine. Society is constantly evolving. However, I do think that there has to be a balance between a modern or unique name and people pushing the boundaries too ar.

b) Classic Comeback Names: I think that it depends on the person and what you like. For instance, I have always liked Elizabeth ( though it’s always been around). If you like it, go for it? Everyone is different.

c) Ahead-of-the-Trend Names: again, I think that it depends on the person and their reasons for naming their child. If you like a name, why should there be a stigma attached to it?

For questions 2c-2e) pretty much the same answer as 2a and 2b

2f) uncommon names or names that don’t abide the norm are coming into popularity. I think a lot of it is influenced by celebrity. I like unique names.

3. To be honest, I think that it depends on the person. The argument against unique names is that the children will be teased- but kids are teased if their names are Joe! It depends on where you are and the culture that you live. I think that people are too judgemental when it comes to names.

Hope this helped. Though it was a great question.

1 - For me and my hubby, this was a big consideration. We wanted a name that would stand the test of time and might even be handed down to future children (either in full or part). Also, I think that we felt that if we chose a timeless classic, then our child would have a name that is cute for a child, but sophisticated enough for an adult...

2 - Again, just for us, category "e" is where my hubby and I find common ground... I do like names in most of the categories however... Also, I think that it is important that everybody find a name they like (as long as it isn't something that could end up being harmful for the child!)

3 - I like the "a" category the least overall... I find very little positive to say about many of these names...

1) My kids first names are more Modern/Trendy, but they all have traditional middle names to help the balance. There's Devon Henry, Logan James, and Hayden Richard--They all have a strong middle name to fall back on. I think it's important for the name to have balance above all else. If I were to name my daughter Elizabeth, I would make her middle name more 'trendy' Like, Elizabeth Riley.

2)My names typically, as you can see above, fall into the modern/trendy names. I know it will date my kids, but I don't think the Jennifer's or Jessica's mind that we can guess their age by their name.

I think it depends on the parents taste on what best suits the child. Either way, everyone is trying to choose the best name they can for their child.

3)Odd ball names are, by far, the worse choice for your child. I think made up names are the next big trend. People are so desperate to be 'different' they're going to great lengths to find a 'unique' name. Turns out, they're not that different after all- just part of another trend.