Everyone into the pool!
Now that 2006 is seeing itself out, it’s time to get down to the main business of the new year. In case any readers haven’t been paying much attention, we are expecting a baby sometime soon. Exactly how soon is a bit of mystery; Adam arrived 26 days in advance of his technical due date, taking us all by surprise, and although the new arrival’s official date is still four weeks away, we’re ready for anything.
Various people have been writing to ask about the due date, and we thought we’d make it interactive. So, with the beginning of 2007, the First Annual Isoglossia Baby Birthdate Pool is officially open. Each reader is welcome to stake out one 12-hour period in the comments. Whoever correctly chooses the period containing the baby’s time of arrival (or holds the half-day closest) will win the invaluable prize of having been correct about something super-mega. Some key information and karmic voodoo data you may want to take into account:
- Magda has chosen the pm half of 21 January. I know it’s not fair that she gets to pick first, but I don’t make the rules.
- On 3 January we’ll be entering the range of Adam’s arrival vs. his actual due date
- Official due date based on ovulation-related calculus is 28 January
- According to last femur-length metric, this baby was born two weeks ago
- A 17 or 20 January arrival would be most inconvenient (and therefore either is highly likely)
- We’ve already had one fairly serious false alarm
- For some reason Magda really wants this baby to be an Aquarius, which runs from 20 January to 18 February
- There is no way to put this delicately: she is stretched to the limit already and getting seriously uncomfortable
- If this baby is late by even one day, someone in this house is going to be really put out — and given Magda’s luck, that should boost the desirability of all days post-due date
Tha Rulz:
- 12-hour slots are available on a first-come, first-served basis, so please read any comments above yours before claiming your slot
- Slots run from midnight to noon (am) and noon to midnight (pm) BABY’S LOCAL TIME
- In addition to Magda’s claim of 21 Jan pm, 12 Jan am is taken (by me)
- Awarding of any prize in addition to having been right about something super-mega is strictly at the discretion of www.isoglossia.com, and is likely to be at best a commemorative postcard
- Under no circumstances is the baby’s mother to be referred to as “T-Bone”
N.B.: a firm decision on a middle name for this kid is still pending from among several possibilities, so if you have any bright, seriously viable ideas for that, we’re all ears. Well, ears and belly. Now let’s get this pool party started.
20 January. Zero Dark Thirty. Ante Meridian.
Comment by Sarcastro — Monday 1 January 07 @ 01.40 MST+2.00
I am in for January 18 in the evening, a perfect time for having a baby. Happy New Year. With a new baby, you’re gonna need it.
Comment by Neil — Monday 1 January 07 @ 02.07 MST+2.00
I’ll take 12 January PM then. This is a good day for a birth, the birthday of a good friend. But Magda’s right to want an Aquarian baby over a Capricorn (says the ex-wife of a Capricorn).
Comment by gwynne — Monday 1 January 07 @ 02.16 MST+2.00
Midnight to noon, January 9.
Comment by Jane — Monday 1 January 07 @ 03.24 MST+2.00
Alright, then. I have applied my highly scientific analysis to the matter, and I take Jan. 10 a.m. That would make his birthday 1-10-07 which gives him a 007, and that’s kewl. Maybe I should take p.m. because I suspect she will start labor in the a.m. How long was the last labor?
As for middle name, how about Ringo? Because Ringo never dies.
Comment by jdog — Monday 1 January 07 @ 06.33 MST+2.00
January 13th. O Dark Hundred.
Comment by Maynard — Monday 1 January 07 @ 06.51 MST+2.00
January 24. In the PM.
Comment by Michael M. — Monday 1 January 07 @ 13.12 MST+2.00
Magda is expressing dismay, even feelings of betrayal, at some of the earlier-in-the-month predictions — which makes no sense, since she seems about ready to allow me to perform an amateur C-section, particularly today. I guess that’s down to the Aquarian desire.
jdog: all of Magda’s previous labors commenced within about four hours of water breakage, and lasted around three hours. Adam was born at 18.24 CET. Oh, and Ringo? Which part of ’seriously viable’ did you not understand? And this business about Ringo never dying? I have a feeling that 2007 is Ringo’s year.
Comment by sgazzetti — Monday 1 January 07 @ 14.31 MST+2.00
This might be a good place to find the perfect middle name.
Comment by Jane — Monday 1 January 07 @ 15.11 MST+2.00
I’ll have/claim January 22nd AM – for one reason only: I agree about Aquariusses (oops, is this the plural form? Or is it Aquaria?). They are worth waiting for a little bit longer (I know I know, a non-pregnant woman’s “little bit longer” is an entirely different (read: a non-relevant) category, time-place-continuum, whatever, but…
Comment by alcessa — Monday 1 January 07 @ 18.40 MST+2.00
I vote for Aquarius, too. I’m one and I tell you, we’re the best. And after all, this is literally the age of Aquarius.
So just for fun I’ll guess the baby will go over the due date. I’ll take February 3rd, afternoon.
Though it would be a lot of fun if it would be 7th February, so the date would spell 07.02.07.
Comment by Lilit — Monday 1 January 07 @ 19.32 MST+2.00
ps. A list of famous Aquarians includes Mozart, DaVinci and Darwin, James Joyce, lord Byron, Charles Dickens, Jules Verne, not to mention James Dean, Humphrey Bogart, Clark Gable, Federico Fellini…
Comment by Lilit — Monday 1 January 07 @ 20.32 MST+2.00
January 19th, pm
Comment by Nina — Monday 1 January 07 @ 22.49 MST+2.00
Not to mention, Lilit, my Aquarian sister who will be seriously incommoded if this baby arrives on the day she (my sister, not the baby, who is reported to be a boy) flies into Trieste.
Ka-ma is unable to comment for reasons that remain intriguing. Our isoglossia IT department is working night and day on a resolution to the problem, but in the meantime she has emailed to say that she believes this baby will be born January 24 am.
Comment by sgazzetti — Monday 1 January 07 @ 23.31 MST+2.00
01/17/07 or 17/01/07, in the a.m., 07:17, if you want to be exact. As my prize, I’ll claim one of those hand-crafted Mac bags, authenticated by Adam’s bith pattern in the top right-hand corner.
Next dates to bet on? How many day’s after his sibling’s birth will Adam be insisting that the visit is over and it’s time for the kid to “go back to where you came from.” Opening bid here is 8 days.
Middle name? I always thought a middle name was a parent’s way of giving their kid a chance to choose between monikers at some later date. So, I’m not in favor of using the last name of one of the parents, but rather a true choice for the kid.
I’d suggested “Rory” and “BeeBop” for my two kids, choices deemed “idiotic” by their mother, whose decision really should not have been taken into consideration as she was in childbirth when she rejected both options. The fact that she still rejects those two choices now can only be explained by her family’s history of holding long grudges.
So, I throw out two names, each na be used interchangably as regards the sex of the child.
Rory, (Yep, still pushing this horse)
D’Arcy, because any name with apunctuation mark is cool.
Comment by DarkoV — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 00.06 MST+2.00
There are some excellent choices at the Utah baby name sight, including many with apostrophes (case in point: NaLa’DeLuhRay). But Ferral would be fun when he gets to be around four.
Comment by gwynne — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 00.47 MST+2.00
Yes, the Utah Baby Namer site is a treasure trove.
Speaking of which, consider the very manly (?) names Tugdick or Brik.
On the other hand, Vernal Independence seems cumbersome, and Azer Baloo is just plain silly. Nobody wants that.
Comment by Jane — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 01.51 MST+2.00
Yah, I’m going along with the kid’s ‘rents, jan 20 or 21-is that vague enough to win a commemorative postcard? very exciting! see you soon!
Aquarius rules!
Comment by gaoo — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 01.56 MST+2.00
For middle names let me suggest,
Mannix
Columbo
Baretta
or to highlight his Polish roots, Banacek.
Comment by Sarcastro — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 05.31 MST+2.00
January 11th, AM.
Middle Name: Angus.
Comment by MacGregor! — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 16.19 MST+2.00
What about two middle names? Angus Baretta for instance.
Comment by Jagosaurus — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 17.19 MST+2.00
Doubling up: “Angus MacGregor” for instance.
Comment by MacGregor! — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 17.49 MST+2.00
As I may have mentioned, I have this sometimes-roommate (SR) who is obsessed with astrology. As in, SR is actually going to astrology SCHOOL. So I hear about this stuff a lot.
So from what little I have gleaned during our roommate-evening-glass-of wine sessions, I would say I agree, Aquarians are fabulous, but a lesser-known fact is that Capricorns (despite the stubbornness) can also be marvy. They can even be a little magical. All to say, don’t be too disappointed if the baboo comes before Jan 20 — and anyway, you can always hope for Aquarius as his/her rising sign, which as my SR will tell you, is pretty influential.
Now about this due date. I am terrible at guessing anything about babies. Part of me wants to be ornery and guess the AM of the due date. But completely arbitrarily and only with the kindest hopes for Magda to be restored to internal torso comfort sooner rather than later, I will go with Jan 15 AM.
Comment by Roo — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 18.14 MST+2.00
I’m staking Jan. 16 in the p.m. Good luck, Magda! Re. names–you haven’t announced the first name, have you? I won’t suggest a name, but here is something we did before our guy was born: put all the name contenders on the fridge. Seeing them over and over again helped us rule out some that we got tired of early on. (”Sorry, honey, but I just never warmed up to ‘Fox.’”)
Comment by juliloquy — Tuesday 2 January 07 @ 18.26 MST+2.00
I’m going with the Feast of the Epiphany, Little Christmas, the arrival of the three wise guys, Jan 6.
And why not?, it worked for me.
So, stay the course, no child left behind.
Comment by unclejeff — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 00.20 MST+2.00
January 27, a.m. He can share Mozart’s birthday and musical genius.
Middle name: Wolfgang and/or Amadeus?
Comment by Jean — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 09.45 MST+2.00
I’m starting to think we are not being very helpful on the middle name issue. I would tell you the middle names we have tossed around for our next kid, but I don’t think you and Magda would consider those ’seriously viable’ either. I’m personally kinda into middle names that are familial surnames that can also be cool names. One of our familial (maternal) surnames is Roark, and personally I think that would be a rockin name. Hi, I’m Roark. Take that, motherfucker!
I feel the same way about Cash and Coltrane.
Let us ask you this: What is your intent in giving a middle name? Is it, as one commenter suggested, a name to serve as an alternate choice once your young’un gets old enough to hate the first name you’ve lovingly chosen for him? Is it merely to serve to fill in those blanks on passport applications? Is it that you would like to honor someone (say, Ringo, for example)? What is the intent here? That might have some bearing on what is ’seriously viable.’ For example, I had to reject ‘Wayne’ as the middle name for our son. It was my dad’s name, and I wanted to honor him, but I didn’t really want to ever have a son called Wayne. I don’t really like that name.
You see? We need more info.
Comment by jdog — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 11.16 MST+2.00
jdog, I am pretty much on the same page as you when it comes to the form/function of the middle name, though Darko’s I always thought a middle name was a parentâ��s way of giving their kid a chance to choose between monikers at some later date has something going for it. Magda and I don’t really agree on how middle names should be used or what they should sound like — she’s less disposed to the family names versus first name-usable names. In my family, middle names were usually recycled family names that were reasonably ‘cool’ and had some meaning or history behind them; in Magda’s experience, they’re mostly the saint whose day you arrived on, so we’re approaching this from different directions and with different ideas of how it should ‘work’. Magda has vetoed the idea of double middle names as a slippery slope, so both Angus Baretta and Angus MacGregor are out, sadly, as is my suggestion of Roosevelt Franklin.
I could warm up to the idea of tying middle name to birthdate, as Jean suggests with the Mozart connection, but that would involve either a lot more research than I am likely to have time for, or a lot more dumb luck than is likely to come our way, and probably both.
Juliloquy: your fridge idea is a good one, and our Post-It™ variation has helped with eliminating some second-stringers. And while the baby’s first name was not exactly announced, it has been leaked more than once, and is immutable at this point (in fact, it is the masculine version of what Adam’s name would’ve been if he’d been a girl, as we were CERTAIN SURE he would be). And I’m with you on ‘Fox’ — it just sounds like it’s trying too hard, as well as being utterly discredited by now as being anything but fair and balanced.
Oh, and also vetoed: anything with a diacritical or other ’special characters’ in it. I disagree, but can see her point. We don’t want the kid to go through life having to explain thousands of times what a haček is, or a an Ł for crying out loud.
Comment by sgazzetti — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 16.19 MST+2.00
Bartholomew. NOT after Bart Simpson, but after Bartholomew Cubbins (of oobleck fame). Also, it’s my brother’s middle name and he is such a great guy it can only bode well.
If that’s just too ridiculous for you, I throw my hands up in frustration and stomp off in a huff. (Not really, I’m just being dramatic.)
Hmmm. This is hard. I guess it’s a good thing I don’t have to name babies every day.
In the meantime, someone sent me this link today, and I think it’s really really funny. http://www.thepoorman.net/wp-content/ihasaflavor.jpg
Trust me, it’s funnier every time you look at it.
Comment by Roo — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 20.40 MST+2.00
Or is that just the post-holiday hysteria talking?
Comment by Roo — Wednesday 3 January 07 @ 20.41 MST+2.00
Aleks Amadeus. Definitely. Just make sure he arrives on the 27th. And hey, have you got something against the letter x? It’s not a diacritic or special character, you know.
Roark is good, too. Or maybe Grok.
Comment by Jean — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 14.22 MST+2.00
‘ks’ vs ‘x’ is a bow to Polish spelling.
Plus, ‘x’ is unlucky.
And Roo, has the post-holiday hysteria worn off yet?
Comment by sgazzetti — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 14.48 MST+2.00
I’m going to plump for January 14th, in the sunny afternoon. Around 3. And I’ve always thought Chlamydia was the prettiest name, despire having been yoinked by an STD. Also Edward.
Comment by Chris — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 16.18 MST+2.00
i’m throwing in a vote for jan. 14th, pm shift.
i love the earlier suggestion of ‘brik’ for a middle name and would like to advocate for ‘brock.’
Comment by kilowatthour — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 18.04 MST+2.00
Hmm, this leaves me in a sort of Solomonian situation: both kilowatthour and Chris claiming the same time slot, the earlier claimant delayed by the moderation queue. What are the odds of that happening, and how do I resolve this conflict? Hmmm…
Since there’s no great prize at stake here, I’ll take the coward’s way out and say that they can share 14 January’s pm slot. And by the way, 16 January am goes to the ladies at our local Sadje Zelenjava.
Comment by sgazzetti — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 20.25 MST+2.00
I assume the ladies chose 16 January A.M.? Or am I gonna have to kick some Slovenian fruit lady ass?
Comment by juliloquy — Thursday 4 January 07 @ 23.23 MST+2.00
I gotta say, any baby name website featuring ‘bucket’ as one of the male names…
The strangeness can be found here.
Comment by Tuuli — Friday 5 January 07 @ 05.29 MST+2.00
i will back down from my claim on jan. 14th pm, if i can have am instead. i suppose.
Comment by kilowatthour — Friday 5 January 07 @ 06.37 MST+2.00
Okay, it’s all settled, then: Juliloquy has 16 Jan PM, the fruit ladies have 16 Jan AM, kWh gracefully regresses 12 hours into the AM slot on 14 January, and Chris remains holder of 14 January’s PM. And no international fruit-vending ass-kickery will have to take place at all. Oh, and no Utah-ready names will be selected under any circumstances. Though I do rather like ‘bucket’.
Comment by sgazzetti — Friday 5 January 07 @ 08.01 MST+2.00
And “Bucket”? Would that be pronounced as “Boo-kay”?
Comment by DarkoV — Friday 5 January 07 @ 14.14 MST+2.00
First, J, allow me to virtual smack my forehead at giving my reasoning for voting against Stephen as a middle name the fact that the boy’s initials would be ASS. Clearly, I was so focused on the initials worrying that I plumb ignored the fact that Aleks Stephen [surname redacted -- ed.] would be, well, perhaps not the most creative name ever. Auntie E may be losing her marbles, and clearly needs to seek solace in a bottle of wine.
I still do like Logan, though. The name, that is, not so much the airport.
Anyway, all of that aside, I vote for January 18 in the morning, just because.
Comment by Emily — Friday 5 January 07 @ 21.50 MST+2.00
I’m bucking the trend and taking Jan 8th, A.M.
Yes, I am.
Sorry, Magda! Love you! SMOOCH!
Comment by Elsa — Saturday 6 January 07 @ 18.42 MST+2.00
(Magda, Little A.?.S.’s not-uncle D is an Aquarius, and I can thoroughly understand why you’d hold out for one.)
Comment by Elsa — Saturday 6 January 07 @ 18.49 MST+2.00
We had some great baby name ideas, all for boys, nostalgic sigh. To wit: John Fitzgerald Kennedy Flanagan. Eh? How can you beat that? Neil Young Flanagan was seriously in the running. OK, MY running. But then when we hit on Anna Louise Flanagan I knew we had to have a girl. Yep. So that worked out well.
Comment by gaoo — Monday 8 January 07 @ 02.54 MST+2.00
January 23, early morning.
Because 1/23 (I’m ‘merican) is A Good Date.
My family uses last names as middle names. My son has my husband’s last name (my husband took my last name). Our big thing on names was they had to be valid in English and Czech. Since Czech names were regulated under Communism (according to my husband, who frequently lies about such things), our choices were limited.
er.. babbling. what was I saying? Middle names. Yes. Polish/English, I’m thinking. How ’bout Norbert? Good Polish name, and also a dinosaur in Harry Potter.
Comment by Kate — Monday 8 January 07 @ 19.08 MST+2.00