Posts on stupid parents

Fuse #8 linked to these lists of the Hottest Baby Names of 2008, per Parents.com. (And while you're there, check out the whiteness of all those babies pictured! Not an Aaliyah among them, I bet.)

One thing that struck me, perusing the Top 50 lists, is how many names appeared on both lists. Eight of fifty are, based on popularity, gender-neutral. And I'm guessing that if you looked at the Top 100, you'd find a bunch more. Here are the eight:

• Avery (#15 girls/#13 boys)
• Riley (#16/#15)
• Dylan (#26/#23)
• Logan (#27/#24)
• Hayden (#35/#29)
• Bailey (#40/#31)
• Brooklyn (#41/#33)
• Taylor (#46/#35)

I have to admit, I'm a fan of gender-neutral names. I can't fully articulate why. My reasons range from thinking, "What if someday I have a child with ambiguous genitalia?" (yes, I really do ask myself these questions) to remembering how much I despised my own name when I was a kid (sorry, Mom). I never felt like a "Lisa," which struck me as a very delicate, feminine name. I wasn't pretty; I didn't want a pretty name.

I remember being thrilled in fourth grade when, in a musical, I got to choose a name for my character. I chose "Leslie"—which has lost popularity as a boys' name in the past couple decades but historically is gender-neutral. (Not that I was thinking of it that way at the time.) At one Scout camp I worked at, I went by "Wishbone," after the cook in Rawhide. At another, "Pete." Sometimes I still forget, when people say "Lisa," they're talking about me.

In one of my novel manuscripts, the main character has a gender-neutral name. The few people who read the first draft came back to me and said, "Hey, I didn't know until page eight that Colby was a girl. Was that intentional?" Actually, Holly Black, who critiqued my first ten pages at the Wisconsin SCBWI conference, said something to the effect of, "For the first eight pages, I thought Colby was a boy—and a real asshole!" And she was totally right. As a girl, Colby was merely angry; as a boy, Colby was a first-class jerk. I ended up revising the second paragraph to include a gender reference, clearing up the confusion and exonerating Colby of asshole-ism.

Not that it always matters. A friend pointed me to Fish, by L. S. Matthews. The story is told in first person by a completely gender-ambiguous narrator. The narrator is referred to only as "you," "Tiger," or "the child." A very rare thing, no? I think I've seen some first-person picture books with gender-ambiguous narrators, but they're definitely in the minority, especially when illustrations come into the mix. Can you think of any?

One more thing about these "hot" baby names—the obsession with Aidan is getting on my nerves. Check out these names from the boys' list:

• Aidan (#1)
• Jayden (#2)
• Caden (#6)
• Peyton (#17)
• Hayden (#29)
• Brayden (#37)

Am I the only one who thinks this is a little silly? I mean, we're naming babies, not playing the Name Game, right? I half expected Bananafanafofaden to make the list.

Ooo, some parents make me so mad!

Tonight I was walking through the junior high section when I overheard an exchange between a mom and her daughter, who appeared to be about twelve years old. The girl had picked out a book from the S.A.S.S. series.

Mom said, "That looks a little too snacky. Let's look for something else. Let's see, have you ever read any Virginia Woolf?"

Alternate-Universe Me snatched the S.A.S.S. book from Mom's disapproving fingers and whacked her over the head with it. Respect-Patrons'-Privacy Me walked away seething.

What is it about free reading that some parents don't understand? What's wrong with "snacky"? Why must reading be a chore?

Author Shannon Hale has a nice article in the October School Library Journal about how assigned reading (including Virginia Woolf) temporarily destroyed her love of reading, though she didn't realize it at the time. Alternate-Universe Me would have strapped this mom to a chair and made her read the article.

This story has a slightly more satisfying conclusion than I would have expected, however. A few minutes after my eavesdropping, the girl and her mother came to the desk asking for diary/memoir recommendations (Mom's idea again). The girl had, of course, returned the S.A.S.S. book to the shelf, but at least she'd replaced it with some other good books actually written for people her age. Still, Alternate-Universe Me couldn't help manifesting for a second.

Me: Oh! You decided not to take the S.A.S.S. book?
Girl: Um, no. I changed my mind.
Mom, to girl: Why was that?
Girl: Um, that was the book you said looked like a 'TV book.'
Mom: It did look like a 'TV book.'
Me: They're definitely not 'TV books.' In fact, those books are really interesting and fun. They're all written by authors who have special knowledge of the countries they take place in. They're a window into another culture.
[That's right, spread it on thick...]
Mom: Do you want to go back and get it, honey?
Girl: Um, no, that's OK.

I console myself that maybe next time they're here, when the girl picks up an S.A.S.S. book, Mom will say OK. If only the same could be said for any book that girl picks out.

ETA, 10/23/08:
For the record, I can only guess at what "TV Book" was supposed to mean. Did they mean a book based on a TV show? Did they mean a book that "rots the brain"? Regardless: HMMMPH!