View Message

Tongue firmly in editorial cheek for quite a few, IMO!

---

Girls

---

Amanda - really? Not Alice, Alison, Ann or Anne?
Beatrice - yeah, maybe.
Catherine - right.
Daphne - eh? I know many more Dorothy people: perhaps they aren't posh enough.
Edwina - right.
Frances - OK; not much competition among F names!
Grace - once again, where's the competition?
Harriet - right.
Imogen - right.
Jemima - maybe.
Katherine - right.
Lucy - not just the posh, but maybe also them.
Margaret - yes, probably.
Nancy - like Frances and Grace, what else is there?
Olivia - maybe.
Poppy - no, surely? 1920s fluff and millennial trendy, but not a lot in between.
Quintana - giggle! Well, they couldn't very well use Queenie!
Rosemary - right.
Sarah - same as Lucy: pretty universal and that includes the posh.
Tracy - bwah-ha-ha!
Ursula - at least they didn't try to fit Unity in ...
Victoria - yeah, with Lucy, Rosemary and Sarah.
Willa - perhaps Wendy was too down-market for the Tatler?
Xanthe - nonsense
Yseult - nonsense
Zara - nonsense

---

Boys

---

Albert
Benjamin
Charles
David
Edward
Francis
Giles
Henry
Inigo - possible I suppose; I'm sceptical.
Jonathan - oh right, not a James or a John in sight, much less a Julian.
Kenneth
Lionel
Miles
Nathaniel - more Yank than Brit, I'd imagine.
Oliver
Patrick
Quentin
Rupert
Sebastian
Thomas
Unwin - nonsense
Vere - nonsense
William
Xerxes - worse than nonsense: fake sense!
Youngblood - oh, please.
Zach - I will dispute that one with my dying breath.

---

All the other male names are pretty bog-standard and/or thrown in because of the authors having painted themselves into a corner labelled ALPHABET.