Hell Is Other People: Etiquetteer’s Experience, Vol. 6, Issue 35

To continue with the theme of "Hell is other people," Etiquetteer feels compelled to share some of his own recent experiences: In daily life Etiquetteer works on a large university campus, one feature of which is a large number of restrooms. One day not too long ago Etiquetteer entered a men’s room with some urgency and was disgusted – disgusted! – to find the toilet seat running with someone’s urine. Quite possibly that is the most cruelly inconsiderate thing one man can do to another: urinate without lifting the seat. Etiquetteer thinks it’s even worse than not flushing. At least that’s corrected simply! It’s the easiest thing in the world to lift a toilet seat. The squeamish can even do so with their shoes rather than soil their dainty hands. The squeamish have another bad behavior Etiquetteer has seen on the rise, too. Snowdrifts of paper towels now appear near the men’s room door, discarded by exiting users who didn’t want to touch the doorknob with their bare hands. Littering is not the way to solve this problem! If you must do this, pocket that paper towel and throw it away in the office,not on the floor. Littering in this way – in any way – shows contempt for the other people in your community. They deserve your respect, and you deserve better yourself. Etiquetteer, of course, recognizes that the squeamish have a point. Not everyone chooses to wash their hands after Performing a Bodily Function. Omitting this essential function of Perfect Propriety really isn’t an option. Your mother may not be watching over your shoulder, but anyone else in the restroom is aware. The time lapse from flush to exit is apparent to all! Please, spend 30 seconds purifying your filthy hands before leaving the room. Etiquetteer has a couple special messages for members of the audience at last week’s "Night of Stars" gala presented byBoston Ballet: To the woman across the aisle: If you absolutely must unwrap a cough drop while in the theatre, please use your intelligence to do so during applause, when it won’t disrupt those around you. As it was, those in your vicinity were vexed in the extreme. Your ability to stretch out all that crinkling to two minutes per cough drop defied all reason. Unless you can show more thoughtfulness to others, Etiquettteer suggests you stay home. To the audible man: During a ballet, it’s not uncommon for a female dancer to part her legs. In fact, it’s quite usual. Female dancers have even been known to part their legs while being lifted by their partners into the air. This movement during any kind of dance is so ordinary that folks ceased commenting about it, oh, about 150 years ago . . . and certainly not in a voice audible seven to ten rows away! Please remember that a theatre is not a stadium, and also that people attend ballet performances to see ballet, not listen to the opinions of total strangers. 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: Hell Is Other People, Vol. 6, Issue 34

Last week's column on the bad behavior of others elicited quite a few responses: Dear Etiquetteer: You are going to get a slew of suggestions concerning cell phones. I'm generally quite tolerant, but there are indeed a few things that irritate me in other people's behavior. To wit: Talking at great length on a cell phone at a dinner table. If you are dining with someone, he or she should be the focus of your attention. A caller can always be asked to call again later. Loud, foul language in public. I can swear like a sailor (actually was one once), but I believe that it should be done with friends or family and adjusted for their amount of tolerance. Swearing loudly is never proper, however. Graffiti: It isn't art, it's vandalism. Case closed. The person who invented the spray paint can should be damned for all eternity. Dear Incensed: Etiquetteer can certainly agree with you about cell phone usage at the dinner table, but just can’t condemn the inventor of spray paint to that Suburb South of Heaven. Spray paint has many useful applications. Profanity is never Perfectly Proper*, but of course groups of Equally Profane People may permit each other to swear colorfully when together. Etiquetteer’s point of view, however, is rapidly losing ground as profanity permeates more and more of the mainstream media and daily speech. One has only to look at the ostentatious profanity of the Weekly Dig and the way alternate spellings of dirty words (such as "biatch" or "shiat") have become commonplace. Liam Kyle Sullivan’s popular character Kelly, the Belle of YouTube, has indoctrinated millions of people into hollering "Betch!" So Etiquetteer must ask the question: is a dirty word still dirty when you change its spelling and/or prounuciation but not its meaning? Dear Etiquetteer: While I, along with a jazillion others, have overheard some pretty amazing cell phone conversations, one stands out. I was in line at a liquor store and the woman in front of me was having a REALLY HEATED CONVERSATION -- no, make that a flat out TIRADE -- on her cell phone while the cashier was too-patiently ringing up her purchases. Not only did the entire store got to hear about her wretched breakup with her girlfriend, we also learned why in quite graphic and expletive detail. Let's just say it had to do with sex. This woman was so distraught that I don't think she even knew she was in the store purchasing something. The cashier tried to get her attention when it came time to pay but it took a number of tries before the distraught customer threw her credit card at the cashier. When this customer finally left, all of us in the store were aghast, exhausted, and relieved to see this woman go. Really, we were all momentarily speechless! Dear Etiquetteer: A few years ago, I was at a neighborhood block party, where I actually got to chat with many people I had previously just waved at when travelling down our street. Introducing myself to one older gentleman, I told him which house I lived in, and that my husband and I bought it from a relative. He immediately asked, "So, d'you have kids?" I replied, "No, we do have a bunny rabbit, though, and I have nieces and nephews." To which he barked, obviously thinking he was 'being funny,' "No kids? What's wrong with you?" Now, he is of an older generation; one would have expected better manners. I decided, though, instead of replying with a "snappy comeback," and feeling resentful, I would just tell the unvarnished truth. I explained briefly what was "responsible" for our lack of children: childhood cancer. He was completely mortified, and apologized several times, and I know he felt bad. But why do people feel entitled to comment on a person's deeply personal issues, like child-bearing? Even in jest? For someone else, it could have been a deeply upsetting moment. Dear Forthright: What a deeply courageous thing to do. The best response to such intrusive questions is usually a change of subject or icy silence. Etiquetteer hopes that your puncturing of this old man’ s rude, artificial bonhomie taught him not to behave that way again. * If you listen very carefully, you can hear That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much crying "Ouch!" as Etiquetteer jabs him with his rapier. 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.

Hell Is Other People, Vol. 6, Issue 33

Jean-Paul Sartre once famously opined (Etiquetteer thinks it was in No Exit) that "Hell is other people." Etiquetteer cordially invites you to share what behavior of other people irritates you. Please drop a line to query <at> etiquetteer.com Dear Etiquetteer: What do you think about people who use their cell phones to carry on long and very loudconversations in public places, such as on trains and buses, or in restaurants? Or even on airlines when they are allowed. And there is the public HEALTH risk of drivers so preoccupied with their calls that they run over pedestrians and bicyclists. It’s referred to as DWD: driving while distracted. Dear Tintinnabulaphobic: People like these, Etiquetteer has decided, must have low self-esteem and feel the need to call attention to themselves, and therefore making themselves more important. That the attention is negative doesn’t seem to make a difference. It would be easy to peg this behavior as lower-class, but many offenders have graduated from the finest business schools (AHEM!). Etiquetteer remembers, from the dim past of 1994, his first trip to Los Angeles. Cell phones were just beginning to become available to the public, and Etiquetteer and his friends were agog to see peopleactually talking on the phone right there on the street! Let’s just say the honeymoon is over. You have the power to disconcert public cell phone yakkers by asking them personal questions about their phone calls. Proceed with caution; Etiquetteer disclaims all responsibility if they beat you up. DWD is certainly becoming more of a problem. Last year Etiquetteer referred to a young woman in the Midwest who killed a man while she was simultaneously driving and downloading ringtones. And Etiquetteer will never forget riding in a car driven by a friend who was operating the car, the phone, and a personal digital assistance at the same time. Please drivers, hang up and drive! Dear Etiquetteer: For almost 50 years I've been friends with a man from my home state. We email infrequently, but I always manage to see him on the rare occasions when I return for a visit. My situation is that he keeps sending me email of a religious nature, long silly stories about how prayer has saved a grieving family, etc, or how the rainbows will come out if you just believe. He is a devout Baptist; I am an atheist, though he doesn't actually know this. Not only have I jettisoned my faith, I consider religion a pernicious deception of the gullible and an obstacle to the general love of mankind. As one can imagine, his emails make me acutely uncomfortable. My problem is: do I (gently and tactfully) request that he stop sending me these ludicrous messages, stressing the fact that I would rather hear about what he's doing and thinking, or do I remain silent and simply erase the damned things? Dear Persecuted and Scornful: You can finesse the whole thing without even mentioning your change of religious beliefs. Ask your friend to take you off his distribution list (Etiquetteer assumes that he is sending his e-mail messages to more friends than yourself) because you find your mailbox so full of general communications such as this that you can’t keep up with specific e-mail from friends. (Once upon a time such specific communications were known as "letters" and they came in the mailbox.) Tell your friend that you still want to hear from him, but enjoy much more e-mail messages that he’s written himself. This is a good place for Etiquetteer to remind everyone that the best way to forward humor, religious, or political posts (once referred to as "chain mail" when the postman delivered it) is to bcc: all the recipients and put your own e-mail address in the To: field. You not only preserve the privacy of your correspondents, but you also eliminate the possibility of annoying flame wars. 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

In Memory of Two Great Ladies, Vol. 6, Issue 32

It was bad enough losing Brooke Astor earlier this year. Mrs. Astor was perhaps the last Truly Great Lady known throughout the United States, and she left a legacy of Good Works and Perfect Propriety behind her when she died at age 105. There are two types of Great Lady. The Grande Dame is the type we’re used to, distinguished by wealth and a casual attitude toward it, flawless manners and presentation, ascetic figure, a general air of noblesse oblige, and Devotion to a Cause. The second type is characterized by a wealth of spirit, effusive manners, a comfortable figure, a general air of good humor and compassion, and Devotion to Those Around Her. The world became a lesser place last week when it lost two Great Ladies, one of each type: Cathryn Keith and Mary Alice Hollingsworth Hairston Gibson. Mrs. Keith’s devotion to her particular cause, Boston Ballet, shone as an example to others for around 40 years. She not only contributed generously but gave of herself: creating the Ballet’s boutique, stitching costumes, shelving office supplies, and even getting on her knees to tackle the office filing. Etiquetteer approached her about this more than once – she was, after all, in her nineties by this time – and her answer was always "I’m helping to build a cathedral." She cared about everyone involved in the Company. We often think of Grandes Dames as having their noses in the air, but Mrs. Keith was not That Sort. She was glad to be part of the "chain of human sympathies." Indeed, her kindness to others made one want to extend kindness to her. Her excitement over receiving a surprise plum tart, an invitation to tea, or a photograph of her beloved Rupert Brooke warmed the heart. Last week she left behind many friends, countless friends, who no doubt feel sad that they can no longer offer her favors. The one area of Perfect Propriety on which she and Etiquetteer differed concerned funerals. Mrs. Keith always insisted that there be no funeral or memorial service for her, no gathering of any kind. She once told Etiquetteer that she’d been to a funeral with everyone weeping and crying and sad, and she wanted no part of that. Etiquetteer must gently disagree. Tears aside, comfort may be found in coming together as a group to remember the dead and to acknowledge feelings of sadness. (Etiquetteer loathes the term "celebration of the life," which ostentatiously denies legitimate feelings of grief when a loved one dies.) But one does not contradict the wishes of Great Ladies – and Etiquetteer can show you the scars from when he has – and will privately lift a glass and reread Rupert Brooke’s "Dining Room Tea" to her memory. Very few Grandes Dames are made any longer; Etiquetteer can only think of one under the age of 50. Mere wealth isn’t enough – though many wealthy ladies think it is! The other type continues to populate our Great Nation in larger numbers, and let us hope it always does. Cousin Mary Alice, a cornerstone of any large family gathering, was such a Life Force on her own that it is difficult to think of her having Gone to her Heavenly Reward. She lavished her talents on those around her: making wedding and prom dresses for neighbor women, going into the Mississippi public schools to teach crafts, serving as church organist (and as a pianist at Sunday worship for every family reunion), and as a prodigious correspondent, even into her nineties. Under what many would have considered insurmountable odds – try raising five children on your own – she achieved two college degrees and a successful career in human services. A Great Lady also exhibits integrity, and Etiquetteer loved hearing the story of how Mary Alice resigned from the Daughters of the American Revolution when Marian Anderson was denied use of their Constitution Hall for a recital back in 1939. While she seasoned her conversation with the spice of reminiscence and the salt of an occasional naughty story, Mary Alice also paid attention to the troubles of others and could offer a word or a shoulder to encourage one to Keep Going. Even at age 93 her exuberance continued. What her mother called her "merry heart" she wore on her sleeve and her lips. As one of her family said "You know the angels are throwing a party for her in Heaven now!" Etiquetteer, who could not travel to Mississippi for the funeral, will certainly do so, but on a smaller scale. [All Etiquetteer's efforts to find a photograph of Mary Alice among his voluminous files have come to naught. When Etiquetteer can locate one it will certainly be added to this page.] So we see that the shared characteristic of Great Ladies is their ability to give of themselves. What better legacy could these ladies leave? 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: White After Labor Day: Vol. 6, Issue 31

Etiquetteer was surprised and gratified by the number of people who responded to the recent column on white after Labor Day:

From a well-read gentleman: May I offer an additional resource into evidence? Vogue's Book of Etiquette (1948), by the inimitable Millicent Fenwick, matron extraordinaire and later an esteemed Representative from New Jersey. It was the first major post-World War II etiquette book, IIRC, and was highly esteemed in its day. I would suggest that the issue is not so much that white was verboten as such between Labor Day and Memorial Day, but that it was commendable in the country (as opposed to town) in certain situations between Memorial Day and Labor Day. (The issue is between prescription and proscription - subtle but important.) That may explain the lack of commentary in the works you referenced.

From a genteel person of discernment: That there is such wide-spread disagreement regarding a subject that makes no appearance in the literature until 1982 suggests that the boundary dates for summer whites is one of those time-honored traditions that, like diamond engagement rings, grill forks, and Christmas, have only become honored in relatively recent times, either for economic benefit or as a means of social exclusion, as in the case of dear Mrs. Hammersley. It is, of course, disrespectful to wear white to certain ceremonial functions, such as a wedding if one is not the bride, but who can truly claim offense on a warm Autumn afternoon if the gentleman at the next table on the club patio is neatly attired in a tasteful white coat and tie?

Etiquetteer responds: I don't know that it's a question of "claiming offense" if someone is not dressed according to the rules, but it does identify them as people who don't know the rules or, even worse, as people who ignore the rules; the latter could be considered dangerous to know.

From a stylish urbanite: There are two things I mourn each September: the herds of moving vans that clog the streets of my city and the storage of my summer whites. Thanks so much for insightful and amusing column on this worthy tradition. And look at it this way: cashmere season is just around the corner!

Dear Etiquetteer:

No white after Labor Day you declare. Now I can understand tucking away the seersucker -- it always speaks of summer holidays I think -- but the color itself is expelled? Just what is the so-called "winter white" then?

Dear Whitened:

Etiquetteer defines "winter white" as a shade one or two notches away from the usual blindingly bright white we’re used to seeing in summer and in the underwear aisle. Yahoo! describes winter white as "cream-colored wool." In 2005 Perry Ellis described a winter white sweater as "ivory." Etiquetteer thinks you could get a whole descriptive range from Benjamin Moore or Sherwin Williams, but you get the idea.

Kyla Ebbert’s Airline Wardrobe Brouhaha, Vol. 6, Issue 30

Once again bad behavior on the airlines is in the news, but Etiquetteer never expected it to have to do with a passenger’s wardrobe. As is frequently the case, there’s plenty of blame to go around. The story in brief: in response to a complaint, a Southwest Airlines customer service representative tried to pull 23-year-old student and Hooters waitress Kyla Ebbert from a flight because her outfit was too skimpy. Ms. Ebbert felt humiliated and her mother felt angry. Because they haven’t received an apology from the airline, they have taken their story to the TODAY show. Etiquetteer will turn his attention to Ms. Ebbert’s ensemble in a moment, but first must express sympathy with "Keith," the airline employee who had to address Ms. Ebbert. Southwest told TODAY that "Southwest Airlines was responding to a concern about Ms. Ebbert’s revealing attire on the flight that day." Etiquetteer takes this to mean that some busybody passenger decided to make trouble. With the Climate of Terrorism that already surrounds air travel, is this really the best use of an airline’s time? Whoever that passenger is ought to be heartily ashamed. The Southwest response to TODAY continued "When a concern is brought to our Employees' attention, we address that situation directly with the Customer(s) involved in a discreet and professional manner." With passengers packed so tightly into an airplane, where is the opportunity for discretion? Even asking a passenger to return to the jetway calls attention, thereby eliminating discretion. Long story short, "Keith" made the best of a terrible situation for him. Etiquetteer can only commend him and deplore the situation he was put into by whoever was complaining AND the airline. Now (said Etiquetteer rubbing his hands with glee) we can address what Ms. Ebbert actually wore on the flight. Her white denim miniskirt, "wifebeater" tanktop, and what Etiquetteer would describe as a green "matador-style" sweater have already been seen on national television and the Internet. Unfortunately for her sense of entitlement and righteous indignation, TODAY had to blur out her crotch when she wore that outfit on the show and sat down. Let’s just say that weakened her argument that there was nothing wrong with her outfit! Etiquetteer is hardly going to suggest that women go around in burqas or Mother Hubbards, but if you can see all the way to Crawford’s Notch when you’re seated, you are not dressed like a lady. Perhaps it has something to do with working at Hooters? Etiquetteer will let you decide that one. But the single most tasteless decision made in this whole sorry story was the decision Ms. Ebbert and her mother made to bring this story to the national news. Having bad taste and, unfortunately, getting called out for it is one thing. Splashing your humiliation (and your air-brushed panties) all over the media is the most embarrassing thing the Ebberts could have done, if only they had the sense to realize it. What was Mrs. Ebbert doing there in the first place? Her daughter is over 21; hasn’t she been raised to fight her own battles? Lots of people on the Internet are calling Ms. Ebbert filthy names not worth repeating here. Etiquetteer will only say that she has been sadly misguided about what is Perfectly Proper for a lady to wear and not be thought a Lady of the Evening only. In the meantime, Etiquetteer can only repeat what he’s said before: "No one wants to see your underwear outside the bedroom . . . and maybe not even there." 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.

White After Labor Day, Vol. 6, Issue 29

Not too long ago Etiquetteer witnessed a particularly unpleasant exchange on an Internet message board. The subject was the long-standing tradition not wearing white after Labor Day, and many participants heaped scorn on this beloved (at least by Etiquetteer) and time-honored tradition, and on anyone who would follow it. Disturbing as that was, Etiquetteer was equally disturbed to see such widespread disagreement about the roots of the tradition and to exactly which articles of clothing it affected. So Etiquetteer decided enough was enough and to get right down to the bottom of it . . . which was easier said than done.

Etiquetteer turned first to his own library of etiquette books:

The Book of Good Manners: A Guide to Polite Usage for All Social Functions by Frederick H. Martens (1923) overlooked it. Kindly Etiquette for Busy People by Rae Welch (1936) declined to include it. Emily Post’s Etiquette (the 1937 edition) made no reference to it. Today’s Etiquette by Lillian Eichler (1940) maintained silence on it. Esquire Etiquette: A Guide to Business, Sports, and Social Conduct (1953) did not mention it. Amy Vanderbilt’s Complete Book of Etiquette (1954) failed to discuss it. I Try to Behave Myself by Peg Bracken (1964) completely bypassed it.

Judith Martin, upon whom may the Deity of Your Choice heap many blessings, at last mentions it in her definitive Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior (1982). She seconds her approach even more vigorously in Miss Manners’ Guide to the Turn-of-the-Millennium (1990), which Etiquettteer encourages you to read on page 149. And she further clarifies in Miss Manners Rescues Civilization (1996).

Now one would think that if anyone would make a complete 100% declarative statement brooking no dissent it would be Miss Manners. And she does, but only in terms of white shoes . . . and that is frustrating. You may be sure, at least, that she and Etiquetteer agree that the wearing of white shoes is bounded by the holidays Americans use to define summer: Memorial Day and Labor Day.

After that, Etiquetteer was horrified to learn that no less an authority than the Emily Post Institute has declared that the rule no longer applies! (The passage in question is midway down the page.) Etiquetteer can only consider this blasphemy.

But what of the rest of one’s outer wardrobe? In the complete absence of written evidence Etiquetteer has little to go on but the films of Ingmar Bergman (you will recall that everyone wears spotless white during Bergman summers) and the story of Lily Hammersley from Marian Fowler’s wonderful book In a Gilded Cage. Mrs. Hammersley, socially treading on thin ice anyway, spent the summers of her first marriage in Newport. There, she sat alone ostentatiously dressed entirely in white on the lawn of her club. No one spoke to her, and she was frequently derided behind her back. A few years later, all the ladies appeared in white outfits unrelieved by any color at all. But by this time Mrs. Hammersley had divorced (!) and moved overseas. At least Etiquetteer thinks that’s how the story went. If you find out otherwise, please let Etiquetteer know.

After all this rooting about, Etiquetteer still feels on shaky ground, but hardly ready to give way. Indeed, Etiquetteer has even offered an opinion in the discussion at Faking Good Breeding, a fashion blog.

So today, Labor Day, Etiquetteer will lovingly lay away his folds of white linen and blue seersucker and carefully tree and bag his white bucks until next Memorial Day, and will prepare to Wag an Admonitory Digit at those who don’t.

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 Etiquette, Vol. 6, Issue 28

Dear Etiquetteer: Recently, a friend and I went to dinner at a Cape Cod restaurant where we both summer. Normally, their service is quite good. This night, they seated us immediately, handed us menus – which we perused then closed in anticipation of service – and then promptly forgot us. No water, no bread, no announcement of specials, no indication of who our server was, nothing. We tried to get their attention, to no avail. Others came in after us, were seated, given water, told specials, etc. Finally, we simply left our menus on the table, got up, and left. No one stopped us or even seemed to notice. But it still felt rude to me to be doing so. Was our behavior not Perfectly Proper? Should we have done something else? Dear Dining: Your question mystifies Etiquetteer. How is it rude to leave a restaurant where the staff forgot about you as soon as you arrived? While accidents do happen, few are as frustrating as waiters forgetting about your existence, especially when one’s arrival at the theatre could be compromised by slow service. Etiquetteer could not possibly fault your behavior. You could even have told the manager, politely but very firmly, why you were leaving without losing your Perfect Propriety. Etiquetteer remembers all too vividly standing at the hosts’s station of a popular local diner at Sunday brunch a few years ago. A Gentleman of a Race Other Than the Host’s, approached on his way out and told the host he’d been waiting over 20 minutes for any service and decided "Maybe that has to do with my [Insert Racial Identity Here]." The host tried to persuade the gentleman to remain for better service, but the gentleman, wisely, chose to leave anyway. Etiquetteer can only fault him for making Race part of the issue. While there are many tipping deadbeats out there who fail inexcusably to acknowledge good service appropriately, there are also a number of super-entitled waiters and waitresses who feel the world owes them a 20% tip just for showing up. On another occasion, some 20 years ago, Etiquetteer and two friends ducked into a downtown Thai restaurant for what turned out to be a long dinner. We waited 15 minutes for the menus, 20 minutes for the waitress to take our order and practically an Ice Age for dinner, which was served without the white rice that had been ordered. Thoroughly tired out by this experience, Etiquetteer and his companions decided not to leave a tip. Before we had walked 20 feet from the restaurant the manager had pursued us out the door to ask why we hadn’t left a tip! Etiquetteer made quite certain he knew about every defect in the service after that. Dear Etiquetteer: I was taught from the very beginning that you never ever put silverware you’ve used on the tablecloth or the table. More and more, however, I’ve noticed that some restaurants just provide silverware for one course. A friend and I were kind of annoyed by this when we went out recently. After we finished our salads I put my utensils on my plate, only to have the waiter put them on the table before clearing. My friend had not used his knife in the first course and tried to balance his fork on top of it to keep it from touching the table, but didn’t succeed. Why do restaurants do this? Is it OK to ask for more silverware? Dear Forked: To his chagrin, Etiquetteer has noticed this behavior and doesn’t like it one bit. Etiquetteer has seen this in, shall we say, pubs and restaurants devoted to "casual dining." But just because dining is "casual" doesn’t mean it should be careless. With a Sincere Smile, and not forgetting to say "please," ask for clean utensils as soon as you see your waiter begin to remove them from the table. In the emergency absence of any place to put your utensils, Etiquetteer can only suggest using your napkin (usually a paper one in such establishments) until your waiter brings you a breadplate. Finally, Etiquetteer would like to congratulate Francesca and Tobias Bazarnick on their marriage, now officially solemnized on two continents, and lift a glass to wish them long life and happiness together. Per cent'anni, amici! 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.

Handy One-Liners, Vol. 6, Issue 27

Sometimes it’s best just to let etiquette speak for itself commonsensically: Hang up and drive. Shut up and eat. If you’re gonna go, go.* Never ask why you weren’t invited; you might find out. Never ask why someone didn’t show up; you might find out. R.s.v.p. now; you won’t get a better offer. If you don’t know what to wear, ask the hosts. If they say "Oh, anything" ask what they’re wearing. Nobody wants to see your underwear outside the bedroom. And maybe not even there . . . For handkerchiefs, carry one to show and one to blow. For jewelry, put on everything you think is right and take one piece off. Too bad this can’t be done with piercings and tattoos. For Maximum Fun Potential, arrive on time. This fashionable lateness stuff is a pain. Don’t start eating until the hostess lifts her fork. If you’re allergic, don’t eat it. If you’re not allergic, shut up and eat. One more drink and you’ll be under the host.** Send the thank-you note the next day. Unless you’re the bride, don’t wear white or ivory or "champagne" to the wedding. Unless it’s a tuxedo, don’t wear black to the wedding. Don’t bring your wedding gift to the wedding. Ladies first, unless you’re going downstairs, off a bus, or through a revolving door. Serve from the left, remove from the right. Turn off your cell phone at the table, in the theatre, in the cinema, and in the bathroom. If you’re talking on your cell phone in public, don’t get indignant when someone starts asking you questions about your phone conversation. It’s your own fault blabbing about your business on the street in the first place. If you want to hang around, you’ll be polite.*** Don’t make trouble. On the other hand, if you’re bleeding, not saying anything will make trouble. There’s no place for your PDA at the table, either your Personal Digital Assistant or your Public Display of Affection. It may be five o’clock somewhere, but if it’s not five o’clock here, it’s time to switch back to ginger ale. A theatre is not a stadium. Keep your seat until intermission. Reference to flatulence is rude. Remember, "he who smelt it dealt it." All you have to say is "No thank you;" no explanation is required. And of course Etiquetteer’s guiding motto: no one cares what you want or how you feel, so just be polite. Please share your own etiquette one-liners, or any manners question you have, with Etiquetteer at query <at> etiquetteer.com!* Courtesy of great-grandmother Dougherty.** Courtesy of Dorothy Parker.*** Courtesy of Sam Spade in "The Maltese Falcon." 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: Jury Duty: Vol. 6, Issue 26

Etiquetteer was delighted to hear from a few readers aboutthe most recent column: From a Webmistress: Jury duty is one of those topics that compels me to write. It always, always distresses me when people joke about trying to skip jury duty. I have been called for jury duty more than anyone I know, and have yet actually to be a juror. The closest I ever got was I got seated once, but was thrown off the case right after the young man in leather jacket and chains. The case was too close to my only experience with the legal system, I guess, for the lawyers to think I could be impartial. I got my first summons at the age of 18, for my college dorm address! But I want to be a juror. I would be a good juror, and pay attention. I think our legal system - flawed though it may be - is an important part of what America the nation is. So each time I go, but now I bring a good thick book with me. And if anyone around me ever speaks of trying to get off, I lecture them with every ounce of indignation I feel. Just because I was born in this country (ancestors on the Mayflower even, as well as much more recent immigrants on my family tree) doesn't mean I take being American lightly. I want to be a juror. And I will, some day, I am sure. Etiquetteer responds: As one who has served on one civil trial jury and two criminal trial juries (once as foreman), Etiquetteer has served about 40% of the times he’s been called since becoming eligible for jury duty in the early 1980s. Etiquetteer even remembers completing Christmas cards while waiting to be summoned for jury duty one December, and heartily endorses your advice to bring a good thick book with you for the waiting period. From a medical professional: First, the last thing I would ever want (if I found myself in that situation) is a trial by jury. I mean, to be "judged" by a random collection of 12 (possibly angry men, angry because they are serving on the jury against their will) would never work for me. I don't have that level of faith in my fellow citizen to synthesize a correct conclusion based on complicated presentations of conflicting information. I just could not consider putting the outcome of my trial in their hands. Secondly, being a self-employed person (as I am) does not exempt one from jury duty. Employees of large corporations have their salaries paid to them for their time out of the office. Unfortunately, there is no one paying me when I am out of the office for any reason, civic responsibilities not being an exception. And as a matter of fact, I have to hire someone to be there to see my patients, at a considerable expense. One or two days of this every few years is fine. But, to be "stuck" on a trial lasting weeks or months would create a great financial hardship. Again financial hardship is not a reason to be excused from your call to duty. Serving under duress would cloud objective thinking and consideration of an evidence stream. 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.

Jury Duty, the Queen, and Lady Bird, Vol. 6, Issue 23

Etiquetteer has been gravely disappointed in three recent news stories that show how Perfect Propriety is being compromised in the courtroom, ostensibly one of the last places any kind of Dignity is required in public. Too many Americans consider only their rights and not their duties as citizens. The right to vote, for instance, involves the duty of actually showing up at the polls to vote. Trial by jury is one of the most valuable freedoms we have in the United States. Jury duty, though frequently inconvenient, should therefore be treated respectfully. All of us have heard stories about how sundry citizens have tried to get out of jury duty, but the blatant lying of Massachusetts resident Daniel Ellis left Etiquetteer breathless with indignation. Describing himself as a homophobe, a racist, and a habitual liar, Mr. Ellis overplayed his hand. ," Barnstable Superior Court Judge Gary Nickerson was quoted in the preliminary transcript saying he had "never confronted such a brazen situation of an individual attempting to avoid juror service." Having made it onto a jury, jurors then have a duty actually to pay attention to the trial and deliberate honestly and thoughtfully with fellow jurors. Using a court trial as a chance to catch up on your iPod listening is shocking. Cloaking this bad behavior with religious headgear comes as close to heresy as Etiquetteer can imagine. But this is exactly what an unnamed Muslim woman did while serving on a jury in Blackfriars Central Court, London. Under cover of her hijab, this Reluctant Juror tuned out the trial and tuned in the Music of Her Choice. Undone by the sound leaking out (one would think she’d have thought of that), she has now been cited for contempt of court and comes to a trial of her own on July 23. Etiquetteer hopes that both of these jury shirkers get clapped in jail. As if these instances didn’t compromise Perfect Propriety enough, comes now the story of Hamilton County (Ohio) Municipal Court Judge Ted Berry. When a hearty F-bomb was dropped on him by a convicted pothead sentenced to 30 days, Judge Berry unfortunately responded in kind. While sympathizing with the judge, who was clearly provoked, Etiquetteer cannot condone that sort of behavior from one whose manners set the tone for the entire courtroom. Dear Etiquetteer: How does one properly ask a crowned head of state to remove his or her crown? Dear Saucy: One does not! Off with your head! Etiquetteer knows (as who could not?) that you refer to the alleged tiff between Elizabeth II and Annie Liebowitz. Thank goodness it was determined that it never occurred and that the docuumentary had been edited out of sequence and that Her Majesty didn’t really behave that way. Etiquetteer was irresistibly reminded of the Queen’s ancestress, Queen Victoria, who once ordered a photographer from the room when he instructed her to "try to look pleasant." Etiquetteer was saddened to read of the death of Lady Bird Johnson, one of the most dignified and hospitable of First Ladies. Of the many challenges to Perfect Propriety she faced while in Washington, Etiquetteer could not help but recall her interaction with singer Eartha Kitt. Etiquetteer’s mother always said "When you lose your temper, you lose your point." La Kitt could have benefited from that knowledge during one of Lady Bird’s "Women Doers" luncheons at the White House. (How quaint it must have sounded, in those far-off days of the 1960s, that women could do anything. Thank goodness we’ve seen some progress on that front!) Using the luncheon’s topic of "crime in the city" as an opportunity sound off about the Vietnam War, La Kitt angrily suggested that young Americans were smoking pot to keep from getting drafted. During this tirade, Lady Bird successfully suppressed the visceral urge to respond and instead reminded herself "Be calm, be dignified." Indeed, what better reminder for us all? 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.

Travel Advisory: Etiquetteer travels by air, Vol. 6, Issue 24

This column also appeared in the July 12, 2007, edition of The Times of Southwest Louisiana. Etiquetteer has weathered a number of challenges to Perfect Propriety, but Modern Air Travel recently took Etiquetteer for a ride, mounting roadblocks of all kinds. How Etiquetteer ever arrived at his final destination – albeit a day late and without a bow tie – with Perfect Propriety intact remains a mystery. Negotiating with a cabby for whom English is not a first language is something one expects in Manhattan and foreign countries, not in one’s own town. Negotiating with a cabby for whom English is not a first language who wants to use a route one knows to be twice as expensive is something Etiquetteer wouldn’t wish on his worst friend. Etiquetteer got his way, of course, but then had to listen to a heavily-accented diatribe about it for ten minutes. If this is "celebrating cultural diversity," Etiquetteer has had quite enough. Etiquetteer arrived at the airport looking Perfectly Proper for summer travel: blue seersucker suit, white bucks, crisply pressed shirt, bow tie, and Panama hat. Security screening required Etiquetteer to strip off just about half of his clothes. The family of four completing their post-screening toilette at the mouth of the metal detector managed to inconvenience just about everyone. While it’s never easy to finish dressing in public at a folding table, Etiquetteer must insist that you continue moving down the table with your belongings to speed this annoying process for everyone. It’s one thing to board a plane, another to sit on it with no information as the clock inexorably ticks long past the departure time. The waiting becomes even more intolerable when one is squashed against the window seat in the last row of a slowly heating aircraft. Within 15 minutes the tie was sacrificed to the mounting heat in the cabin. After an unacceptably long delay with no information, the pilot crackled over the intercom that the plane would be rerouted due to bad weather, but that the reroute had not yet been completed and they didn’t expect it for at least another 20 minutes. This did at least give the cabin crew an opportunity to serve us parched passengers little cups of ice water. Etiquetteer applauds the flight attendants, who certainly endured this ordeal with Professional Aplomb. Etiquetteer was beginning to wilt. Having departed over 80 minutes late, Etiquetteer knew he would miss his connecting flight. The rude shock that it was the last flight of the day and that the airline would not provide accommodations for stranded travelers (since the delay was not the airline's fault) sent Etiquetteer right up to the ragged edge of Perfect Propriety. All that was left to do was head for the restaurant and get a Suitably Large Cocktail and dinner. It would have been lovely if the restaurant kitchen hadn’t closed just as Etiquetteer arrived. This led Etiquetteer into line at the quickly-closing pizzeria behind two Gentlemen Older than Etiquetteer. After many questions about ingredients (at a pizzeria . . . honestly), they swept up the last two remaining sandwiches, leaving Etiquetteer with only cheese pizza and a Bad Attitude. Cell phones have completely changed the way we travel and communicate, both for good and ill. The anxiety of having to wait in line to use a pay phone to call family or friends, who would have to be home to receive the call, is now past. Instead we have the anxieties of not having the cell phone numbers of family at the destination airport and of not having anywhere to recharge one’s phone before it completely loses power. There is also the necessity of having to take calls from those one will meet under any circumstances. Etiquetteer found it necessary to take three cell phone calls during "dinner" at the airport to confirm and reconfirm arrangements for the following day. At least Etiquetteer was not in the restroom at the time. So with security requirements, flight delays, missed connections, and restaurants snapping shut like clams, Etiquetteer thinks it’s a marvel anyone can travel with Perfect Propriety unscathed. Next time Etiquetteer may well take the train. 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.

Random Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 23

Dear Etiquetteer: So, where are you really supposed to put your napkin after dinner? Do you put it on the table or on your seat? We got into this discussion after dinner one night ‘cause we were all using paper napkins and they looked gross. Dear Dabbing: This is why Etiquetteer really doesn’t like paper napkins. Not only do they fall on the floor, they do not hold up well if the meal is, uh, moist. One of Etiquetteer’s favorite pub foods is buffalo wings. Most of us know how easy it is to use an entire stack of paper napkins going through a plate of those! No matter the material of the napkin, its Perfectly Proper place at the end of the meal is to the left of your plate, not on your seat. When paper napkins get particularly messy, Etiquetteer is sometimes driven to slipping them into his pants pockets, but this is really a Desperate Measure . . . and not an option for a lady in a skirt. Dear Etiquetteer: What is the proper way to deal with friends who blog with wild abandon, and include one's private matters in their online diaries? If one highly values one's privacy, is the only solution to curtail social contact with the blogging folks? How does one make it clear to cyber-exhibitionists that one does not wish to be the subject of their reporting? Dear Exposed: Your life doesn't become a blogger's property, even the parts of it you choose to spend with and/or in confide in him or her. As soon as you read or become aware of references to yourself in someone's blog, you should contact the blogger and request that those references be removed immediately. Repeat as necessary until the appropriate action has been taken, up to and including legal assistance. (Indeed, Etiquetteer became aware of an amateur photographer who had been threatened with a lawsuit if he didn't remove photos of a former friend from his blog.) If you feel, after repeated instances of this behavior, that your private life is no longer truly private, Etiquetteer can only recommend that you no longer communicate with this person without witnesses. Dear Etiquetteer: A few months ago, we were talking about mailing a letter to a lawyer and his wife who's a doctor and you said the names should always be alphabetical, not Mr. first and Ms. second. But now we're down to the nitty gritty of wedding invitations and I have a few questions. I normally start with Mr. and Mrs., but here are the questions: Mr. Arturo Swisserswatter and Ms. Igotta Cacciabutti (married couple -- should Mrs. come first?) Mr. Galahad Familyman and Ms. Prunaprismia Amanuensis (not married, living together, one address, one invitation, but should our son Galahad come first?) Ms. Antoinette Outlier and Mr. Lancelot Britlington (my married niece and her husband -- again, with different names, but I feel that my niece should come first). I admit to different rules (in one case husband first, in another case the relative first). But what is the perfectly proper way to handle it? Or does it really matter? Dear Familyman Patriarch: Taking your examples one by one: Ms. Igotta Cacciabutti Mr. Arturo Swisserswatter Yes, this is in fact correct, even though you and I were always taught that the gentleman comes first. Mr. Galahad Familyman Ms. Prunaprismia Amanuensis Etiquetteer admits that ordinarily they should be listed alphabetically, but since this is a family wedding invitation and Galahad is the family member . . . well, Etiquetteer thinks that's a good enough reason to list him first. Etiquetteer has seen some universities list the name of the alumnus first and then the spouse, whether or not the last names are in alphabetical order. This seems a universal enough precedent to Etiquetteer to apply here. Ms. Antoinette Outlier Mr. Lancelot Britlington Again, family may come first for a family wedding. To answer your last question, you'd be surprised to whom it matters! People will interpret slights over the least little thing, especially at weddings. 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.

Random Issues and Comments, Vol. 6, Issue 22

This column appeared in the June 15 issue of The Times of Southwest Louisiana. The death last month of Etiquetteer’s dear friend, Keith Gates, saddened all true lovers of Music and of Perfect Propriety in the Imperial Calcasieu area. At such times it is right and good to think about the influence our friends have on us, and Etiquetteer has been drawn to consider many people from Earlier Life who guided Etiquetteer in the ways of Perfect Propriety, including Keith. These days the definition of "informal" seems to be "no visible tattoos or underwear," but it was Keith Gates Himself who taught a Teenage Etiquetteer its true definition, which for gentlemen is "coat and tie." Long ago in 1983, when Teenage Etiquetteer was briefly one of Keith’s students, Keith and the Perfectly Poised Christa kindly accepted an invitation to an "informal" dinner. Etiquetteer, not yet wise in the ways of the world, answered the door in shirtsleeves and couldn’t quite conceal his astonishment to see dinner guests dressed as though for church. Keith’s quiet example, underlined only by an arched eyebrow and his usual smile, could not have been more effective in getting across Who Was Correct and Who Was Not. Keith’s examples of how to respond to a question with silence and how to make impromptu guests feel welcome and not in the way will long shine for Etiquetteer and, hopefully, all those who care about compassion. He was not only a Great Artist, but a true Christian Gentleman. It’s often been said that "It takes a village to raise a child." Aside from Etiquetteer’s parents – who know all about Perfect Propriety – many villagers invested their time in Etiquetteer’s manners. From the neighbor across the street who explained that you don’t just walk into people’s houses without knocking to the many bad examples in the schoolyard, Etiquetteer learned a lot. From the late Rev. James Ailor, Etiquetteer learned that you never ever scream in pain during the benediction, no matter how hard the person next to you is maliciously squeezing the blister on your finger. Etiquetteer’s redoubtable grand-aunt, Kate Thompson, would sternly admonish "Ladies!" if ever Young Etiquetteer’s enthusiasm caused him to dash for the front of the line. And since it’s just past Father’s Day, it’s appropriate to recall one of the many lessons Etiquetteer’s own father taught him: don’t buy gaudy jewelry for a girl you’re not really dating yet, and really, don’t buy gaudy jewelry at all. (Etiquetteer still remembers those earrings . . . and tastes do change, thank goodness.) On a completely different note, Etiquetteer has to lash out at Andrew Speaker, the Atlanta lawyer who flew to Europe knowing he had tuberculosis and was exposing this disease to others around him. Ayn Rand may have written about "The Virtue of Selfishness," but Etiquetteer can find no virtue here! Hasn’t he ever seen "La Boheme?" Modern medicine aside, people still die of tuberculosis. Etiquetteer is appalled that he and his wife would travel across the world with that knowledge. This gives not only lawyers, but destination weddings, a bad name. Dear Etiquetteer: I was raised to write thank-you notes. I do enjoy getting thank-you notes in return when I give time and effort to picking out a gift or for donating time to a special cause. Recently, I took special effort in picking out the perfect baby gift for a co-worker and was promptly surprised by a thank-you email with an attached thank-you Powerpoint presentation. I will say that I believe this was a first for me. Has the computer age taken over so much that people should not put pen to paper in appreciation? Dear Thanked: Certainly not! While appreciating your co-worker’s eagerness to thank you right away for your generosity, it certainly doesn’t excuse her from actually writing a Lovely Note on Actual Stationery to 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.

Invitation vs. Invoice, Vol. 6, Issue 20

Dear Etiquetteer:

I am planning a Bat mitzvah, and I already know that some people are unable to attend due to other social obligations. Is it appropriate or inappropriate to send an invitation? I was told since I know that a person cannot come it obligates him/her to a gift. Yet, she already knows about the party and not to receive an invitation despite the fact that she cannot attend seems wrong. Please advise.

Dear Hostess:

Thank you for an excellent question! Etiquetteer tends to agree with you that those you've already told about the party (with the intention of inviting them) should get an invitation even if they've told you they can't come. You can always superscribe it (or enclose a note) saying, "In case your plans change we'd love to have you." Regarding your concern about the expectation of gift-giving: No matter how many people try, an invitation is not an invoice.

The mother of "Hostess" had her own response when she saw what Etiquetteer had to say:

I totally disagree with [Etiquetteer] regarding "an invitation is not an invoice." I don't think this person is very knowledgeable regarding Jewish people and Jewish affairs. In our world, an invitation is an invoice! Perfect example that just happened: [Insert Name of Friend here] was sent an invitation, couldn't come, knew she couldn't come, but sent a note and a check! That's how Jewish people were brought up. In fact, we were even given a second option: if you don't want to send money, make a donation to some organization, plant a tree in Israel, etc., etc., but we always do something if we receive an invitation and cannot attend.

Not, in fact, being Jewish, Etiquetteer certainly wasn’t going to try to pretend some insider status. Etiquetteer is privileged to know many Jews who are Paragons of Perfect Propriety, however, and turned to three of them for the Insider’s View to refute this woman’s claim that an Invitation is an Invoice:

First response: This is not a "Jewish" question. An invitation is not an invoice. However, it is true that some people, Jews and non-Jews, are rude enough essentially to demand gifts with their invitations. And many people, again Jews and non-Jews, send gifts (selectively) even when they can't attend. The flip side is that a gift is not being bartered for a meal and some drinks.

Second response: I'm so astonished (well, I suppose I shouldn't be) that I can barely formulate my reply. There is perversion and abomination in saying that the expectation of gifts in response to an invitation is something Jewish. Then again, there is perversion and abomination in the entire Bar/Bas Mitzvah/Wedding Industry. Proof of this was recently delivered to us when a young and fabulous colleague announced that he was planning a Bar Mitzvah for himself because he'd never had one -- because he isn't Jewish -- and he was still envious of all his friends who'd had these huge parties. I wish that I was making this up. On one level, these people seem to be confusing gifts in commemoration of a milestone event with the response to a charitable solicitation. In the case of the latter, I'd say that, yes, there is an understanding of obligation in Jewish law and custom. But that should not be conflated with some latter 20th-century notion of how some expect us to respond to a social invitation. As a final note, I'm deeply chagrined that these ladies would impugn Etiquetteer's sense of propriety based on his lack of Tribal Membership.

Third response: I think invitations to family and friends are appropriate even if you know they will not be able to attend. The decision about whether to send a gift and if so how generous a gift is up to them but presumably family and friends would want to send a gift anyway. I think it is inappropriate to send an invitation to people who are not family or friends, e.g. business associates of the parents, if you know that they will not be able to attend.

In rereading this correspondence, which was initiated about a month ago, Etiquetteer is inclined to rethink what the Mother in Question actually meant. It may be that, when this woman said "In our world, an invitation is an invoice!" she was not referring to the spirit in which the invitation was sent (the expectation of a gift, which would be greedy), but the impulse of the recipient to show support in spite of one’s absence from the celebration (which would be generous). Let us hope that this was the case, anyway, and that no one sending out invitations for anything, of whatever Religious Persuasion, expects any Material Return beyond a Lovely Note.

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.

The Brawl at Symphony Hall, Vol. 6, Issue 19

No doubt many readers are eager for Etiquetteer to comment on the "brawl at Symphony Hall" that occurred on Wednesday, May 9, 2007. Needless to say Etiquetteer is Absolulely Appalled at what happened and would ban the two men in question from Symphony Hall for life. In summary, Michael Hallam and his female companion were talking throughout the first two numbers of the Boston Pops. Matthew Ellinger and his female companion, sitting behind them, were understandably annoyed, and Mr. Ellinger shushed them more than once. With Hallam still talking, Ellinger reported him to an usher. He then "tapped" or "struck" Hallam (depending on who tells the story) with his program. Hallam then threw the first punch. As they say on fark.com, "Hilarity ensued." This Hallam Person bears the principal responsibility for dragging Boston through the mud like this. When someone in a theatre asks you to be quiet, that is exactly what you should do! You don’t have to be embarrassed that you’ve inconvenienced someone else, but Etiquetteer thinks it helps if you are. Hallam then branded himself Unfit for Polite Society by threatening to throw Ellinger over the balcony and then, of course, punching him in the face. Mr. Ellinger’s error, unfortunately, was making physical contact with Hallam. Up until then he had done everything appropriate by shushing Hallam and then notifying an usher. But one never ever touches someone one is confronting. Physical contact is easily misinterpreted; just look at how one side of this argument uses the word "tapped" and the other "struck." Etiquetteer has long felt that the White Middle Class is Giving Up when it comes to Perfect Propriety, and this sad incident seems like another Nail in the Coffin. What struck Etiquetteer first, however, in looking at the photos, was how badly everyone was dressed. Not one man sitting in or near the brawlers was wearing a jacket and tie. And Etiquetteer doesn’t care at all that they were sitting in the second balcony. This is a concert hall, not a bear garden, and Proper Dress should be worn. A crisply-pressed shirt is not enough. And of course now the Unspoken Rules must be spoken: no denim, no athletic or athletic-looking clothes or shoes, and No Visible Underwear. And it’s not just the Young and Untutored showing up like this. Etiquetteer has seen on many occasions Those Old Enough to Know Better appear at Symphony Hall improperly dressed. Ladies in sneakers with scoop-neck cotton tops, old gentlemen wearing plaid flannel shirts with jeans, anybody in a down jacket with a hood – this is Letting Down the Side. Did conductor Keith Lockhart behave with Perfect Propriety by halting the concert until the brawlers were removed? There are two schools of thought here, each with its merits, but Etiquetteer is inclined to say that he did. The Stiff Upper Lip folks would say "Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!" Continuing with the concert would, perhaps, have called less attention to the Bad Manners in the Balcony. Under the circumstances – loud screaming having called all attention to the balcony – to keep playing would have seemed to Etiquetteer like Nero fiddling while Rome burned. Mr. Lockhart showed respect to his musicians, the audience, and to the music itself, by halting the performance. As Etiquetteer said, the brawlers should be banned from Symphony Hall for life. Both of them should be sentenced to community service as theatre ushers. Now if only there was a way to ban that Little Old Lady Who Rattles Bangle Bracelets and Cough Drops . . . 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.

Social Kissing, Vol. 6, Issue 18

Dear Etiquetteer:

I was taught that when social greeting includes kisses, one starts right to right cheek, not brushing skin, and makes a soft kissy sound or perhaps murmurs something about being delighted. Should the kiss fest continue, both participants then kissed left, and if again, then right to right. This rule as I learned it pertained to any combination of sexes.

At times, the traffic jam can be a bit distressing and can injure maquillage or nose. So, upon what side does the kissing properly commence and how many times are appropriate for whom?

Your response is eagerly anticipated.

Dear Blunderbussing:

You have certainly touched on a thorny issue, one in which it’s easy to hurt someone’s feelings, makeup, or nose job. And Etiquetteer knows, having damaged them all at one time or another.

Social kissing, especially for acquaintances, should not involve mouth-to-mouth interaction. You correctly identify the right cheek as the Perfectly Proper place for each person to start. Not everyone is ambidextrous, however (cheekbidextrous?), and it helps not to commit yourself to leaning in too quickly. On the other hand, if you see someone aiming for your lips and you don’t want to get that close to them, most people already know quite well to turn one’s cheek to them.

Errant lip prints lead to misunderstanding, especially between married couples. Ladies with lipstick especially should adopt the Air Kiss, when the lips come close to, but don’t touch, the cheek. Indeed, Etiquetteer remembers walking by an Orthodox Church years ago and being tickled by a sign in the doorway that read “Ladies With Lipstick Please Do Not Venerate Icons.”

It’s always important to emphasize that social kissing is most Perfectly Proper with dry lips. Those who don’t Air Kiss often forget that no one wants a slug’s trail on their cheek after an Introductory Osculation. And gentlemen most certainly don’t want a big smack of flavored lip gloss on their cheek.

Gentlemen show respect to ladies by not forcing their attentions upon them. Really we all ought to take a lesson from the Viennese, who have developed the handkuss since the end of the 16th century. There it is understood that one does not kiss a lady (or her hand) unless she first offers it. Enthusiastic gentlemen (like That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much) would do well to remember this and not get caught up in the excitement of the moment. Indeed, That Mr. Dimmick got himself into quite a bind once by practically lunging at a Female Acquaintance Old Enough to Be His Mother. Mere millimeters away from Epidermal Contact, the lady cried, “Don’t kiss me! I have a cold!” His embarrassment was exceeded only by his inability to stop in time . . . which of course led to sniffles four days later. Gentlemen, let this be a lesson to you.

Another big don’t, having mentioned the handkuss, is that True Gentlemen never behave like Cartoon French Lovers and make those little mwah sounds while kissing up someone’s arm from hand to neck.

Americans seem to kiss only once, as a rule. The French, and those in the arts (dancers, especially, and Those Who Love Them), no matter their nationality, kiss at least twice, once on each cheek. Italians, on the other hand (as explained to Etiquetteer by an Italian-American balletomane) kiss three times in rapid succession, right-left-right.

So, happy kissing! Etiquetteer hopes that you now have enough ammunition to preserve your maquillage, your dignity, and your good humor. Just don’t forget to carry a handkerchief with you in case you have to blot up a mess.

Current Events, Vol. 6, Issue 17

Celebrities only seem to get into the news when they are behaving badly. Two recent mini-dramas have captured Etiquetteer’s attention. You will be surprised – very surprised, Etiquetteer suspects – to find Etiquetteer defending Karl Rove about anything. But after the White House Correspondents Dinner last week, Etiquetteer must Wag an Admonitory Digit at Sheryl Crow and her dinner companion Laurie David for initiating a nasty little contretemps about global warming. Crow and David, whose self-serving account of the incident appears on Arianna Huffington’s blog, certainly make themselves out to be the Calm Crusaders. From ingenuous comments like "How excited were we to have our first opportunity ever to talk directly to the Bush Administration about global warming" to glossy acccounts of their own part in the barney ("We felt compelled to remind him that the research is done and the results are in"), they present themselves as Earnest Little Girls nicely asking the Big Man about a Bad Decision. Etiquetteer finds abhorrent their idea that Sheryl Crow’s beauty alone should compel Rove to speak with them ("How hardened and removed from reality must a person be to refuse to be touched by Sheryl Crow?"). Feminists everywhere should be offended with this 19th century notion. If they really wanted to have a meaningful dialogue about climate change with Rove, they would have used this opportunity to schedule an appointment. Indeed, courtiers of Louis XIV were always advised not to surrender petitions to him during particular audiences because the Sun King was likely to lose them while changing clothes. Instead, it just looks like they wanted to get in the paper themselves. Not that Rove comes out smelling like a rose. Eyewitnesses indicate that he gave as good as he got, whereas a change of topic or a cold "This is not the time or place to discuss it" would have been Perfectly Proper. The truth, as is so frequently the case, is someplace in the middle. Moving right along, we find that actress Kim Basinger has released to the press an abusive voicemail message from her ex-husband, Alec Baldwin, to their daughter Ireland. While hardly excusing Baldwin’s vicious telephone tantrum – did he miss that day in anger management class? – Etiquetteer is outraged that La Basinger and her attorneys leaked the voicemail to the press. Can you think of anything that would be more embarrassing to eleven-year-old Ireland? All this dirty laundry could have been kept right where it belonged – in the family – without the vengefulness of a celebrity divorcée selfishly shaming the father of her child, and her child as well. 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 16

Dear Etiquetteer: I enjoyed this most recent column, and really applaud your telling the praying family to keep a lid on it. Suggesting doing it in the car was a particularly welcome idea. When I see people praying in a restaurant (infrequently, thank Zeus) it makes me acutely uncomfortable. Dear Etiquetteer: I suspect you'll receive many a letter about this. Let me be one more to speak out about your advice on grace before meals at a restaurant. It is quite possible to say grace and not draw undue attention to one's self when dining out. Our family will sometimes hold hands silently for a moment or two in an abbreviated prayer, so sometimes instead of our unison prayer just one person will speak in gratitude for the blessing of food and the hands that prepared it. A simple grace is less conspicuous than a toast over the meal and is as good for one's soul. As I was growing up our family continued our practice of prayer no matter what the circumstances. Over vacations we'd attend services as visitors at other parishes, even at churches when the service was in other languages when we traveled abroad. It taught us that special circumstances don't change the call to need to thanks. Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer must respectfully disagree with your assertion that a simple grace is less conspicuous than a toast, because grace is less usual in a restaurant than a toast is. Dear Etiquetteer: I am about to have a 50th birthday bash. It is relatively informal and I do not want gifts, but I will be taking donations for [Insert Name of Worthy Charity Here] if people feel compelled to do something. How can I word such an invitation so that there should be no pressure to give a donation? Dear Birthday Girl: First, Etiquetteer would like to wish you Many Happy Returns of the Day, and congratulate you on holding your own birthday party. Let Etiquetteer assure you, handling the arrangements yourself is the only sure way that everyone you want to see actually gets invited. The best way to be sure that your guests feel no pressure to make a donation to [Insert Name of Worthy Charity Here] is not to mention it at all. Etiquetteer doesn’t want to dampen your enthusiasm for supporting this charity, but this particular custom has become so widespread that people are starting to look on party invitations as invoices. Should anyone ask you what you’d like for your birthday, then you may say that would you’d enjoy most is a donation too [Insert Name of Worthy Charity Here]. Etiquetteer will, reluctantly, allow you to put "No gifts, please" on the invitation. 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.

More Random Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 15

Dear Etiquetteer: I need your guidance. A cousin of mine, with triplets, works two jobs (one of which is as a waiter at a local restaurant) while his wife stays at home with the kids. Money is tight for them. I just received from them a gift certificate large enough to cover a lovely dinner for two at my cousin's restaurant with a little note that he is always there waiting on table on Saturday nights. I have no trouble with the hint that I should dine on a Saturday night. My quandary is, if he is my waiter that evening, does one tip the waiter/donor when the account is tallied? Dear Diner: How does one tip one’s host? Such an interesting query. If your cousin was entertaining you in his own home, tipping would be out of the question. Were your cousin the owner of the restaurant, and waiting on your table, tipping would again be unthinkable. But in this case – in which one’s benefactor is also an employee – Etiquetteer thinks one would tip as one ordinarily does when the service has been exceptionally good. Etiquetteer knows how very much waiters depend on tips to supplement their meager salaries, and Etiquetteer finds it too great an extension of your "host’s" hospitality to omit a gratuity. And if you really found everything to your liking, you could send a little basket of edible treats to your cousin’s home the next day, to return the hospitality of their gift certificate . . . and make a reservation at the restaurant for another Saturday night. Dear Etiquetteer:My mother, who works at a local college, has an antisocial boss who turns around when he sees her coming in his direction, so he doesn't have to say hello. Last week, she and her colleagues received this missive. I'd love to have your expert take on this latest social anomaly. By the way, he is loathe to meet face-to-face. As to handwritten notes, do octopi fly?P.S. Grammatical errors and typos in letter (sic). In an effort to reduce the amount of e-mail I generate, effective today, I'mgoing to experiment eliminating most, if not all, "thank you" messages.In lieu of these, I'll try:* assuming you understand that I always appreciate your good work* picking up the phone and thanking you* thanking you in person as we meet face-to-face in a meeting or on campus* sending you a handwritten thank-you note Basically, I wanted to to know that I appreciate all you're doing for [Insert Name of Local College Here] despite you're not necessarily receiving a "well done" e-mail message from me to clog your inbox. Dear Skeptical: At first glance, Etiquetteer has to wonder why this man was put into a supervisory position. So often in academia, and even in large corporations, the only way talented people can advance is by becoming supervisors. But talented people are not always effective supervisors, which leads to communications problems like this. Surprisingly, Etiquetteer likes the idea of reducing the amount of e-mail going around, but it is never good form to assume that one’s employees "know" one thinks highly of their work. Etiquetteer wishes your mother’s employer had just started writing Lovely Notes to thank employees without this clumsy e-mail announcement. As it is, those Lovely Notes had better be extra lovely and he’d better not be seen dodging his staff, as your mother has witnessed, to keep from talking to them. 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.