Do you think some dated names are more loved than other dated names?

[oldnorsesaga]

Kind of weird theoretical question.
do you think, among general population, some people love some dated names more than others?
For example, Julia is dated, but people like it more than Sandra, because it is romantic and has some quality in sound which makes people like Julia over other dated names
or when people disliked Gladys more than Edith, so Gladys is still not revived, while some Victorian names are back, and some people like Enid as well.

what would be your dated names everyone loves, but you find dreadful? It can be revived name.

Anything ‘classic’ always stands a better chance of a comeback. Julia is Shakespearean. Sandra is gimmicky and of its time only.
That’s why Arthur is back and Barry isn’t.

To answer your question. I can’t stand Noah! Doesn’t get more dated than that.
I think Susan is well overdue for a revival.

Yeah - I'm really interested in why so many granny names are back, but not Mary. I'm guessing it's the religious connotation - but then, why not Abigail, or Tabitha, or even Elizabeth?

That said: I'm not sorry that Mildred and Gertrude haven't had a comeback!

I don't really understand what it is about sounds that makes some "pretty" and some not, and also how it happens that the whole population changes the names they like in waves. People think they are choosing names they love but really they are subject to cultural influences that they seem quite unaware of.

For example the war and postwar years had a fashion for plain serviceable girls' names - Jean, Joan, Mavis, Jill. Yet every parent choosing those names would have loved the sound of those names. Then in my generation names like Karen, Sharon, Tracey, Pauline - "modern" names - abounded. But my generation called their girls things like Maya, Mia, Amelia, Ava, Eva, Evie. Again, thinking how lovely such names are, but in 30 years I think those names will sound very old fashioned again.

Then what is it about Alison that is old fashioned, but Alice less so? Louise firmly 1970s, but Eloise or Louisa more current? Helen a 60s name, but Eleanor perennial? Edna absolutely horrible, but Edina rather lovely?

Anyone understand how all this works?

@TallandSkinny People want lovely, but underused names... so trends come and go because some names become overused, and it became overused because everyone think they are unique by choosing it, then realizing they were wrong after name becomes mass popular. And they choose names they already like or other people already like, but it sounds to them they are less popular.
Some trends are also influenced by movies and books. (Caspian for example)

I think Edith, Margot and Maggie are awful and cannot understand the appeal.

And Hazel, to me it’s a frumpy person with a bad perm.

Sandra has been used in U.K. since 13th century, as a name and a female name for Alexander

I think Julia and Sandra are quite different names

Julia has a long literary tradition, Sandra is a pet form of Alexandra (a classic like Julia) but in itself became faddy/fashionable in the mid 20th century like say Denise and Dawn and Tracy, so fell into a group of names that were fairly quickly seen as low end. That’ll change I am sure but needs more time.

It’s true not all names get revived though - I’m always surprised Thora hasn’t been. Gladys I can see sounds quite harsh. Mary I think it’s because of the very strong religious associations.

@TallandSkinny

I think it’s partly just cycles but it’s also what’s going on for that generation. Post war/mid century I think we had a lot of faith in the future so a batch of snappy shortish practical sounding names, some without much history, were appealing.

Now I think we’re pretty terrified of the future so cottage core type names are appealing (you can see the Victoriana is now extending into 30s type names and I’m sure Jane, Peter, Janet and John won’t be long - Joan and Jean are already around). I think the fashion for nature names is the same - it’s comfort.

Interesting. Some names are classic and still disliked, like Deborah for example. It's as classic as it gets but isn't used much anymore. Also Harold.

It’s also associations with people I think. Julia Robert’s is beautiful and a widely known woman, even if just in the back of your mind. So the connotation is positive.

Someone posted the name Doris recently and there quite a few negative comments. But that’s no worse or better than Grace, Lily etc.

Names such as Harry, and George were once considered really old fashioned.

TV programmes can definitely influence names, and Downton Abbey made Sybil and Cora more acceptable.

I actually love most of the old names. I find once you meet someone with one who isn't elderly you quite quickly fall in love with it. It becomes cute, classic and interesting all at once. Names like.... Beatrice, Miriam, Betty, Mary. I will however, never love Maud. It's sound so drab and ugly.

I can’t stand Cora, Hazel or Maud. Which just autocorrected to Maudlin.
Noah and Jonah are pretty depressing.

I do like Lettice, Jane, Elijah and Samson.

Is Julia dated? I think it’s a name that’s been used throughout history, whereas names like Tracey and Leanne are dated because they’re more attached to a specific decade, so if you met a Leanne you could guess they were probably born in the 70’s/80’s or a Tracey would most likely be 60’s.

Lettice? Dunno if this is a joke, I'm stupid and it is a real name or the best vegan name ever lol

@VeggiJ it is a real name :)

I think it is when a name becomes popular over a short period of time. If you grow up with 5 people with the same name in one class you are going to go for something different for your own children.

In the 1970s it was virtually law for each family to have a Simon or a David and a girl with Louise as a middle name.

I blame Rodger Moore for the sudden popularity of Simon due to the TV series 'the saint'.

Neils were almost all born shortly after the moon landings.

I've met a Lettice, she was rather old and this was in the 1980s.

It can be pronounced like the leaf but also like let-eesh like Leticia without the a.

In my family tree there is a 'Squire'.

I think it's curious that Maeve is super popular but Mavis is hated. Personally I hate both.

I prefer Gladys by far to Edith / Edie / Enid. The latter sound so ugly to me, but Gladys has "Glad" in it which makes me think of happiness. I quite like Doris too because I think of the beautiful Doris Day.

Agnes seems relatively liked but I hate the Ag sound in any name. I like Shirley but it doesn't get much love on here.

I too find this fascinating. Also the way that two names that sound very similar phonetically can have completely different vibes as names, while two very different sounding names can have the same 'feel'. I think that the way a name sounds plays quite a small part in people's perception of it, and it is almost entirely about the cultural associations that a name carries.

Poor Hazel.
I think it's a pretty name. I teach a lovely yr10 girl called Hazel. Ponytail, no perm.

I know a Thora! She really suits it

There's an element of people choosing their grandparents' names as well, I think.

I adore Gladys, I think it sounds both chic and happy, and makes me think of gladioli.

I really like Thora. I don’t see how it’s too out there as it’s similar to Flora and other similar sounding name.