Random Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 14

This column also appeared in the March 21 issue of The Times of Southwest Louisiana.

Dear Etiquetteer:We recently went on a vacation with friends and I offered to charge the house rental to my credit card. This was done under the mutual understanding that the other couple would reimburse me for their half of the bill. They have yet to cut me a check and I'm sure it's just an oversight on their part. Still, I feel very awkward mentioning it to them. I don't want to seem miserly but it's about $400. Is there a graceful way to broach the subject or should I just wait for them to remember?

Dear Billing:

First of all, you're taking the right approach to assume there's no malice on their part. It probably really is just an oversight that they'll be happy to correct. On the other hand, if you wait for them to "remember" it might not take place until it's time to plan your next vacation. Your awkwardness is not uncommon, especially with the amount in question; Etiquetteer encourages you to use that to your advantage. With an air of Infinite Reluctance, call your friend and mention that, in reviewing your trip expenses, you don't record their reimbursement and ask if you could get it right away.

Dear Etiquetteer:

What is a tactful way to communicate the dress code to a wedding? Although our wedding will take place in a garden, it's formal and we would like all the men to wear a suit. At the bottom of our invitations can we say "formal attire?"

Dear Bride to Be:

What time of day is the wedding to take place? If it's in the evening, say "black tie" and everyone will know you mean evening clothes. If daytime, once you could have gotten away with "informal," but no one understands that it means "coat and tie" any more. Etiquetteer would suggest "Formal;" in the USA, for a daytime wedding, that should be understood as meaning dark suits for the men.

Of course, since it's a garden wedding, Etiquetteer hopes you'll encourage all your lady friends to wear picture hats and crisp white kid gloves! Etiquetteer remembers as a Very Little Boy attending a family wedding at one of those large old Southern houses complete with white columns and veranda. It was an afternoon reception with a lot of cookies and punch, and Etiquetteer still vividly remembers the young teenage bridesmaids walking on the lawn carrying huge silver trays of rice bags to offer the guests.

Dear Etiquetteer:

What do you think about saying grace in a restaurant? We always begin family meals with a prayer. Our children are getting to an age when we can take them out to restaurants now and then, but we want to keep this tradition with us wherever we go, because it’s part of our family life.

Dear Praying:

Etiquetteer adores the Freedom to Worship, both the Bedrock of our Great Nation and the famous painting of the same name by Norman Rockwell. Now you’ll recall that the painting is of a sweet old lady and a young boy saying grace before their meal in a diner. (Actually, Etiquetteer just looked it up and it’s called "Saying Grace;" "Freedom to Worship" is one of Rockwell’s "Four Freedoms.") You’ll also remember that everyone else in the restaurant has stopped everything they’re doing to watch them. Now while Etiquetteer knows this isn’t the intent, this little family group has made themselves rather conspicuous, and it is never Perfectly Proper to attract attention to oneself. (Etiquetteer certainly wishes someone would tell Britney Spears this.)

In the Holy Bible, Matthew 6:5-6 comes to mind: "And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray . . . at the street corners, that they may be seen by men . . . But when you pray, enter into your closet and shut the door . . . " So Etiquetteer doesn’t question your intention to continue a stable, meaningful ritual for your children, that they might be brought up to be Perfectly Proper. But Etiquetteer thinks that its effect – undue attention to your family in public – is not what you really want. You might instead say grace before you leave home, or even in the car before entering the restaurant.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Mourning and Help Wanteds, Vol. 6, Issue 13

Dear Etiquetteer:Last week my mother called me to tell me the child of neighborhood acquaintances had died. It was a baby, and I guess it was sudden and unexpected. I haven’t seen these people in awhile, and I wasn’t sure if I should have gone to the funeral or not. I haven’t seen these folks in a very long time, and I wouldn’t want them to think I was intruding. We also, I know, have different opinions about gay marriage; would they think I was rubbing it in their faces?

Dear Sympathizing:


Conventional wisdom has always been "When in doubt, don’t." But whenever attending a funeral is in question, Etiquetteer says DO. The bereaved are more likely to be grateful for any effort taken to console them, rather than think of slights and disagreements. And if they WERE to think of slights and disagreements, then they wouldn’t be very worthy of consolation, would they? But that would be their fault for thinking it, and not yours for going to the funeral. Etiquetteer hopes you will at least send a letter of condolence (not an e-mail) to let them know you’re thinking of them.

Dear Etiquetteer:

An elderly cousin in North Carolina died last month. She was an eighty-year-old first cousin who had not married, but had a large town full of friends. While she had cousins on the other side of her family, my wife and I were the closest next of kin. We were the ones to make funeral arrangements. While she had already prearranged her funeral, there are those final details to take care of: getting proper clothes for her to be buried in, arranging a time for the funeral service that would fit the church, minister and family that had to make travel arrangements. Finding the cousins on the other side of the family was a problem. We had to be escorted into her apartment by the security man at her group residence to look for her address book. Looking up the phone number of the cousins on the other side along with other friends and finding out who is the custodian for her mentally retarded god child in New Orleans. After recording all the addresses and phone numbers of people we recognized as being our cousin’s close friends, the address book was turned back to the security man. Our cousin had been very generous in helping just about every good cause in town and out. I was informed by the administrator of the county school system that she had given over 90 scholarships. This did not include the city school system.Writing the obituary was really a joy as we included facts about her life. The funeral home had their web site or e-mail address included at the end of the obituary. Yesterday, I received from the funeral home several copies of e-mails from some of those who had received college education due to her scholarships. These are people that could not make the funeral due to time or may not have known until days later. And, if they had come to the funeral, I would not have the email to read again in my mourning time or to share with those other cousins. Dear Next of Kin:Permit Etiquetteer to offer you sincere sympathy on your bereavement, and also congratulate you on handling all the arrangements with such organization. But Etiquetteer must take issue with you over one tiny item. Whether mourners attend the funeral or not, they still must write a Perfectly Proper letter of condolence to the family. So if everyone was pulling their weight, you’d have these stories to read later anyway, whether you’d met the people at the funeral or not.

Dear Etiquetteer:I put an ad for a Medical Assistant on [Insert Name of No-Cost On-line Community Here] last week, outlining job responsibilities with instructions to call and speak with the office manager, leaving her name and office number. Almost immediately, I started to receive e-mails with résumé attachments!I deleted the first ten or so, thinking that, if they cannot read and follow instructions, then they could never work for me.But dozens of responses kept coming in via e-mail. And we did eventually start to review them - thinking maybe we are not keeping up with the times. Who doesn't want to be au courant? But, we did get a near equal number responding in the manner suggested.While reviewing the applications I also noted one e-mail address in particular, because it included the word "sexy." My first impulse was to e-mail them and tell them if they were to ever be taken seriously for a position as a Medical Assistant (and not a call girl) they should change the e-mail address! But, I didn't.So my questions for you are:1. Is this what society has come to? If so, do I have to accept this?2. Should I have expected this 50/50 split in responses - i.e. those who can follow instructions versus those who cannot - considering the medium I chose to advertise the position?3. Why do I seem to notice (and then have to relay) all the oddities I observe daily - like sexy's e-mail address? Or is that a question for the shrink? You don't have to answer that last one!

Dear Ad Doctor:

Etiquetteer very much fears that this is what society has come to, but you do not have to accept it. You will aid and abet Perfect Propriety by not advertising on [Insert Name of No-Cost On-line Community Here]. Etiquetteer promises you’ll get better responses by going directly to medical communities on-line. The first rule of any advertising is "target your market!"

As to the even split between responsible applicants and ignorant doofuses unable to read what’s put before them, Etiquetteer isn’t really surprised. While it’s common now to expect to respond to something seen on-line via e-mail, that’s no excuse for missing the instructions not to do so altogether. Really, Etiquetteer doesn’t see why you shouldn’t reply to them via e-mail that their applications will not be considered because they were sent improperly.

As for your last question, Etiquetteer’s Polite Explanation is that you notice these sexual references because they are Absolutely Improper in the workplace.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify etiquetteer.com.

 

Reader Response to Past Imperfect, Vol. 6, Issue 12

Etiquetteer was quite surprised at the outpouring of reader comments after last week’s "Past Imperfect" column. A few choice responses, sometimes edited for length and to preserve anonymity, are offered today:

From a doctor: Some etiquette should be history for good reason. Thanks foran enjoyable and well-expressed column.

From a graphic designer: My husband and I thought about this, but as a wedding day flies by, and many people do not know how to keep things going, we opted out, with the exception of the informal hugs, kisses and handshakes as people exited the [Insert Name of Wedding Hall Here]. There the group of people behind exiting guests naturally impressed that a brief greeting was best.

At the calling hours following my mother’s death we did have a receiving line, which worked fairly well despite the number of people in it (6), and the many guests waiting in line. Receiving lines are formal, ritualistic things. Not without value, but no place for a heart to heart, or for two people who’ve not seen each other for years to embark upon a reunion.

My mother’s family, especially her sisters, took the clothing subject very seriously. Black dresses, stockings, gloves, hat, sweaters and coats for at least a year, whether at home or in town. I think I favor that over what one friend saw at his father’s calling hours a couple years ago. He said that nearly a dozen people all twentysomethings, showed up in nylon athletic running pants and sweatshirts. He was appalled. I agree that mourning a loss, a death, has a place.

Etiquetteer responds: Many years ago Etiquetteer attended a visitation at a funeral home. Three friends appeared wearing beach clothes: shorts and casual shirts. They’d learned of the death while returning from vacation and chose to show up in the wrong clothes rather than not pay their respects at all. Etiquetteer thinks they made the right decision. On the other hand, we could all take a lesson from the Queen of England, who always travels with something black in case she has to return home quickly due to a sudden death. (She also has someone do all the packing and dry cleaning for her . . .)

From Someone Who Would Know: One ugly feature you didn't mention, but one that can tear the heart out of family and close friends, is the "open mike." It seems to be a popular feature with some of our megachurches; however, if I hear it's to be included in a service, I don't go.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer must gently disagree with you. While the term "open mike" is better suited to a comedy club than a funeral, the custom of "bearing witness" to the life of the deceased can be a beautiful opportunity for mourners to share the good ways that their lives were affected by that person. That said, not everyone understands that There Are Limits on these occasions. Etiquetteer was once Absolutely Appalled at one memorial service to hear how a dead acquaintance had helped someone evade the law and posed for nude photographs. Really, that’s not the sort of story for Public Consumption!

From a Regular Reader: Enjoyed your article about mourning practices but you failed to mention people 'producing' the after-burial festivities before they die. I gather there are now 'funeral planners' who are similar to wedding planners except that the host pays but does not appear at the party. Videos of the departed run on a continuous loop, food, flowers, valet parking etc are over the top for those underneath the bottom. I guess we are not all equal in death. I had personal experience with about a year ago when someone in my condo building died after a long illness. She was Jewish and arranged for two evenings of a catered reception with floral arrangements (even though in traditional Judaism no flowers are present). It was held in the social room of the building and from a distance looked like a wedding reception. Moreover in discussions with friends I learned that this is now becoming common with people making videos that play continually. It is such a departure from the traditional way of mourning that are very carefully detailed down to the fact that the door of the house is left open so the mourner does not have open the door or that the mourner sits on a low stool to mark his/her status as one 'brought low' and that the food is to be brought into the house for the grieving family, not served to the guests who should be bringing the food. It has become such a party that I think it is bad taste to grieve now; might spoil the fun people are having.

From an engineer: My boss's mother died, and in the Jewish tradition, she wore a small mourning button (Keriah), which if you know what it is, is a nice signal to lay low. The button carries an attached black cloth tail, which is cut as a substitute for tearing of actual clothes. It’s worn for 30 days.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer saw two Jewish ladies (on two different occasions) wearing such a button, but didn't know its significance. But let Etiquetteer tell you, wearing that button with a loud red floral print blouse doesn't really look like mourning to Etiquetteer.

From a journalist: When my mother died we had a memorial service instead of the traditional funeral -- we couldn't have a Jewish ceremony because a) she had died out of state and a Jewish ceremony has to be done within 24-hours, and b) she was cremated. We did have a very nice Rabbi who gave us the traditional mourning ribbon. This is a small black ribbon that is cut to symbolize how family members used to tear their clothing in grief. The tradition is to cover the mirrors for a week, you light a candle that lasts a week, and you wear the ribbon for a month. Then I guess, although I never had any counseling on this, you should begin a period of healing. Better than three years of mourning.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Past Imperfect, Vol. 6, Issue 11


PAST IMPERFECT

Vol. 6, Issue 11, March 18, 2007

 

Many people assume that etiquette writers, not just Etiquetteer, believe that everything was better in the past than it is today. Etiquetteer is here to tell you "Not so!" Many old customs have fallen out of fashion because they became overdone and not particularly conducive to good human relations. Etiquetteer would now like to look at some of the "vices and virtues" of the past, both things that we can do without and those we would do well to bring back.

MOURNING AND MOURNING CLOTHES

Grief and sadness are common emotions when a loved one dies. Society has developed traditions and rituals to comfort the bereaved: letters of sympathy, offerings of food or flowers brought to the home, funerals and memorial services, and even mourning clothes. The latter, including armbands, memorial buttons or badges, black-bordered handkerchiefs, and of course the famous mourning veil, served two purposes: to show respect to the dead and also to warn others not to bring up sensitive subjects.

But the idea of having to wear all black for at least three years after the death of a spouse or be thought not to have loved him or her . . . well, it’s just silly. Enough people in the mental health profession have already shown how excessive mourning prevents people from resuming their daily lives. The sort-of cult of mourning in the 19th Century, complete with memorial illustrations, restrictions on where one might go and to whom one might speak there, could lead one to Distraction, and probably did.

Now Society has moved to the opposite end of the spectrum by denying grief altogether. We "celebrate the life" of the deceased instead of mourning the death, wear colors to actual funerals if we attend at all, and use the convenience of e-mail when the special effort of writing a letter is so much more appreciated by the bereaved. And black, now so fashionable, is no longer a signal of mourning. Etiquetteer has witnessed on more than one occasion one person joke with another "Wow, black! Who died?" only to hearexactly who the deceased was.

One of the innovations of which Etiquetteer heartily approves is the mourning button with the picture of the deceased on it. Frequently made in the 19th Century for public figures (Presidents Lincoln and Garfield come to mind), they are now more widely seen and more easily made than they were 150 years ago.

Etiquetteer would like to see a middle ground between these extremes: a service where one could acknowledge one’s sadness by mourning the death as well as "celebrating the life," wear mourning colors at least through the funeral (but not for an extended period unless the bereaved chooses to do so), and yet not be thought insensitive when one feels the need no longer to demonstrate mourning.

CALLING AND CALLING CARDS

"The old arbitrary Washington custom of calling has lapsed entirely, and I lay a wreath on its grave without regret . . . " said Ellen Maury Slayden as far back as 1918. The rules and regulations governing calling and leaving calling cards in the homes of friends and associates must have collapsed under their own complexity and inconvenience. Rules about who called on whom first, the time in which those calls had to be returned, members of the household for whom one (and/or one’s spouse) left cards and how many, even different messages to send by folding certain corners of the card, had to be rigidly obeyed or interpreted as slights or insults. Mrs. Slayden recorded in her journal getting a cold shoulder from someone new in town whose call she couldn’t return because she lived too far away. Not a satisfactory system at all, and rife with misunderstandings. At least it kept the engravers in business.

Now we have the Internet, which solves some of these problems, but creates new ones.

RECEIVING LINES

Etiquetteer loves a receiving line, let’s not be mistaken about that. But too much of a good thing can implode, and it’s no wonder to see this useful custom kicked to the curb. The first problem with a receiving line is having too many people in it. Etiquetteer’s beloved Ellen Maury Slayden recorded attending an afternoon reception in Washington where "there were twenty women in the receiving party ‘bunched,’ as we say in Texas, on one side of the room . . . " And many of us remember weddings with a receiving line of twelve or more people: bride, groom, four parents, and eight or so bridesmaids. This is overkill, to say the least!

The second, and perhaps more noticeable problem, is that they take a long time. And the only reason for this is the garrulousness of the people in it. A receiving line is no place for a conversation! You are not rude if you say only "How do you do," "Congratulations!" or "It’s so nice to see you again" and then pass to the next person. Really, it’s rude if you say more and hold up everyone behind you. The time for conversation is during the party. Thoughtful brides and grooms (or other guests of honor) circulate among the guests during the reception in order to talk more.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Invitations and Condolences, Vol. 6, Issue 10


INVITATIONS and CONDOLENCES

Vol. 6, Issue 10, March 11, 2007

 

Dear Etiquetteer:

Please tell me whether I was right in a dispute about how an invitation was to be worded. At a school where I’m involved a new dining hall was to be dedicated at a catered dinner for major donors. The invitation used the phrase "the honour of your presence." I saidno, that the term should be "the pleasure of your company." "The honour of your presence" is only for marriages held in a house of worship, isn’t that so? Using that phrase for a dinner to dedicate a dining hall was ludicrous to me. Happily the school staff listened to me and changed the invitation in time. But if I’m not correct I’ll take you to dinner.

Dear Honored Guest:

You are correct, but Etiquetteer has to tell you what a great deal of fun it’s been researching "chapter and verse" on this. While no one’s ever specifically said "‘the honour of your presence’ may only be used on wedding invitations for church weddings," examples for invitations of charity balls and other such functions (with which Etiquetteer would group invitations to university dining hall dedications) always use the form "the pleasure of your company." And from that Etiquetteer infers that you are correct.

While checking up on this issue Etiquetteer has been vastly entertained reading about relics of bygone days like train cards for country weddings (when a private train is engaged for guests), cards of admittance to church weddings (for weddings when the general public is not allowed into the church), and invitations to the weddings of young widows issued by her parents.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I received an e-mail, sprayed to a number of members of an informal group to which I belong, that someone we all knew had a death in his family. I've seen this person off and on for a few minutes or so at a time, here and there over the years as part of this group. Otherwise we never socialized. We’ve never been to each other’s homes. I've always enjoyed his company whenever our paths have crossed. To contact him, all I have is one of his e-mail addresses.

I was raised that when one heard of a death one dropped everything, made food if possible, and immediately went to the house of the bereaved to offer any and all assistance: cook, make beds for arriving family, mow the lawn, whatever they asked. If the bereaved were more distant one called them on the phone but, under all circumstances, send them a contemporaneous, handwritten notice of condolence.

This ran into an iceberg a number of years ago when, after having sent my handwritten note of condolence, I overheard at the wake that the family thought I was cheap not to have purchased a sympathy card.

Further, although my ancestors on my father’s side are Protestant, my mother’s side is devout Catholic, and I have been often faulted for not bringing a Mass card to the wake.

To further compound my confusion, in this case, the only way I have to communicate is this person’s e-mail address, and I don't even know if that is his main e-mail address. I've e-mailed a mutual friend asking if he could provide a street address and any particulars as to the arrangements since I feel that condolences by e-mail are far below par and that the more proper course is to send a sympathy card with a personal note of condolence.

In this new strange world, what is the proper etiquette? A sudden death, especially of anyone other than the elderly is a horrid, emotionally wrenching situation whatever the relationship between the survivor and the deceased. I feel that an e-mail is so de minimis in the face of such heartbreaking circumstances. Can Etiquetteer help?

Dear Condoling:

First of all, Etiquetteer has to say that a bereaved person who is going to criticize the way a condolence is sent does not deserve to be condoled. Etiquetteer can only identify these people as Trash Pure and Simple if they can’t realize that correspondence on one’s own stationery is much more meaningful and intimate than on some pre-printed sympathy card (especially the kind with some treacly poem inside). Etiquetteer bets they didn’t even bother to write you back the mandatory Note of Thanks . . .

Second, if you’re not a practicing Catholic yourself, Etiquetteer sees no reason for you to send a Mass to the bereaved, even if they themselves are practicing Catholics.

As your acquaintance with the bereaved is slight, in spite of its long standing, Etiquetteer doesn’t think it necessary for you to provide food or attend the funeral, as you already well know. Tracking down the street address, through mutual friends, or even an on-line directory, really is the best plan of action to send a Perfectly Proper Condolence Note. If you know the name of the deceased, check for the death announcements in the relevant newpaper (again, frequently on-line), and the church or funeral home might be able to assist you. Should all these avenues still leave you without the information you need, Etiquetteer would allow you to e-mail your acquaintance with your condolences and a request for his street address (without of course, implying that you want it handy for the next time he has a death in the family).

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Bridal Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 9

Dear Etiquetteer:

We would like to avoid sending reception cards as they would be redundant. Our reception and ceremony will be at the same place. The reception will follow the ceremony. Can I just indicate on the invitation that the reception will follow the ceremony? Do I need to indicate the reception site? Do I need to state the ending time of the reception? We have the place until 8:00 PM, but want to wrap things up at 7:00 PM.

Dear Conserving:

The reception card was originally created when more people were invited to the wedding than the reception. Indeed, people preferred to be invited to the wedding. Nowadays the preference is for the reception. People would rather, to use a vulgar expression, "get their money’s worth" for their wedding gift by strapping on the feed bag.

If everyone invited to the wedding is also invited to the reception, the Perfectly Proper form to use is to add "And following in the Reimenschneider Room." If the reception were in a different place you could add the address on the line below:

And following at the Hotel California

45678 Lakeshore Drive

Etiquetteer knows from bitter experience that if you want everyone out by 8:00 PM, then an end time of 7:00 PM should definitely be indicated. A lady always knows when to leave a party, but alas, ladies aren’t what they used to be. Add the times like this: "And following until seven o’clock in the Reimenschneider Room."

Dear Etiquetteer:

I’ve been asked to play guitar and sing at a friend’s wedding. Do you have any recommendations?

Dear Stringing:

Obviously "Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring" is nice for Christian weddings – the guitar is in some ways the perfect instrument for this piece – but Etiquetteer is not aware of any vocals for it. Talk to the Happy Couple and see what they like and dislike in music. Etiquetteer attended a wedding last year at which the groom’s sister played a song by The Platters. Just please avoid "Because," "Oh Promise Me," "Ah, Sweet Mystery of Life," "Evergreen," and of course "My Heart Will Go On." Not only are they less than great for a guitar, they’ve become cliché.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I like my last name and would rather keep it after I get married. My family name is really well known, I’m extended special privileges because of it, and I’m really afraid people won’t recognize me as much with my husband’s name. Is this sufficient to keep my maiden name?

Dear Bride to Be:

Once assumed that a bride would take her husband’s name, now it’s entirely up to you what you would like to do, for whatever reasons you choose. You could, like one of Etiquetteer’s successful cousins, use both names in your married life, e.g. "Ms. Cousin Maiden Married." Observe that no hyphen is used.

But take heed from the experience of two of Etiquetteer’s lady friends. When they married each kept her maiden name, but ended up adopting her husband’s name after the birth of her second child. Each wanted to have the same last name as her children. So if you’re planning to have children, you might as well take your husband’s name when you marry and forget the bother later.

And Etiquetteer has one more thing to say to you, though you didn’t ask: if Etiquetteer ever hears you saying "Don’t you know who I am?" to get some of those "special privileges" you covet so much, Etiquetteer is going to Wag an Admonitory Digit at you.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Dinner with Friends, Vol. 6, Issue 8

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently, my husband and I planned a dinner engagement with friends. The most mutually convenient plan was for us to host a dinner, and I was happy to do so.Under normal circumstances, I typically inquire as to a guest's food allergies or socio-cultural food-related concerns. However, we've dined with these friends on many prior occasions, and they have no such predilections.

This time was different.

In three separate communications prior to the dinner, the couple repeatedly requested an accounting of my proposed menu. They mentioned that they were "dieting" and wanted to make certain that dinner was "healthy."

As I am not the White House chef, nor a professional caterer, I don't make it a habit to pre-approve my menu with my guests. I also don't serve "unhealthy" meals, e.g., fast food, foods I consider to be heavily processed, or foods containing poison, etc.

My response to my guests was to acquiesce, provide them with the proposed menu, and go from there. They offered to bring dessert, to which I responded that I had planned only on serving a fat-free hot chocolate in lieu of dessert given their oft-mentioned "diet."

My quandary: did I behave in a Perfectly Proper manner? Did they? Should I kindly suggest to them that this is not really very polite on their part and as such, should be refrained from unless an individual is faced with a life-threatening food allergy or an applicable religious conviction?

Dear Hostess Fricassee:

Well, you certainly were plucked and trussed by your guests! How sad that they seem to value their "diet" more than your generous hospitality. Etiquetteer does understand how important diets are to the people on them, but it’s Beyond Improper to enlist friends to accommodate them that much. As usual in these situations, Etiquetteer would like to serve a Perfectly Proper serving of "shut up and eat!"

You were more than accommodating in allowing your guests to vet your menu in advance, so much so that Etiquetteer thinks they took advantage of your friendship. Since it’s never a good idea to tell people they’re rude in so many words, you’ll have to approach this from another angle. Should they, or others, try that in the future, Etiquetteer encourages you to respond "Gosh, I’m probably not going to decide what to cook until that day. Perhaps you should host if that’s going to be a problem." (Some people would call this passive-aggressive; Etiquetteer calls it cagey and astute.)If these "friends" for whom you’ve bent over backwards didn’t send a Lovely Note afterward, Etiquetteer would seriously reevaluate how much you want to cater to them.

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do I really have to offer to help in the kitchen after dinner?

Dear Scullery Shirker:

The only thing you have to do after dinner is send a Lovely Note. Of course if your hosts ask you to help, Etiquetteer expects you to do so cheerfully. You’ll also note how lonely it is to sit by yourself in the dining room with everyone else in the kitchen washing up.

On the other hand, Etiquetteer has noticed an interesting trend in Middle-Class Homes With No Help (which is to say Middle-Class Homes) for kitchens to become large enough to accommodate guests. This way the hosts can continue to prepare dinner without leaving their guests all alone in the living room. Even Etiquetteer has set up a cozy nook in the kitchen with two armchairs and a cocktail table so company can nibble on hors d’oeuvres and chat while Etiquetteer wrestles with the risotto. This is a far cry from the day when guests never saw the "working" part of a household, and while Etiquetteer sometimes mourns this situation, it certainly does make things easier.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Free Speech vs. Perfect Propriety, Vol. 6, Issue 7


FREE SPEECH vs. PERFECT PROPRIETY

Vol. 6, Issue 7, February 19, 2007

 

"Cousin Marie says politicians aren’t gentlemen," may be Etiquetteer’s favorite quotation from all Agatha Christie’s mysteries. Then there’s Henry Fonda in Jezebel, who said, "I believe it was Voltaire who said ‘I disagree with everything you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’" These two quotations come to the heart of a living civics lesson that took place in Massachusetts this month, bringing together a state senator, a high school, Facebook, American Idol, and differing political ideologies. The result has been less about the ideologies and more about Free Speech vs. Perfect Propriety. Both have taken a beating.

In brief, Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, was scheduled to make an appearance at a high school in his district to discuss his conservative positions. A student with more liberal positions than Senator Brown created a page on Facebook.com, the popular social networking website, in the days or weeks before the senator’s appearance. Students posted profane comments on the page, some very personal, about both the senator and his daughter, a former American Idol contestant. Photos of the senator with devil horns and pitchfork added were posted as well.

Senator Brown became aware of these comments before his appearance at the high school. He brought a copy with him and proceeded to read, word for four-letter word, many of the profane comments written about him and his daughter to the eighty sophomores present. Teachers were horrified that a state senator was swearing in front of an entire high school. One student was quoted as saying, "He was doing it loudly and pretty angrily." There has been some hand wringing about childishness and just how a state senator ought to act. Senator Brown’s response: "If the kids are old enough to write it, they’re old enough to hear it."

Etiquetteer sides with Senator Brown. This may surprise you.

Free speech is one of the most precious cornerstones of our Great Nation. We should all be able to say what we want without fear of government surveillance, whether it’s "I love the war," "I hate the war," or even "You’re wearing that?" But Etiquetteer also believes that, if you’re going to exercise this right, you might at least have something to say. Profanity is easy, unoriginal, and distracting. What kind of a person are you if that's the best you can do with free speech? And it certainly has not escaped Etiquetteer’s notice that no one is talking about the issues anymore, only the profanity.

It’s not surprising to see adolescents behave like, well, adolescents. Etiquetteer does not condemn the kids who made the profane postings. But it is important for adolescents (and all of us) to know that actions have consequences. Comments made in the public square, whether on the Internet, the newspaper, or anywhere, may be heard by anyone. When you say something, you’re responsible for what you said. You shouldn’t be surprised if someone calls you on it, especially if it’s personal. Senator Brown did that in a very dramatic and public way. Etiquetteer hopes that it impressed on these students these lessons:

  • Personal attacks don’t further a discussion of issues.
  • Post something on the Web and anyone can read it, even people you don’t want to read it.
  • Profanity still has the ability to shock. That makes it the lowest common denominator when trying to get attention. Use more class and think of another way to make your point.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

A Gentleman’s Accessories, Vol. 6, Issue 6

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently, I decided to use my 1920's pocket watch. For convenience, I've been thinking about using a watch fob. However, are there rules about where the fob hangs from? Also, does the metal of the fob have to match the metal of the watch?

Dear Timely:

A watch fob usually hangs at the other end of the watch chain. If you were wearing your pocket watch on a waistcoat, you’d put the watch in the pocket on one side, loop the chain through a buttonhole in the center, and stick the fob in the other pocket. With a pair of jeans – more common these days, alas – you put the watch in the watch pocket, loop the chain through a belt loop and then clip the chain to the belt loop. That would expose the fob; some might find that too showy.

Believe it or not, Etiquetteer has actually seen photographs of 19th century gentlemen with their watch chains looped through their lapel buttonholes, with their watches in their breast pockets! That fashion, Etiquetteer can safely say, is now as outmoded as spats.

Curiously, none of the etiquette writers of the past laid down any guidelines on whether the fob and chain had to match. Indeed, sometimes fobs were set with precious or semi-precious stones with a seal carved into them; Etiquetteer imagines they were actually used with sealing wax on letters.

The dictum those etiquette writers do lay down, however, is that all of a gentleman’s jewelry be as plain and unostentatious as possible. Remember what that little gnomish woman said in Unzipped: "Fussy, finished!" So as you commence your search for a Perfectly Proper fob, permit Etiquetteer to steer you to some of the better antique stores for assistance. As the late Amy Vanderbilt once said, "Heirlooms are never out of fashion."

Dear Etiquetteer:

For Christmas I was given some handkerchiefs with my first initial on them. The only problem with that is that I’m a guy. I was always taught that men have their last initials on handkerchiefs. Do I give them back and ask for the correct initial or keep them and have hankies that are wrong?

Dear Initialed:

First of all, no, you may not ask the giver to exchange the gift. Good heavens . . . just use those handkerchiefs anyway! Etiquetteer hopes you aren’t calling so much attention to them that people would notice the initial in the first place.

Marking linens (handkerchiefs, sheets, towels, underwear, etc.) with initials and monograms got started to be sure everyone got their own laundry back from the laundress, not as a status symbol. While it’s Perfectly Proper to have your handkerchiefs marked, it’s bad form to show it off.

Second, you are, in fact, correct about initials. A gentleman’s linen, when not monogrammed with all three initials, is embroidered with only his last initial. Ladies use the first initial.

Dear Etiquetteer: Is there a comfortable way to wear a tie bar? I just got one and I can’t stop wrestling with it during the day.

Dear Fit to be Tied: Etiquetteer considers the tie bar an unnecessary accessory for a gentleman nowadays. It’s actually a little déclassé as far as Etiquetteer is concerned -- not quite as bad as dental grills and other gangsta bling, but definitely not for the discriminating gentleman. Please just tuck it gently into your jewelry box and forget all about it.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Reader Response, Vol. 6, Issue 5


READER RESPONSE

Vol. 6, Issue 5, February 4, 2007

 

Dear Etiquetteer:

You and your recent column were on my mind last night when I was at the symphony. The woman behind me rattled her bracelet through the entire evening. At the end I turned around and asked her sweetly if she had enjoyed the concert. After receiving a favorable reply, I asked her if she was aware that her bracelet jingled through the entire concert. She said that she wondered why the people around her were so agitated and she thanked me for letting her know. She was clueless! She asked her friend to remind her not to wear the bracelet to future concerts! One can only hope.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer commends you on your non-confrontational approach to addressing this problem. Turning around and snarling "Take off those **** bracelets!" would not have helped the situation. Etiquetteer’s mother was right as usual: you catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar.

Dear Etiquetteer:

Here's another take on the gift/no gift thing. My wife and I discussed this quite heavily when we were planning our wedding, and I think we came up with a fairly classy solution. Our basic premise about gifts was that giving should always be spontaneous and never expected. No one should feel bad for not giving a gift, and no one should feel bad for giving one either.

When we got married, we created a website for information for our guests. (This was in 1996, when the web was still new.) The wedding invitation included a map and schedule of events, and an invitation to visit the wedding website for more information. The website had an FAQ section that included the following, under the heading of "Gifts": You have already given us the best possible gifts: your love and kindness, as our family and friends. The nicest wedding gift you could give us is to share the day with us, either in person or in spirit. Thus, you should feel free to ignore the whole wedding gift and registry racket.

"Gift and registry" was a link to a separate page on our site. The gift and registry page started out with a restatement of the above, and was followed by: "However, because some of you have asked us whether and where we are registered, we have enlisted the help of our dear friend C****** S*****, who is helping us tremendously in coordinating the wedding. Feel free to address inquiries about gifts to her, or to [Insert Name of Bride’s Mother here]." We communicated our feelings about gifts to these allies, along with information about where we were registered for anyone who wanted it. Just as in business, reaching a human at the other end instead of a machine (or in this case, a one-liner on a wedding invitation) made for a much more pleasant experience for everyone involved.

Etiquetteer responds: It’s always refreshing to hear from a Happy Couple who are more concerned with their guests’ experience than with strong-arming them into showering them with Expensive Gifts. And certainly this is the traditional role of the Mother of the Bride (and the Mother of the Groom, too).

Dear Etiquetteer:

I have to write a condolence letter to the wife of a recently departed friend. Is she still Mrs. John Doe? Mrs. Jane Doe? Ms. Jane Doe?

Dear Condoling:

"Mrs. John Doe" is most Perfectly Proper unless she used her maiden name during married life. You would never address Ms. Jane Jehosphat as "Mrs. John Doe;" the militant feminists would mince your vitals into bits.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Restaurant and Random Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 2

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently at a Fine Dining Establishment we were told that there was no room to accommodate our party. As we were putting on our coats one of the waiters came past, who turned out to be a social acquaintance, and asked if we were having lunch there. We said we had hoped to, and explained the predicament while continuing to put on our coats. "Wait a moment." he said, and shortly we were squeezed into a cozy but otherwise charming table for a delicious lunch.

Though he was not our waiter, I did thank him afterwards and slipped him a tip, since I felt he had acted in a professional capacity as much as in a social capacity. Was this proper? When is it proper to tip friends or acquaintances, and how much is appropriate when indirect service is rendered?

Dear Well Led and Well Fed:

Interacting with personal friends working as service personnel does sometimes feel tricky. When friends do each other favors, they respond in kind with another favor or a Token of Gratitude, not Cold Hard Cash. But Etiquetteer thinks you acted correctly in slipping a consideration to your waiter/acquaintance because of his position in the restaurant. Had he waited on your table, you would have tipped him as you would any other.

Dear Etiquetteer:

My wife and I were out to dinner with friends not too long ago, and I started the meal with a delicious crab bisque. As I got down near the bottom, I tilted the bowl toward me to get to the last of the soup, and my wife nudged me to stop. And, she added, I should be pushing my spoon away from me rather than pulling it towards me. Was I wrong to tilt the bowl, and is that idea of spooning away from your body real etiquette or merely an old wives tale?

Dear Spooning:

Etiquetteer hates to tell you, but your wife is correct. Etiquetteer’s Beloved Grandmother even had a rhyme about it: something something "Like little ships that sail to sea/I tip my spoon away from me." Etiquetteer believes that you have less of a chance of slopping a bowl of soup on you if it's facing the other direction. So when getting down to those last excellent drops of crab bisque, please tip your bowl and spoon toward the table.

Etiquetteer hopes Your Lovely Wife didn't correct you verbally before people, which is certainly not Perfectly Proper. Nothing more than a raised eyebrow or gentle nudge should be required.

Dear Etiquetteer:

How do you address an envelope for a thank-you note if the wife is a doctor? Mr. and Mrs. John Doe seems right. Mr. and Dr. John Doe doesn’t seem right. But I'm open to suggestion.

Dear Corresponding:

That’s good, because ignoring a lady’s professional title is a bad idea. Put Dr. Jane Doe on the first line and Mr. John Doe on the second line. Please note that these are in alphabetical order; if they had different last names, they'd be in alphabetical order regardless of gender, e.g. Dr. Jane Adler/Mr. John Doe.

Dear Etiquetteer:

This came up with my wife, and then a few days later in a conversation with another couple. What is the proper etiquette for a man and a woman approaching a revolving door? I thought the man should go first. My friend proposed that, if the door is already moving, the woman should go first, otherwise, the man should go first.

Dear Revolving:

This is really a question of safety and chivalry. The gentleman goes first to keep the door from speeding out of control, thereby knocking to her knees some poor lady in spike heels or platform shoes. It doesn’t matter whether or not the door is already moving. Gentlemen similarly go in front of ladies when descending staircases or getting out of buses.

Dear Etiquetteer:

President Ford’s funeral was over a week ago. How come all the flags are still at half-staff?

Dear Flagging:

Because the period of official of mourning set by President Bush is 30 days from the date of death of President Ford. The Flag Code indicates that this is established by the President of the United States by proclamation at the time. You may find the President’s proclamation here.

While researching this, Etiquetteer also found out that when one raises the flag when it’s supposed to be at half-staff, one must first raise the flag all the way to the top of the staff and then lower it halfway down the flagpole. For two years in elementary school Etiquetteer got stuck with . . . uh, gladly took on the duty of raising and lowering the flag at school each day and understood that half-staff only meant one flag-length from the top of the flagpole. What a relief to find out what True Perfect Propriety is now.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Reader Response and Lovely Notes, Vol. 6, Issue 1

Readers alternately applauded and chastised Etiquetteer for rewriting "Away in a Manger" recently. One was even inspired to reply in verse!

Now now, dear Etiquetteer, I do so believe

You've never tried to find a sitter on Christmas Eve

My cherub was quiet all the way here in the car

But the lights and the music have brought out her voice thus far

 

Please do forgive parents, they really do mean well

And are in emotional agony trying their babe's cries to quell

Instruct, please, the ushers for next year to gently take

Parents with crying babes to nursery as their job, and make

 

The parents, who are mortified that NOW their babe is loud, oh, not good

Tried so hard to make this service, so meaningful from their own childhood

Some have never stepped foot in this church, or haven't in years

And the stress of the season has the parents close to tears

 

All they wanted, to a person, I bet, was one peaceful hour

Full of the sounds and songs of Christmas Eve, the glory and its power

It is not our place, as adults, to turn struggling ones away

But to offer comfort, and the nursery, and a hope for a better day

 

Seriously Etiquetteer, lots of new parents, particularly, seem to turn up at a church on Christmas Eve, hoping for some of what they remember of the magic of Christmas. They don't know, most of them where the church nursery is - never mind that it is staffed with patient and experienced volunteers, even on Christmas Eve.

Etiquetteer responds: Your spirited defense of New Parents is most appreciated, and you are quite right to point out that ushers have a duty to "keep the peace" by directing Those With Unruly Children to the church nursery. But Etiquetteer stands fast against those who behave in church as they would at a stadium, allowing their children to caterwaul or even walk around without any restraint.

From a former altar boy: I loved the new version of the Christmas hymn! I yowled out loud when I read it.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer can only hope you weren’t in church at the time.

From a devoted son: My parents insisted on Christmas Eve services this year, and though I am far less pious in my old age than they are in theirs, I agreed.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that at [Insert Name of Church Here] holds a children's service at 4:00 PM, with children both welcomed and participating in the activities (with the requisite meltdowns and bawling), followed by several grown-up services. That struck me as a perfectly proper solution to your own Christmas Eve lament.

I'm also wondering, what is the right age for children to send Perfectly Proper notes of thanks on their own stationary for gifts received? I have several young nieces and nephews from whom I have never received a thank-you note. To me, "thank-you duties" aren't complete without the note, even though, when the family is together, verbal thanks may have been exchanged at the time the gift was bestowed. Do these on-the-spot thanks substitute for written sentiments?

Etiquetteer responds: What a wonderful idea! Etiquetteer heartily encourages other churches to adopt a children’s service and grown-up services.

As to Lovely Notes of Thanks, Etiquetteer started giving his nephews and niece boxes of appropriate stationery when they turned six. When time permitted, Etiquetteer would actually sit down with them the day after Christmas to be sure those Lovely Notes got written. Ah, happy times . . .

On the other hand, Etiquetteer was completely charmed by his niece this year, who smilingly hand-delivered a Perfectly Proper Lovely Note not half an hour after the gifts had been opened.

You are quite correct that verbal thanks do not substitute for a Lovely Note. And as Etiquetteer writes this, That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much blushes with shame, since he hasn’t even started his Lovely Notes yet!

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Netiquette: Invitations, Vol. 5, Issue 30

Dear Etiquetteer:

In the age of e-mail invitations for dinners and barbecues I submit to you the following situation. Recently a friend of mine invited a group of us to his house for dinner. He apparently used an old e-mail list so that he could contact a large group of us all at the same time. He did not, however, take into account that he had included an e-mail address for a woman that one of our friends broke up with over a year ago. That friend has since moved on to date a very nice (very sane) woman and the two are currently living together. The other woman (let's just call her the crazy one to be clear) does not assume that she was invited by mistake and hits the dreaded reply to all button to say that she misses us all terribly and that she had recently had a dream about our friend.

How does one now uninvite the crazy one to the barbecue without being outright mean (I personally don't care since I never liked this person to begin with, but most people would be afraid of hurting her feelings)?

Dear Invited and Appalled:

Here we see the disadvantages of the cut and paste commands. The three extra minutes the host saved not typing in each individual address are more than lost now that he’s invited someone he didn’t want to see ever again (and which it seems few of his other guests would either). Etiquetteer cannot stress enough that reviewing the To: field before hitting Send on any e-mail, not just invitations, will save a multitude of anxiety later.

It’s quite natural to assume that when one receives a party invitation one is actually being invited to a party. Etiquetteer cannot fault the Ex-Girlfriend in Question for that. But Etiquetteer still has to Wag an Admonitory Digit at her anyway for sending her reply to the entire guest list (never Perfectly Proper for large gatherings) and even more for including a personal message to her ex-boyfriend. Personal correspondence should be just that: personal. And let’s face it, telling your ex-boyfriend (and all his friends) that you just had a dream about him a year after the break-up conjures up images of Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction. (On the other hand, if they’re serving rabbit at the barbecue, that might come in handy . . .)

The Host, if he’s not willing to let the invitation stand and welcome the Ex-Girlfriend in Question to his barbecue, now has the embarrassing duty of rescinding his invitation. He needs to do this in person (or at the very least by phone, and Etiquetteer does not mean voicemail) and he needs to do itimmediately. He must spread the embarrassment and self-abasement over himself thickly and explain that the invitation was sent in error. He may have to put up with some tears and/or temper. Etiquetteer does not care; it’s his own fault for not checking the guest list before sending the invitation.

Many people would say it’s mean to take back an invitation like this. Etiquetteer suggests the Host needs to weigh what would be meaner for the Ex-Girlfriend in Question: hearing that she’s not really invited to a party she’s already publicly expressed excitement about attending, or actually attending the party and being snubbed by everyone there.

Or he could cancel the party altogether and then reschedule it (preferably for another day) with the correct guest list. The two e-mail messages should not go out back to back. The Ex-Girlfriend in Question will be sure to find out if she’s been snubbed.

 

Random Issues, Vol. 5, Issue 29

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do you think the term "Lezbollah" will ever take off as a way to describe lesbian activists?

Dear Tiresome:

Oh please. "Lezbollah" is rather like one of those words from the David Letterman Top Ten List of Words That Never Caught On, "Hitleriffic:" it sounds really catchy and upbeat, but it’s Wildly Inappropriate. Etiquetteer recommends another semester of PC 101 for you.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I’ve just had the terrible experience of cleaning out my closet and finding a Christmas gift I was supposed to give to one of my neighbors last Christmas. She must think I’ve snubbed her! How can I correct this now?

Dear Absentminded:

Clearly you must invite your neighbor over for "Christmas in August" one evening. Serve Christmas cookies on red and green napkins, pour a glass of cold eggnog, and give her her present. You could even put on a Santa hat and those annoying Christmas light bulb earrings that blink on and off. Just think of this as an opportunity to grovel in a reallyspectacular way. Remember what they say in real estate: if you can’

t hide it, paint it red!

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do you think you can handle another wedding question? My fiancé and I are getting married later this year and are working out what we want the attendants to wear. The women aren’t a problem; we’ve already told them to wear black (you’ll probably get us in trouble for that). We’ve come to a disagreement about the men, though. Both of us will have on tuxedos, but the guests are just being told to come in jackets and ties. We think that asking the men to wear a dark gray suit would be OK, but we feel bad about asking them to buy a suit. And they’d all have to be the same suit, so they’d look uniform in the photos. On the other hand, there aren’t a lot of rental places that will rent suits. What would you advise us to do?

Dear Grooming:

Elope, just to keep those poor ladies from having to wear black to a wedding!

No, no, seriously, let’s look at this from the beginning. Etiquetteer feels compelled to remind you that this is the sacrament of Marriage, not a summer stock production number. Etiquetteer has some grave concerns about the ideas you’ve suggested. First and foremost, what’s all this about you being in black tie and your attendants in suits? One is evening clothes and the other is day clothes; to combine them as you suggest will look tacky. While Etiquetteer is not fond of combining a formally dressed wedding party with casually dressed wedding guests – a particularly American custom –

Etiquetteer would rather see you and your men attendants all in tuxedos or all in dark suits (that need not match). That will certainly promote the uniformity you claim to seek. You can provide different boutonnieres for yourselves to shake up the mix.

 

Lovely Notes and Wedding Entrées, Vol. 5, Issue 28

Dear Etiquetteer:

Not too long ago, I attended a lovely and informative, and not a little grand, buffet luncheon in the gardens of a stately house. The event was actually a fund-raiser for an Old New England Institution of which I am a very junior member, actually billed as celebrating the accession to Director of said institution of a good, talented, and engaging man who is a friend of mine. I attended both to support him and to get to see said stately house, which is architecturally significant, in the midst of restoration and not open to the public. My gut instinct, despite being a 'paying customer,' is to write an Etiquetteer-approved Lovely Note to mine hosts (the event WAS wonderful, and I fear the clock has already ticked a bit long). Perhaps it could be couched in terms of "Thank you so much for opening your home in support of O.N.E.I. and providing a brilliant, informative, and delightful afternoon for me, as for all - bravo!"

My only discomfort with that is that I don't know these people, nor they me. Plus, I am in a profession where I don't want to seem like I'm self-promoting. And my reticent English side is suggesting that maybe it would be considered too forward or gauche even to mention it in this crowd. The only other minor complication is that I met the hostess but very briefly and I don't believe she shares the patronymic of the host, who was the only person listed on the invitation; this, however, I can ferret out from my friend the Director, I suppose.

What are your thoughts, o great guru of that which is or is not gauche?

Dear Well-Feted:

It’s a rare day when Etiquetteer advises against writing a Lovely Note. Today is that rare day. After attending a fund-raiser, you are the one who should be getting the Lovely Note! In this case it would be from that Old New England Institution and it will tell you how lovely you are to have shown up to support the new Director; then, in much smaller type at the bottom, will cut to the chase and tell you about your tax deduction.

Etiquetteer rather agrees with your "English side" in this situation. This event really introduced you to the Stately House as a Stately House and not as a Home. In other words, being greeted by the hosts in their Stately House at a fund-raiser is not a social introduction. To write them privately, no matter how pure your motives, would be considered "pushy" by the recipients. The best way to communicate your thanks is through your mutual friend, the new Director of O.N.E.I. The next time you speak or e-mail, tell him "And please do tell Belshazzar Grandee and his wife how much I appreciated their opening their home for your party. It was all the more special because of their hospitality."

One last thing: it’s no minor thing to be uncertain about your hostess’s last name! Etiquetteer has been bruised often enough by assuming that "Mrs. Belshazzar Grandee" would be Perfectly Proper only to find out that "Ms. Shrieking Militant Feminist Termagent" was her real name. Life was much simpler when women didn’t have any choices, but that does not excuse Oppression. While more complicated, Life in General is much better now.

Dear Etiquetteer:

My fiancé and I are planning a small wedding of just immediate family and close friends. This nevertheless has created a list of 60. To keep costs down we'd originally planned a buffet dinner with an option between a vegetarian pasta and chicken option for the main course. After the tasting at the caterer, however, we were so impressed by the quality of both dishes and by the elegant presentation that we've decided that everyone would likely enjoy both dishes and to make it a sit-down dinner. The oh-so-tasty pasta will be the first course with the chicken as entree. Since the increase in costs has knocked a dent in our budget, we will not offer a second entree option.

Some are saying we simply must offer a second entree choice, declaring that not everyone will like the elegant chicken dish we've selected. We're doing our best to accommodate guests with specific needs. A vegan relative and a friend with significant food allergies will each receive special meals. The caterer has told us they are unable to provide a whole different, formally-plated entrée without another significant hit to our budget.

We'd like to balance generous hospitality at a memorable event with a reasonable budget. Can you advise?

Dear Too Hot in the Kitchen:

First, allow Etiquetteer to congratulate you and your fiancé on your impending marriage and wish you a long life of Perfect Propriety together.

Etiquetteer is delighted that you’re only serving one entrée. Etiquetteer’s favorite entrée at special occasions like weddings has always been "Shut Up and Eat." Whether everyone "likes" it or not makes no difference. They aren’t attending your wedding because of what you’re serving at the reception. Besides, it’s an additional hassle to track down all the last responders to find out not only if they’re coming to the wedding but also what they want to eat. So offer only your elegant chicken with Etiquetteer’s blessing.

 

Seersucker and Antique Pricetags, Vol. 5, Issue 27

Dear Etiquetteer:

I have a dilemma over whether it would be appropriate to wear seersucker to a wedding this weekend. The dress is not specified and the wedding begins at 7:00 PM. Is this too late in the evening to wear my seersucker suit? Do I need to wear a dark suit? I'd greatly appreciate your help.

Dear Wedding Guest:

Etiquetteer is delighted to hear from you and to offer assistance. Thank you for writing!

If the Happy Couple didn't specify what to wear on the wedding invitation, then they deserve what they get. And seersucker during the summer months is no different from a dark suit in the winter. By all means wear your seersucker suit (with white bucks) with Perfect Propriety to the wedding, and please report back and let Etiquetteer know how it went. Actually, Etiquetteer is dying to find out what everyone else wore since the dress code was never specified!

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently I gave a friend an antique vase I’d found tucked in a corner of a closet. I have no idea where it came from, but it had obviously been in that closet for some years. A pricetag was on the bottom, which must have reflected the price of the vase at some point. I left it on when I gave the vase to my friend because I’

d always heard that you keep the pricetag on an antique. But that really goes against taking the pricetag off any other kind of gift. What should I have done?

Dear Tagged:

Had you heard that? Etiquetteer once heard that if you put a knife under the bed, you cut the pain in two . . .

Etiquetteer thinks you are confusing a couple different types of tags. Antiquarians and historians and those sorts of people are always interested in preserving as much of the past as possible. That means that original tags affixed by the makers need to be kept on antiques. This is more typical of furniture; Betty C. Monkman’s wonderful book “The White House: Its Historic Furnishings and First Families”

has a wonderful section on this topic. But that does not mean that you keep anything other than the original pricetag on an antique gift. Etiquetteer has no idea what you might be digging up in your closet, but please remove pricetags before presenting your finds as gifts.

 

Reader Response: Holiday Gift Guide, Vol. 6, Issue 40

Dear Etiquetteer:

I've read your gift guide for this year and I have a few comments/suggests. Your gift guide is great for those who are not on a very limited budget. If you are, or if you are shopping for that special person who has everything, I have a few suggestions:

1) I know you are not a big fan of the gift card. I, however, love them because I take the time to find out if there might be a remodeling project the recipient might be planning yet just has saved the money to complete it. A gift card to their local home improvement center can be just the thing to complete that project or get that project started.

2) For the couple on a very limited budget and very little time, a gift card to a favorite restaurant and a night of your time to babysit if needed. Sometime that is their only night out whether or not they have kids the couple can afford.

3) There may be that special someone who has almost everything. Get them a gift card for a good bottle of wine or liquor of their choosing if they enjoy such things. Use your imagination.

4) For that elderly person on a limited budget, a gift card to [Insert Names of Big-Box Store Here] can be used for everyday items they may need. A gift card to their pharmacy to assist with their medications can be a blessing. Even a gift card for their local grocery store is greatly appreciated.

5) For children, savings bonds are great. It teaches them to save and invest wisely and it can grow along with them. Also stick in a dollar or more just to give them a little money in their pocket. Gift cards to [Insert Name of Big-Box Store Here] makes those kids feel like they are big.

6) For the elderly that want to remain at home, pay some on their caregiver services if they require them or even yard maintenance services for during the summer. This can give them that feeling of independence.

Just think outside the box. The more creative and individualized the gift, the more meaningful and appreciated. Ask people what they want. If they won't tell you, ask their family, friends, neighbors, or caregivers. Even making some cookies or candy for your shut-in neighbor or just spending a little time with them or those in the nursing homes that their families live away and can't be with them for the holidays. With the economic times like they are, the least gesture of kindness can make this the best holiday season ever.

Dear Giving Lovingly:

Well, Etiquetteer has had to rub his chin thoughtfully contemplating what you suggest. Your heart is so very much in the right place, and if you know Etiquetteer doesn’t really like gift cards, then you know Etiquetteer well!

And why is that? Because gift cards set an expectation that one deserves to get a gift that one wants, when in fact all one might deserve is a lump of coal. And really, Etiquetteer doesn’t think a gift card is that imaginative; in effect, it’s like giving in and saying, "I have no idea what to get you, so here’s some money that just isn’t cash." One also wants to avoid making the recipient feel like he or she is receiving charity. A gift should make one feel special; not that one looks like one needs help paying the bills.

Some of the other situations you describe could be addressed more imaginatively with a gift basket rather than a gift card. For the elderly, why not fill a beautiful basket with everyday necessities and a few gourmet treats and wrap it all up with a big shiny bow? Or for the person who has everything, a basket of holiday greens or other plants?

But for the family on a limited budget or undergoing a home renovation, a gift card to dinner and or the cinema (plus babysitting services) or a home improvement shop could be the perfect gift to give. And as an early recipient of savings bonds, Etiquetteer can vouch for their resulting long-lasting gratitude.

Etiquetteer was so glad to see you mention homemade holiday treats. Tins of cookies and other goodies should always be welcome in season. Really, Etiquetteer doesn’t know how he’ll face Christmas without Mrs. Keith’sincomparable shortbread hearts!

You may be surprised to learn that Etiquetteer isn’t a fan of asking people what they want for presents. It can lead to disappointment if you can’t find what they ask for, if it’s more than you want to spend, or if you just plain decide to get them something else. But detective work with mutual friends and relatives is fair game and very instructive.

Etiquetteer wants to thank you for your generous and well-meant thoughts. Would that everyone could be so Perfectly Proper!

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.