What’s in a name?

Watching the nightly network newscasts this week has me wondering who really won the U.S. Revolutionary War some 235 years ago. Somewhere the ghost of Cornwallis smirks as Americans fawn over the heir to the British throne. A KING! HE WILL BE A KING!

Despite our protestations those centuries ago, Americans then and now still like the idea of a civilized famous person to make decisions for us. The presidency has become a sort of temporary monarchy, and we still debate who is the “One True King” of baseball, auto racing or late night television.

But why fight it any longer? Wills and Kate are considering names for their new baby boy, who will one day pretend to lead the British Empire. GQ wrote a guide for naming babies that matches my views precisely, a fact reflected in the names of my boys, Henry, Douglas and George — each of which would thrill me to see attached to the new royal baby. You know, for kicks.

Someone once told us that our boys’ names sounded like “old man names.” Well, we replied, that was the goal. We’re naming men, not boys. How would it look on a bridge, a building or a book jacket? Will it cause them to have to fight their way out of childhood, a la Johnny Cash’s “Boy Named Sue?” These are all factors to consider.

(h/t C.J. Anderson)

UPDATE: The new prince’s name is George Alexander Louis of the House of Windsor. So, Prince George, the future King. Ought to open up some college nickname opportunities for our son, George of the House of Brown.

Speak Your Mind


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.