New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesLucille
I want to use the name Lucille in my book but to my knowledge it didn't come popular till 2000s excluding the peak in the early 20th century. She was born in 1996. I think Lucy was more popular,would that make more sense? Or was the name just not used?
Don't be ashamed of your story, because one day it will inspire others.
Don't be ashamed of your story, because one day it will inspire others.
1
Replies
To my knowledge, it was ranked at #1396 in 1996, so it seems just fine for that time period to me.
This message was edited 2/7/2015, 5:09 AM
1
#1396 is very low down the list. 119 girls were named Lucille in 1996, as opposed to over 25,000 Emilys and 24,000 Jessicas. It is certainly "possible," but in my opinion it would stand out as improbable and anachronistic for that time period. If I were to use Lucille for a fictional character born in 1996, I would probably feel obliged to give an explanation for its use. Perhaps this Lucille was named for a deceased but fondly remembered family member, or something like that.
1
...or her parents were well-read...?
1
It's not about being well-read. 1996 was the year I got married, and I'm pretty sure everyone my age knew about the name Lucille (because of Lucille Ball, if nothing else). Lack of familiarity was not the reason the name was not being used, it was that it was seriously out of fashion. Add to the image of Lucille Ball, which was very strong, the fact that most living Lucilles were between 60 and 90, and the vast majority of parents would have found the name totally unappealing at that time.
Lucy was not particularly popular in 1996 either, but it was being much more frequently used than Lucille and seemed much less dated.
Lucy was not particularly popular in 1996 either, but it was being much more frequently used than Lucille and seemed much less dated.
This message was edited 2/7/2015, 4:04 PM
1
I know this conversation may be old - but i agree with ClaudiaS... a reasonable explanation should be embedded into the story for a name that uncommon in 1996. A name past the 1000s would be totally normal today, since so many names are in use, many people are looking outside the norm (far more so than 20 years ago, and incredibly more so than 100 years ago).
As a suggestion - Lucille Ball was born in the town I grew up in. If you were to take a stat of names there, you would find that since her celebrity status, the name has never fallen out of the top 100 in that county. Tons of girls named Lucille there. That might be a good backstory.
As a suggestion - Lucille Ball was born in the town I grew up in. If you were to take a stat of names there, you would find that since her celebrity status, the name has never fallen out of the top 100 in that county. Tons of girls named Lucille there. That might be a good backstory.
This message was edited 2/11/2015, 8:42 AM
1
The 'net has certainly given us a larger pool of names to draw from.
1
By well-read, I meant more in touch with its history, euphony, etc. Not all parents are fashion-conscious when naming their offspring like they (more likely) might be in their clothing choices.
If a random fictional character can inspire breaks with tradition, so can a creative parent. Such a parent would have to be aware of names beyond the current "top 40;" a byproduct of being well-read. Your suggestion of being named for a relative is just as plausible (and could fit within this scenario).
We purposely set out to use more rare and invented names,* but with strong consideration of American English euphony (and likely nicknames). If they live to be 90, they will probably live through a number of naming trends before they are done.
*As our kids have aged, many of our given names have become slightly more common. SHILOH (1994-) [preceding Brangelina's baby by 12 years] is a good example. Her middle name, JOSHANA, is also the given name of an Indienne(?) athlete [Joshana Chinappa (1986-)] who didn't come into the public eye until 2003. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshna_Chinappa
If a random fictional character can inspire breaks with tradition, so can a creative parent. Such a parent would have to be aware of names beyond the current "top 40;" a byproduct of being well-read. Your suggestion of being named for a relative is just as plausible (and could fit within this scenario).
We purposely set out to use more rare and invented names,* but with strong consideration of American English euphony (and likely nicknames). If they live to be 90, they will probably live through a number of naming trends before they are done.
*As our kids have aged, many of our given names have become slightly more common. SHILOH (1994-) [preceding Brangelina's baby by 12 years] is a good example. Her middle name, JOSHANA, is also the given name of an Indienne(?) athlete [Joshana Chinappa (1986-)] who didn't come into the public eye until 2003. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshna_Chinappa
This message was edited 2/8/2015, 12:34 AM
1