View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

[Opinions] Re: Philadelphia
If we can use "Forever Amber" as a guide, the name was not considered especially unusual in Restoration England (that's around the 1660s.)
But obviously, its didn't last long.
I don't think it's usable. It's super-long, in terms of letter-count, as names go. And unless you're really attached to the city, it's liable to call cheesteaks, notoriously badly-behaved sports fans, or general dirtness to mind. (Many older guys around here who spent time in the city call it Filthadelphia. I can't say I've noticed that it's any dirtier than any other big city, but the tap water is famous for tasting bad.)Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, when you criticize him, you're a mile away and you have his shoes!
Steve Martin
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

Oh dear, one can definitely NOT use "Forever Amber" as a guide to names in Restoration England! The title character herself has a name which was probably completely nonexistent back then -- and even the explanation given in the book, that she was named Amber "because of the color of her eyes", is anachronistic, because "amber" was not used as a color term in English until 1735, while the character was supposedly born in 1644. Withycombe's "Dictionary of English Christian Names" does say that C. W. Bardsley claimed he had found 100 examples of woman named Philadelphia in the reign of James I, but that is of course a couple of generations before the Restoration, his reign being 1603-1625.

This message was edited 6/26/2023, 1:36 PM

vote up3