Table of contents

- Home
- Introduction
---- first name, origin of the name
---- law of january 8th, 1993
---- around the first name
----- the moment of the choice
----- the choice of the pregnancy and of the genre
----- our friends animals
----- the death and the firstname
----- sick firstnames
----- american firstnames
----- creation
----- incestuous choice
----- mythological first names
----- regional first names
----- parrot first name
----- mr and mrs have a son
----- breaking up first names
----- the centre of the saint
----- hysteria and firstnames
----- son of...
----- danger out names
----- first names, in order of...
----- individuation and first name
----- first names of stars
----- turn around the world
----- first names like a burden
----- nickname, obliteration of oneself
----- diminutive
----- small name
----- until where they will stop
----- what one does not name
----- phantasm and first name

- Conclusion

The Traumatism of the first name
This site was carried out according to the book of François Bonifaix, with the Dune95 Editions

First names like a burden

Each first name undergoes a phenomenon of mode, the Jules, Alfred, Lucien are far from used nowadays, which was not the case at the beginning of the century. At the time when François Mitterrand was a president, this first name was more in vogue, with the apogee of Brigitte Bardot, Marilyn Monroe, these two last had taken an enormous rise. Even if in France, the Adolf first name has much evil "to pass" near the administration, it is first names which pose a handicap with the child as of his birth.

With nastasia, Marlène, Greta, Claudia, evoke very beautiful considered women. The child and especially later the girl finds himself with an obligation, that to conform so that one can wait or what this first name implies. The identification so that returns or to which it first name refers for all is inevitable. Hercules must be strong, Richard has a heart of lion, Guillaume is conqueror...

There is the burden there to carry first name which renvoit with somebody of famous, rich in exploit or "beauty", there is also the first name of another to carry. We could note it in death and the first name. You never heard: "you carry the first name of your large father, it would have shame if it saw how you acted", or then "you were chosen the same first name that Untel, you are not worthy to carry it".

Ange which can appear as "a very pretty" first name is not less place with ambiguity. Indeed Ange refers well to the purity, the majestueusity, the beauty but it is also an asexual being. We saw throughout these lines the importance of the sexuation of the individual. As beautiful and poetic as that is to say the angel, he is neither man, nor woman. At the time of the individuation, sexualisation of the child, cannot it raise the question, me boy who me prénomme angel, that which does not have a sex. It is indeed a first name which can pose problem during the advance of the child towards his sexual identity. He is to be reflected on the incidence of this first name on the place where he is carried: Corsica who prénomme Angel, one charentais which prénomme Ange. There are migrations of first names which are not accompanied inevitably by the symbolic system to which they are attached.

A little anecdote besides, it is for the moment a first name exclusively carried by the men. Angel appearing only in the diminutives of female first names, Angelica for example. Angelica, which milked with the angel, with the glance angelica. First name which was given in mass mainly after the diffusion of the series of "Angelica marchioness of the angels", with the Geoffrey first name. The traumatism is different in this case present since it refers to a "sublime" woman and either with nature even from the angel. It is said that the Angel does not have a sex, but the representation of this one is always male: Gabriel is the best example. Let us continue the reasoning: the angel does not have a sex, it is thus male. The biblical writings have asexual the angel for not that there is possible confusion. It is however him which with Marie... Baby Jesus... etc. The angel is not God, but he is not Homme either, the asexuer it is him to give his statute, a special character, a transition. Were the marriage of the priests, the sexual abstinence always prohibited accordingly, to give its life to God for the Men not to be given to the Men... for God?

Literature was made the echo of this question: the angels have a sex. Its male representation is the work of the man, of the male man, a manner machist of saying: the perfection, the beauty, the purity is represented only through the male image with the detriment of the woman. A manner of sitting even more the domination of the man on the woman lowered with lower rows. But there is the other side of the coin, its implications. It is a demonstration of this refusal of the man for this female share which it carries in him. This repression results not by the rejection of female but in the negation of its masculinity even by asexuant the angel.