Tuesday, 10 January 2012

What’s in a name?

Quite a lot, I reckon. During the course of writing my own manuscript, I changed the names of major – and many minor – characters several times. I found that as their personalities developed, they often outgrew the names I had initially thought were perfect for them.

I’m not sure what this says about me, but I find names very important when I’m reading a novel. Those that I don’t like will simply jar on me throughout. For example, I read a book last week, which had the main protagonist as a ‘Bernard’. I simply couldn’t get on with it – resorting by the finish, to giving my poor, beleaguered Bernard a French spin in an attempt to lend him the charisma that his character so called for.

Would I treasure Pride & Prejudice quite as much had Fitzwilliam Darcy been plain old George Smith? Austen’s brilliance would always lead me to say yes, but I’m grateful I don’t have to ponder it. For me, a great character name should be unique, age and period appropriate – and one that suits their personality to such an extent that they become almost like a living relative.

I’m sorry, Bernard, but alas I fear we are destined to remain casual acquaintances. 


  1. I'm with you. Bernard only makes me think of (holy--hah!)dogs with casks of booze on their collars. I'm equally down on Bernie, for smarmier reasons. I just can't see any good coming from a man named Bernie.

    (Also, sending you an award! Glad to see you're stick kicking around! http://amalieberlin.blogspot.com/2012/02/7-x-7-blog-award.html)

  2. Hey Amalie!
    Great to hear from you – and thanks so much for the award! It was a lovely surprise when I woke up this morning!!!
    Nadia x