Apparently, my mother and father were way ahead of their time when they decided to name me Joie (pronounced “Joey”) almost thirty years ago. And don’t get me started on hyphenating the Jager and the Hyman back in 1978—that was really radical.
The result was a very distinctive moniker. One might even call it Google gold. Because of the nature of my profession and the prominent role that internet search databases play in building a reputation, “Joie Jager-Hyman” has become more than just my name. At some level, “Joie Jager-Hyman” is also my brand.
And if the skyrocketing popularity of baby naming books, websites and consulting services are any indication, it seems that millions of parents would agree. We are in the midst of a national baby naming bonanza.
New York Times columnist, David Brooks, commented on this phenomenon last week. Citing research that demonstrates a trend in which parents are becoming less likely to choose common names for their children, he writes, “Name conformity peaked around World War II. Since then parents have been more and more likely to seek out the unusual.”
A June Wall Street Journal article on the business of baby-naming also provides some more evidence:
**”baby names” was in the top 10 generic internet search terms in 2006–right up there with basic information like “weather” and “maps.”
**80 baby name books have been published in the last three years alone, compared with just 50 books published between 1990 and 1996.
**thousands of parents-to-be are paying somewhere between $35 and $500 for customized lists of baby names and other consultation services like numerology tests on various names.
Why is this expertise and information in such high demand? Baby naming has turned into a high stakes “individuality” contest. It started with celebrities giving their kidz unusual names like Rumor (Demi Moore and Bruce Willis’s daughter), Apple (Gweneth Paltrow’s and Chris Martin’s little girl), and–my personal favorite–Kyd (David Duchovny and Téa Leoni’s son).
Creative celebrity baby names seem to say to the world “I am different, and my baby is different.”
(How else can you explain why Nicolas Cage named his son, Kal-el, after a Superman character?)
The baby naming megatrend has caught on outside of Hollywood.
Babynames.com made $1.2 million last year and approximately 600,000 people visit Babynamesworld.com each day. Moms and dads who want a more “scientific” approach to originality are drawn to the Baby Name Wizard, which uses oodles of name-related data and customized computer models to provide parents with ideas and information about all things BABY and NAME.
Unique baby naming is now a lucrative business sought out by non-celeb baby-makers as a way to tell the world that their baby has arrived.
But I have to ask–what does this baby name bonanza mean for the next generation of babies being born today?
Though this frenzied obsession with “individuality” is reminiscent of other crazy child-rearing trends, this particular phenomenon seems to be all about marketing our children. The only problem is that children are not products.
We’re not just brining up baby anymore, we seem to be branding baby as well.
I guess it’s a good thing that “Joie Jager-Hyman” is already taken.
As a fellow hyphenated baby, but perhaps not as far ahead of my time (1980), I have to say that I’m a big fan. Then again, my job requires that I get my unique moniker out there as much as possible.
This connects to the issue of teenagers becoming adults and having their MySpace and Facebook profiles coming back to haunt them. If you have a Googleable name, you’re more likely to have a trail following you around from your youth. I know I can never quite rid myself of sites that I was identified with as a teenager, even if they don’t have anything incriminating.
If we all have Googleable names and are yet unable to control what pops up for us on Google, are we moving towards a society where everyone’s private persona is a little too public for comfort? In ten years, will children named Sarah Jones and John Cooper be super grateful to their parents for their generic names in the same way I’m super grateful for my unique one?
I think that’s a really good point, Ethan–”unique” names are much easier to track down, for better or worse. Anonymity can have its perks and perhaps the John Does of the future might appreciate their names more than little Kal-el et al.
Still, I wonder about the dangers of approaching the process of naming a person in a way similar to that of marketing a product.
Well, it’s the era of spin, right? I mean, in an age where substance is sublimated to the packaging you put around it, it seems like a necessary evil to treat yourself and maybe even your children that way. I don’t endorse it, but I understand it.
Although you name was chosen for very personal reasons I am glad that were able to help you develop your brand. But of course what’s in a name?
You hit the nail on the head when you stated that “children are not products”.
I think a lot of this has to do with the pervasive celebrity under which we live – we all want to be (or for our kids to be) “special” and to stand out somehow.
I’m all for unique names – but some of the ones I’ve heard in recent years (Kal-el, Pilot Inspektor, or any variation of common names spelled in difficult, ludicrous ways) are just awful. They don’t sound pleasant, they have no real meaning – they seem more for show than anything else.
The question of anonymity and your Internet past haunting you is an important one. Like you and Ethan, my whole name is pretty unique (mainly my last name), and when you Google me, I’m it. Honestly, I don’t want the same for my kids. My son has a very common name (his middle name, while foreign to Americans, is fairly common in the Spanish-speaking world), and I like that. I like his name is easy to pronounce, that it has familial history, and that he won’t be marked for life by a name that can’t be pronounced or spelled or that just sounds bad.
This just appeared on AOL tidbits – so it seems to be a worldwide issue.
Couple Tries to Name Baby ‘@’
AP
Posted: 2007-08-16 13:30:44
Filed Under: World News
BEIJING (Aug. 16) – A Chinese couple seeking a distinctive and modern name for their child chose the commonly used Internet ‘at’ symbol, much to the consternation of Chinese officials.
The unidentified couple and the attempted naming were cited Thursday by a Chinese government official as an example of bizarre names creeping into the Chinese language.
The father “said ‘the whole world uses it to write e-mails and translated into Chinese it means ‘love him,’”‘ Li Yuming, the vice director of the State Language Commission, said at a news conference.
The symbol pronounced in English as ‘at’ sounds like the Chinese phrase “love him.”
Written Chinese does not use an alphabet but is comprised of characters, sometimes making it difficult to develop new words for new or foreign things and ideas.
In their quest for a different name, Li said that the parents of baby ‘@’ were not alone. As of last year, only 129 surnames accounted for 87 percent of all surnames in China, Li said, suggesting that the uniformity drove people to find more individual given names.
Photo Gallery: Baby Naming Gone Wild
AP Earlier this year, New Zealand blocked a couple’s bid to officially name their infant son 4Real, saying numerals are not allowed in names. His parents plan to name him Superman instead.
1 of 8
“There was even a ‘Zhao-A,’ a ‘King Osrina’ and other extremely individualistic names,” Li said, according to a transcript of the news conference posted on the government’s main web site, http://www.gov.cn.
Li did not say whether police, who are the arbiters of names because they issue identity cards, rejected baby ‘@’ and the others. But nationwide last year there were 60 million people’s names that used “unfamiliar characters,” Li said.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
2007-08-16 09:31:40
Wow! That article is insane. What’s next? Someone naming their kid “The Child Formerly Called @?”
And Terre, thank you so much for your comment! I do agree that there is some value in anonymity–which is probably going to increase as personal information becomes more available on the internet.
I wrote another Kidz Today column a few weeks ago about Facebook and My Space that talked about the dangers of having an adolescence online. Here’s the link if you want to check it out:
http://www.crucialminutiae.com/?p=304
This reminds me of VH1’s show — Awesomely Wacky Celebrity Baby Names.
As a girl with the most generic, Jewish name in the world I am like the least findable person on the web. So not fun.
The one that amazed me most was the Chinese couple that wanted to name their child “@”. They’re like Prince.
http://www.insidefatherhood.com/the-perils-of-baby-naming/
[...] idea of s0mething different was also appealing. Joie over at Crucial Minutiae has an interesting article about baby naming and says that it “has turned into a high stakes ‘individuality’ contest.” [...]
Maybe this is not true for all parents, but I’d like to think that naming a baby, whatever the actual name may be (common, unique, symbols,) is really the first thoughtful gift parents give to their newborns. Perhaps I am too naive but I find it interesting that you believe a parent wanting a child to have some individuality in his or her name is considered a “frenzied obsession”.
In a world where we have too many children neglected, abused and/or abandoned by their parents, this “frenzied obsession” seems pretty harmless.
Thanks “Mom of the…” for your comment.
It is important to remember that so many children are abused and neglected in this world, and I appreciate your bringing that up.
However, the point of this column was to a) address a significant trend, using evidence of the popularity of baby-naming books, websites etc and b) to raise questions about the implication of marketing and/or branding our children.
Most of the sources I read made a direct connection between the baby-naming trend (giving examples about how parents are–yep–frenzied, obsessed and stressed out over baby names) and the rise of google.
I wanted to explore how technological changes influence parenting, for better or worse. I think there’s enough evidence to raise these questions when you look at the trends. Parents are acting much differently than they have been in the past when it comes to naming their children and an entire baby-naming industry has risen up to cater to them.
In short: I think it’s still a legitimate topic for a weekly column.
Sorry Joie- I convinced my friends to call their daughter Joie (short for Johanna). I’ve made your name a little less unusual, but it was somewhat in your honor- they were unhappy about calling a girl Joey so I suggested the spelling, having gotten it from you. On behalf of Joie Ry Greenberg, thank you Joie Jager-Hyman’s parents! If it weren’t for you, they might have called her Shea (for the Stadium). On another note, I spent some time looking at the social security name lists, and noticed that some names became drastically more popular thanks to celebrities with formerly unusual names. For instance- Ethan became popular the year Dead Poets Society came out. Ironically, having a name as a brand is likely to make it less unique. That said, at least you’re identifiable. Try googling Erica Schwartz
wow, Erica! I am truly honored that you were inspired to pass along my (somewhat?) unusual name to your friends! There should definitely be more Joie’s in the world!
The only other Joie I know of is Joie Chen, a CNN news anchor.
I hope to someday be able to meet little miss Joie Ry Greenberg!