To get right to the point, all a politician needs to say to a reporter, when not wishing to respond directly to the reporter's questions, is "No comment." Only "no comment." No matter how tedious and repetitive it gets. One does not threaten a reporter with physical violence, as United States Representative Michael Grimm (R - NY) did following the State of the Union address. First of all, reporters may ask any questions they want about any subject. That's good journalism. While Rep. Grimm infers that he only agreed to be interviewed about the State of the Union speech, Etiquetteer thinks it rather disingenuous for anyone, much less a politician, to expect a member of the Fourth Estate not to ask questions about any burning and controversial topic - such as Rep. Grimm's fund-raising practices detailed in a Federal complaint. Frankly, he should have expected it. And while Etiquetteer can certainly understand why the Congressman would consider it an unwelcome question, that doesn't excuse violence or the threat of violence. Don't let it happen again.
No One Cares About Your Children in Public, Vol. 13, Issue 10
Since there seems to be some doubt on the subject, Etiquetteer would like to clarify that no one cares about your children. Especially when they are misbehaving out in public. No one cares! And no one cares especially if you, as a parent, do not care about the impact your children have on other people and/or their belongings. What, you are probably asking yourself, launched Etiquetteer into this tiny tirade? The answer, dear readers, is this article, with photos, of parents blissfully unconcerned about their child climbing all over what is apparently a multi-million dollar work of art at the Tate Modern. One of the parents responded, "You obviously don't understand kids." To which Etiquetteer protests that the parents don't understand them. Children want a place to play! This is why there are places for children to play that are specifically for playing. This is why we have parks with jungle gyms. This is why we have playgrounds with swings. This is why we have traffic with . . . wait, no . . . no, that's not helping. Don't send the children to play in traffic.
Parents who fail to set boundaries for their children outside the home fail to teach them respect for other people. This is most often seen in restaurants, where parents of Children Too Young to Know Better are allowed to get away with terrible behavior, which usually has to be cleaned up by a long-suffering waiter or waitress who is insufficiently tipped. Parents, think honestly about the impression your family makes when you're out and about. It takes a village to raise a child, the old saying goes, and you want to be sure the villagers aren't coming after your Precious Snowflakes with tar, torches, and pitchforks.
Of course, when you look at the artwork on which the child was climbing, an obvious solution presents itself. A reasonable facsimile can be purchased from West Elm or some other stark and severe home furnishings catalog and installed in the nursery at home. Problem solved.
Possibly Contradictory Issues About Dieting and Hospitality, Vol. 13, Issue 9
When is one's Diet more important than Offered Hospitality? When is Hospitality more important than Diet? Sometimes the issues are clear, and sometimes they are not. Religious Diets and Fatal Allergies usually trump Hospitality, Personal Preference usually shouldn't, with just about everything else, including Weight Loss and Doctor's Directive, wandering in the middle ground. Etiquetteer didn't get very far in this article about the dangers of artificial sweetener because of the story that began it. A grandmother, who just happens to be a researcher of food sweeteners, told a hostess not to serve her little granddaughter any birthday cake at a birthday party because it was made with an artificial sweetener. Let's leave aside the food safety issues for a moment and consider the etiquette of the situation. You've been invited into someone's home for a party, which automatically means that some trouble has been taken to entertain you, and questioning the trouble your hostess has taken for you enough to suggest that it's unsafe to eat. And on top of that, you're telling a hostess not to serve a little girl a slice of birthday cake at a birthday party when everyone else is going to have cake?! This is where Etiquetteer would like to serve up a heaping helping of Shut Up and Eat! Only that wouldn't be very Perfectly Proper, now would it?
A private home is not a restaurant, and it is not realistic for 21st-century hosts and hostesses (the overwhelming majority of whom haven't hired a cook) to cater as specifically as some guests require. You can eat what you want at home. Adhere as closely as you can to your diet when you're dining out, but please keep from overemphasizing it. Very many hosts make a point of accommodating vegetarians, which is a generous and gracious thing for them to do, by soliciting that information from their guests in advance.
Some related stories: the late Letitia Baldrige, in her diamonds-and-bruises memoir A Lady, First, told the story of one Kennedy White House state dinner when President Kennedy noticed a couple sitting near him weren't eating anything? "Is the dinner all right?" he asked, to be greeted cheerfully by the reply "We're Mormons, so we can't take alcohol." It turned out that every dish on the menu had alcohol in it! But this Mormon couple were clearly going to make the best of it with rolls and mints, and wouldn't have said anything if the President hadn't asked.
The late Gloria Swanson, famous in her later years as a vegetarian, would bring her own sandwich to dinner parties when invited out (whether to a home or a restaurant). Of course this works best on occasions when there's a staff to slip it to on arrival with the instructions "When you bring the entree, just slip this on a plate for me. I'm on a diet." The point is that Gloria knew enough not to inconvenience her hosts with her dietary needs and came prepared. She also didn't make a big fuss about it.
And then there's the late Ethel Merman, who brought a ham sandwich to Jule Styne's Passover Seder, as recounted in Arthur Laurents's wonderful memoir Original Story By Arthur Laurents. Jule Styne threw it on the floor and said "Ethel, you're offending the waiters!" Which just goes to show that there are limits. Indeed, Etiquetteer has written before about how it's not a good idea, even with a spirit of compassion and multiculturalism, to invite Orthodox Jews to Easter dinner and serve them a ham.
So . . . back to the children's birthday party with the Artificially Sweetened Cake. In this case, Etiquetteer thinks Hospitality trumps Diet. At a children's party Etiquetteer is most concerned about the children, and children, especially young ones, are eager to fit in. What needs to be saved in this situation? Three things: the little girl's experience as a guest, the dignity of the hostess, and the responsibilities of the little girl's grandmother, who, although Etiquetteer can't really approve of what was reported, is doing her job as a Protective Grandparent. Rather than say anything to the hostess, Etiquetteer could almost wish that the grandmother had simply told her granddaughter that she couldn't have any cake, even if it was served to her, and to make do with other refreshments. That way the little girl is still included as an equal with the other children, the hostess's feelings have been spared, and the grandmother's role as guardian is maintained. And if the grandmother is committed to eradicating Artificially Sweetened Cakes, she can always reciprocate with an invitation to her own home and serve a cake made with the Sweetener of Her Choice and nonchalantly raise the issue of what her research is uncovering about artificial sweeteners.
Etiquetteer feels sure you've encountered such an issue before, and would love to hear about it at queries <at> etiquetteer dot com.
Punctuality, Vol. 13, Issue 8
"Punctuality is the politeness of kings," often attributed to Louis XVIII*, really lays out the most basic Perfect Propriety for kings and commoners. Arriving on time and prepared, whether it's for a party or a meeting, shows respect to the other participants (whose productivity may depend on one's punctuality) - and also for one's hostess's soufflé, which could be ruined for all. So Etiquetteer read with interest this article about the four habits of punctual people. It really is astonishing how many people don't allow themselves enough time to get from one place to another, allow for delays, or, new to this century, rely on a Global Positioning System that is not 100% accurate en route without checking a map first.
This story also vividly brought to mind an incident from Etiquetteer's early life in the work world, which Etiquetteer has told so often you may have heard it before. A weekly management meeting would routinely begin up to 20 minutes late in this company because managers (who perhaps just didn't want to attend the meeting anyway) couldn't remember the time. Eager Young Etiquetteer, taught courtesy at his mother's knee, was assigned to record the minutes to these meetings, and began listing in the attendance at the top those who had been tardy. Within two weeks, everyone appeared promptly and the productivity and brevity of the meetings improved. But Eager Young Etiquetteer continued to list the tardies, who would occasionally appear for one reason or another.
And then the day came for which, apparently, many people had been waiting. Eager Young Etiquetteer Himself was tardy. It happened very innocently! At lunch with a colleague at a restaurant perhaps too distant from the office, the waitress was too slow with the check, and traffic was encountered returning to the office. Eager Young Etiquetteer and the colleague rushed to the conference room, only to discover that the door was locked! There was nothing to do but knock on the door. And much merriment ensued when Shamefaced Young Etiquetteer had to mark himself down as a tardy.
And the moral is this: good punctuality, like good housekeeping, is what goes unnoticed.
*Etiquetteer somehow prefers to remember him as the Comte de Provence, the younger brother and sometime Dauphin to Louis XVI.
Suburban Drag Racing, Vol. 13, Issue 7
Dear Etiquetteer: Justin Bieber has gotten himself into trouble drag racing in Florida. I feel sure he could have managed this better if you provided a few pointers on how to behave correctly in these circumstances. Just how DOES one drag race correctly in suburbia?
Dear Provocateur:
First of all before you get started, permission from the homeowner's association (HOA) is absolutely essential if you're in one of those gated communities. If no HOA is involved, be sure to get a racing permit from City Hall or the local Department of Motor Vehicles. Omitting these important steps could get one into a lot of trouble, as Mr. Bieber has discovered.
Next, some concern should be given to one's wardrobe. Perfectly Proper racing apparel absolutely includes a helmet with goggles, brown leather jacket, leather driving gloves, and white silk scarf. Etiquetteer very much recommends not wearing anything that could be mistaken for a prison jumpsuit. Orange may be the new black, but not for Best Society.
Even with a permit and everything, local laws about driving under the influence will still apply; when you go back and look at that permit, Etiquetteer'll bet there's no checkbox for "waiver of Driving While Impaired laws." So Neely O'Hara-style consumption for drag racing just is NOT Perfectly Proper.
Drag racing attracts attention, so it's important not to be surprised if local law enforcement suddenly appears to take an interest - especially if one hasn't already gotten permission (see above). Once THEY appear, only your Best Behavior will do. The police expect complete obedience, if not respect, but they will certainly not be inclined to assist you if you use Bad Language and fail to cooperate.
Last but not least, foreign nationals should be absolutely sure that their paperwork is in perfect order. One never knows when deportation might become an issue.*
The discerning among you will have understood by this time that Etiquetteer takes a dim view of this particular situation.
* If Mr. Bieber is, in fact, deported over this Unfortunate Incident, Etiquetteer can envision phalanxes of Beliebers descending on the White House in protest. Since most of them aren't yet of voting age, it will likely make no difference.
At Random, Vol. 13, Issue 6
Now that the milestone of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day has passed, Etiquetteer certainly hopes that you've finished all your Lovely Notes of Thanks from all the gifts and invitations you received. And Etiquetteer hopes you've received a sheaf of them in return for the gifts and entertainment you shared.
In bleak and bare January, it is pleasant to think of the spring to come and the blossoms that will appear in one's garden. So it's also helpful to remember that Oscar Wilde made the green carnation popular in his day. Gentlemen who wore a green carnation were instantly recognizable as "men of the Wilde sort," which made introductions of the like-minded so much safer and convenient. Remember this next St. Patrick's Day, now less than two months away.
Etiquetteer is getting mighty tired of people who do not understand that in this country, on escalators we stand on the right and pass on the left, and we certainly do not stand next to each other talking and blocking the way for others to pass us. Stop it at once!
Many people find it difficult to feel Perfectly Proper in subzero temperatures for the simple reasons that a) they're extremely cold and b) bulky winter wear obstructs movement, and sometimes vision as well. We can't all be Omar Sharif and Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago, more's the pity - PETA would be after their fur coats with their paintball guns in a flash - but concentrating on Perfect Posture can help transport us to a nice warm drawing room in our minds.
Breakfast by Candlelight, Vol. 13, Issue 5
File this under "Gracious Living" instead of "Perfect Propriety" if you must, but let's face it: the darkness of winter can be more difficult to face on some days than others. For those whose daily routines begin as early as 5:00 AM, the dark months can seem to go on for eternity. Etiquetteer has one possible remedy to suggest. Why not have your breakfast by candlelight? No special menu is needed; just enjoy your usual breakfast. But if you're more a breakfast-on-the-go type, it helps to set a place at the table as you would for any other meal. Before electric lights, the rule for dinner parties was one candle per person at table. Dust off a couple, light up, turn off the rest of the lights, and postpone the rush and bustle of the day for this one moment. You will feel that much more Perfectly Proper for the rest of the day.
And candlelight is so kind to the complexion.
Cummerbunds, Vol. 13, Issue 4
Etiquetteer hates cummerbunds. Not that they aren't Perfectly Proper. A cummerbund still falls within the Perfectly Proper evening clothes of a gentleman. But they can be rather difficult. Moving about causes a cummerbund to ride up, exposing shirttail and crumpling shirtfront, or to ride down, contributing to an air of sloppiness that is not consistent with evening clothes. And for gentlemen with a waist over, say, size 28, they only increase the size of one's girth - or its perception, which is quite different. And Etiquetteer thinks it's silly that the pleats have to be facing up - "up to catch the soup" as one friend of Etiquetteer's was taught - when what they really catch is crumbs, necessitating a trip to the restroom.
No, Etiquetteer does not like cummerbunds, and was quite happy to see the waistcoat start making a comeback in the 1990s. A waistcoat hides a multitude of sins and displays one's most elaborate watchchain. (What? You have no watchchain, no pocket watch? Get thee to the antique store!) But Etiquetteer longs for the day when the current fashion for a waistcoat with a shallow neckline - one that begins buttoning almost below the second stud - is replaced with a return to the waistcoat with a deep narrow V sets off that sliver of gleaming white shirtfront studded with - well, studded with shirt studs. Nothing could be more striking!
More on Hostess Gifts, Vol. 13, Issue 3
Readers over at Etiquetteer's Facebook page have more questions about hostess gifts: Dear Etiquetteer:
Is the gift to the hostess given to the hostess for her use only, or is it usually to be shared with the entire party? I've heard that gifts of food and/or wine are quietly given to the hostess with the idea being that the food or wine may not suit the evening's menu but enjoyed later after the guests have left. What do you think?
Dear Gifting:
Etiquetteer thinks discerning guests give hostess gifts as actual gifts, to be used at the discretion of the host or hostess. Reasons abound for this:
- The guest may actually have chosen the gift for the private enjoyment of the host or hostess.
- The gift might not actually fit in with the refreshments already planned.
- The host or hostess might want to spare the feelings of other guests who did not bring a gift.
If the hosts included in the invitation "Please bring a bottle of wine," however, Etiquetteer will bet they intend to serve it at the party.
Etiquetteer would suggest one exception. Should a child appear with a gift of food or drink to your party, be sure to share it and exclaim over it, no matter what it is. It's not always easy for children at a party of (perhaps) mostly grownups, and your attention and gratitude to them will make them feel more at ease. Which is really what Perfectly Proper hosts and hostesses do for guests of all ages.
Dear Etiquetteer:
And I would further suggest that if you're bringing flowers, bring a flowering plant, an arrangement, or cut flowers already in some kind of vase. The last thing I as a host want to be doing is searching out an appropriate vase, cutting the stems, arranging the flowers, and so on, when I want to be greeting guests and/or putting the finishing touches on the meal. (Or quietly having a nervous breakdown in the next room.)
Dear Flora: The great Miss Manners herself, Judith Martin, covered this exact issue in her marvelous Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior, and recommended keeping a vase full of water in the pantry just in case. But Etiquetteer will confess to loving a Floral Tribute, even if it does create some additional hustle-bustle at a party. The hustle-bustle that gets Etiquetteer is the guests who call (or even worse, text message) at exactly the time the party is supposed to begin with requests for directions or an update on why they aren't there yet.
Hostess Gifts, Vol. 13, Issue 2
Dear Etiquetteer: What is the proper etiquette for what to bring to a dinner party? Does one always simply ask what to bring or perhaps just a nice bottle of wine? Does one ask what one can bring if it is not mentioned in the invitation?
Dear Invited:
Call Etiquetteer old-fashioned, but Etiquetteer prefers to maintain that a Lovely Note of Thanks after a dinner party is much more essential, and Perfectly Proper, than a hostess gift. That said, flowers are the safest choice for a gift, with wine running a close second. Etiquetteer ranks them in this order because the number of people who are allergic to flowers is less than the number of people who don't drink wine.
As you point out, sometimes hosts will specify what they would like to guests to bring; honor that as closely as possible. If hosts don't include a preference in their invitation, by all means ask if you're so inclined. But be warned: you might get more of an assignment than you bargained for. Etiquetteer vividly remembers asking one hostess "What may I bring?" to be given the reply "Oh, the dessert!" This was more work than Etiquetteer wanted to do, but having asked in the first place, Etiquetteer gritted his teeth and baked a cake. Etiquetteer still thinks of this as a bait-and-switch invitation; having been invited to a dinner party, it actually turned out to be a potluck.
Hosts should also be prepared for this question, and Etiquetteer encourages general instructions rather than specifics, e.g. "Oh, just a bottle of red you like that will go with roast" rather than "a couple bottles of Chateau de la Tour de Bleah 2008." This gives the guests the opportunity to stay within whatever budget they have.
But Etiquetteer really thinks the best response to that query is "Please bring a smile and a couple good stories!" A dinner guests "sings for his supper" best with a contribution not of a bottle, but of one's camaraderie and good humor.
When Hospitalized Overseas, Vol. 13, Issue 1
Dear Etiquetteer: You are such a well-traveled and well-mannered person, I write you to seek your wise guidance as to how to respond correctly to unexpected situations.
1) Imagine Madame in an overseas hospital operating room. She is lying on her right side with her left arm held up out of the way by a restraint, and anesthetized from the chest down, but wide awake and conversing with the surgeon during the operation.
The surgeon, while cutting into Madame, informs her of his progress, to wit: “I am now cutting through all the fat in your butt.” What, pray tell, is the appropriate repartee?
2) Madame brought along with her to the hospital her extendable “grabber/reacher” thing. It's called a PikStik, and the name is on it. There followed some smirks from the nurses.
Upon inquiry, one of the male nurses, blushing, informed Madame that “Pik” was the local dialect word for “external male genitalia”, and that the idea that such equipment could be doubled in length upon command was a concept that was appealing to many. The blushing and snickering persisted with each new staff member to see Madame’s reacher.
Any thoughts as to the proper response?
Dear Patient:
Indeed, one must be patient in a Country Other Than One's Own when interacting within its healthcare system. And it is most important to the retain the sympathies of the healthcare personnel with whom one interacts. That need not come at the expense of one's dignity.
Humor, however, relieves many an awkward situation, and each of these might benefit from a bit of levity. While under the knife, Madame might have responded to the doctor, "I guess it's too late to go on that diet now." In the second, a Victorian etiquette manual (Etiquetteer is gnashing his teeth to remember which one) said that "a lady does not even recognize a double entendre." Alas, we are none of us Victorians . . . still, one can do more with a pointed or coy glance and a raised eyebrow than with any words. But truly, as a hospital patient, one is excused from conversation on the grounds that one just isn't in the best of health and needs to catch up on one's sleep.
Allow Etiquetteer to wish Madame a Swift and Perfectly Proper recovery!
Holiday Gift-Giving and Money, Vol. 12, Issue 13
Dear Etiquetteer: I take my god daughter and her brother to [Insert Large Traditional Holiday Entertainment Here] every year. Their parents come, but their tickets are not part of my gift. Last year they gave me a check for their own tickets. This year they did not. Is there a polite way to ask for the check, or am I [Insert Euphemism Here]?
Dear Godfather:
The Most Wonderful Time of the Year always reveals that Absentmindedness is the true Gift That Keeps on Giving. It's always more Perfectly Proper to assume Absentmindedness in such cases, rather than Malice or Cheapness. It's possible that you could introduce the topic with the parents by claiming the absentmindedness was yours rather than theirs, such as "In the excitement of taking Ethelred and Ethelredina to [Insert Large Traditional Holiday Entertainment Here] I did not remember to get your check. Would you mind awfully sending it to me? I do enjoy making this possible for the children!"
Etiquetteer must caution against the Worst-Case Scenario, in which the parents respond that they had no idea they had to pay for their tickets this year. Etiquetteer hopes you specified that in the invitation, but no one wants Max Fabyan hollering "Dees ees for lawyers to talk about!" as part of what is supposed to be a Happy Time. If they do, in the interests of Harmony, it might be best to drop it - but to be careful to specify it in invitations for all subsequent years.
Dear Etiquetteer:
I usually tip my cleaning lady the amount of a regular cleaning at Christmas. This year she will be cleaning the week after Thanksgiving and just before New Year. So, do I give it to her on early or late December. I am FIRMLY opposed to holiday creep, but . . .
Dear Householder:
Tip on your regular schedule. While the holiday cleaning is beginning earlier in your household this year, it's still ending at the same time.
Tomorrow night, Monday, December 9, Etiquetteer will a festive celebration of the anniversary of Prohibition's Repeal at The Gibson House Museum in Boston, including a few brief remarks on the Culture of Alcohol Concealment that Prohibition helped foster. It will be an amusing time!
No Cellphones in Planes! Vol. 12, Issue 12
Etiquetteer was thrilled with horror earlier this week to read that the Federal Aviation Administration was actually considering allowing the use of cellphones on airplanes after reaching an altitude of 10,000 feet. As if Airborne Perfect Propriety were not under threat enough already, now we may have to contend with the loud, indiscreet yakking of selfish, indifferent fellow passengers whose limited imaginations keep them from thinking of other ways to respond to boredom than calling absent friends. "It's the social stigma of people having loud public conversations in a public space," said Steve Nolan, a Gogo spokesman, quoted in the Wall Street Journal article linked above. Except that's not quite what the FAA has in mind, so it's a good thing Etiquetteer didn't tear off in high dudgeon* to protest. At least not yet. According to its press release, "The FAA did not consider changing the regulations regarding the use of cell phones for voice communications during flight because the issue is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission. The ARC did recommend that the FAA consult with the FCC to review its current rules. Cell phones differ from most personal electronic devices in that they are designed to send out signals strong enough to be received at great distances."
The FCC, at least the way Etiquetteer interprets their blog entry, sounds just a wee bit like they're punting the issue to the airlines. "In this case we have an outdated rule on our books that has been overtaken by advances in technology. If the technological justification for our existing prohibition is no longer valid, then it is our responsibility to examine ways to update and modernize the rules through an open and transparent rulemaking process. But it is the responsibility of the airlines, in response to their customers, to determine how to apply that rule change to their in-flight services."
That may be, but this "outdated" rule has helped keep the peace on many a flight. Others have already commented that 21st-century air travel is 20th-century bus travel. From outrageously large carry-on bags (both quantity and size) to narrower seats to the invasion of privacy for security, from overbooked flights to fellow passengers who believe the world is their bedroom, Perfect Propriety has never been more at risk. If airlines do not have the opportunity to offer cellphone service to their passengers, then they won't be tempted to do so.
Of course there are legitimate reasons for people to want cellphone access while flying, the most obvious being the need to communicate with others about last-minute changes to one's itinerary. But these situations have been solved already for generations without that opportunity to communicate, and Etiquetteer fears that such calls would only end up a very small percentage of those actually made.
This issue bears watching, and Etiquetteer encourages you to contact the airlines you patronize most frequently to urge them not to allow voice calls in flight.
* Etiquetteer suspects that somewhere in the north of England there is a village called High Dudgeon.
Acknowledging Acknowledgment of a Sneeze, Vol. 12, Issue 19
Dear Etiquetteer: If I sneeze while wearing earphones, should I remove at least one bud to accept and show gratitude for a "bless you" or is it OK to keep listening to my NPR podcast?
Likewise, if I am on the opposite side of that scenario is it rude NOT to say "bless you" to the sneezer should they not shed a bud, assuming that they will not hear it anyway or should I throw it out there regardless?
Dear Budded:
If a sneeze is sneezed in the forest with no one to hear it, is it blessed?
It is one of etiquette's eccentricities that sneezing is the only Bodily Function acknowledged in public. One does not comment on, or even acknowledge, coughing, nose-blowing, yawning, belching, snoring, and especially flatulence - no matter how obvious any of those Bodily Functions might be. Etiquetteer has always understood that this began in Days of Yore ("when knighthood was in flower") because the soul was thought to leave the body with the sneeze; a blessing would protect or restore it.
To answer your second question first, a Perfectly Proper "God bless you!" can't go wrong, even if the sneezer is wearing earbuds or earphones. (Etiquetteer does prefer "God bless you" to "Bless you." The Fiercely Secular may always use "Gesundheit," which is the German for "health." Etiquetteer must caution you to avoid translating this into French. Answering a sneeze with "A votre santé!" will only lead people to wonder where the champagne is*.)
If you sneeze without sufficient power to dislodge your earbuds, Etiquetteer does not think it necessary for you to remove either or both of them to acknowledge a "God bless you." This does not, however, excuse you from acknowledging it. Make eye contact with your blesser and nod - kindly or briskly, depending on your degree of acquaintance - and then go about your business. If you're one of those people who are going along with the Medical Establishment and sneezing into your elbow instead of your hand, Etiquetteer hopes this won't involve removing, um, Nasal Effluvia from your sleeve. While hesitating to question the wisdom of the Medical Establishment, Etiquetteer continues to advocate the use of a Perfectly Proper handkerchief.
*Or whether or not you are Doris Day in Romance on the High Seas.
Etiquetteer Succumbs to Temptation and Gets His Comeuppance, Vol. 12, Issue 18
The late Mae West famously said "I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it." Today, unfortunately, Etiquetteer couldn't resist it, and paid the price. This morning Etiquetteer stopped by the library at a time when one of those special movie screenings for children was taking place (arranged, perhaps, for children to enjoy the library without actually having to pick up a book). Outside the screening room a table of little snacks had been set up: cups of snack mix, little trays and baskets of cookies, etc. Etiquetteer, from either peckishness or annoyance (though there is no excuse for Imperfect Propriety), casually helped himself to a large biscuit while passing the table.
With the first bite Etiquetteer sensed something wrong. Not that his Improper Grazing had been observed, but with the biscuit itself. Had some health faddist concocted it out of sawdust? Turning back to the table, Etiquetteer observed for the first time the box from whence the biscuits came. They were organic dog biscuits!
"Keep cool," Etiquetteer's beloved Ellen Maury Slayden once observed. "This is a test of breeding." And of course when one has something in one's mouth that shouldn't be there, one removes it as unobtrusively as possible. Without attracting attention, Etiquetteer silently made his way to the restroom, where the remains of the dog biscuit were disposed of without incident.
And what do we learn from this little incident?
- Don't help yourself unless invited to do so.
- Segregate refreshments by their consuming species.
- Even Etiquetteer can make mistakes.
Perfectly Proper Parenting - or Not, Vol. 12, Issue 17
Like many, Etiquetteer has watched with appalled dismay the unfolding story from Stephentown, New York, of the untenanted house of former NFL player Brian Holloway trashed by a party of hundreds of teenagers. Unfortunately no one comes out of this story blameless. The Marauding Teens, of course, come in for a hefty share of blame. At a bare minimum they're guilty of trespassing, and who knows what else. The petting party in Peyton Place looks so innocent by comparison!
Mr. Holloway Himself, though Etiquetteer does not question his motives, should not have posted names and photos on the Internet. Anytime you get involved with something like that involving a minor, it gets ugly. Etiquetteer rather wishes Mr. Holloway had spoken to his lawyer first.
But the parents of these marauding teenagers certainly come out the worst! Etiquetteer does not really think it matters that the house was untenanted and in foreclosure. One of the central tenets of Perfect Propriety is that, if something doesn't belong to one, one doesn't use it without permission. And no one is pretending that anyone but Holloway owns the house! Etiquetteer's ears are deaf to their Outraged Whining about the alleged actual condition of the house and its furnishings, and even about their concerns for Mr. Holloway republishing the names and images of their children (using information already posted by the Marauding Teens). What their children did was indefensible, plain and simple! Instead of threatening Mr. Holloway with lawsuits, they should absolutely be leading their children - dragging them by the hand in necessary - to apologize for trespassing on his property and leaving it in a worse condition than that in which they found it. Why they are not doing this is a mystery to Etiquetteer. And their apparent acquiescence in the behavior of their children sure does send a message that it's Perfectly Proper to destroy someone's home for a party, whether someone lives there or not. And since there seems to be doubt in the matter, let Etiquetteer assure you that it is NOT!
Think for a moment: would your parents have let you get away with something like this? One looks with pride on the Australian father who sold his daughter's concert tickets after he discovered she was on a sleepover at the home of an older man (though Etiquetteer's hair curled at his candor.)
When people gas on about "family values," they forget that the most basic is raising children to be good citizens. One should not have to ask if this kind of behavior is good citizenship. One should not!
Etiquetteer rather hopes these parents do pursue their lawsuit against Mr. Holloway, so that the judge can school them on what really is Perfectly Proper. In the meantime, you may be sure that Etiquetteer will be staying far away from Stephentown, where one's rights are not respected.
Tipping and Panhandling, Vol. 12, Issue 16
Dear Etiquetteer: I had an ethical quandary today. I was hawking programs at Fenway Park. A man was begging for money next to me. He was in a wheelchair. He was conversant and friendly with people. He offered to buy a program from me for $2. I obliged.
When I finished my shift, I gave him a dollar. It was actually a dollar I had received as a tip.
Was this right? Was this ethical?
PS. I'm submitting this to the NY Times Magazine as a question, too.
Dear Hawking:
Etiquetteer considers that you were acting in two capacities, professional and personal. Had you not waited until the end of your shift to assist this man, it would have given the appearance that your largesse was, in fact, that of your employer.
The purchase of a $2 baseball program by a panhandler might be considered extravagant on his part, but he may have considered it expedient to ensure your goodwill during your time together outside the ballpark. (Etiquetteer can only imagine the difficulties he and others face.) Was it right/ethical of you to sell him that program? Absolutely! That's the job your employer has hired you to do, and it isn't Perfectly Proper to inquire into the circumstances of your customers - even when they're paraded in front of you. In other words, they aren't your programs to give away.
But your tips are your own to dispose of as you wish, on yourself, or to share with others.
Etiquetteer will be interested to read what the Times has to say, too!
No One Is a [Traffic] Island, Vol. 12, Issue 15
This afternoon Etiquetteer nearly witnessed a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian on a city street. Etiquetteer heard some sort of suspicious noise, turned around, and there across the street about 50 feet back a woman was sitting up in the street yelling "It's a crawswawk! It's a crawswawk!" while a man in cycling garb was standing over her and beginning to raise his voice, too. And indeed, the woman was sitting in a crosswalk at an intersection with a stoplight. The point of impact was about five feet from the sidewalk. As several others were going to the aid of the woman, Etiquetteer felt no need to become involved directly - too much help can be as bad as too little, and quite a cluster of people was starting to form - but Etiquetteer could picture a few different scenarios:
CYCLIST SCENARIO: While the woman was crossing the street during a red light, the cyclist, Master of the Universe, hit her, disregarding the rule "Share the road, share the red light."
PEDESTRIAN SCENARIO: With the blithe certainty exhibited by more than a few pedestrians that all vehicular traffic will stop whenever someone walks into a crosswalk regardless of signals or signs, the woman began crossing the street and was hit by the cyclist who actually had the right of way.
IDIOTS SCENARIO: Neither of them was looking where they were going, regardless of who had the right of way, and they are equally at fault.
Etiquetteer hopes that neither party sustained grievous injuries, but hopes that they, and you, will exhibit greater care on the streets. Because the moral of the story is, "Watch where you're going, whether you have the right of way or not."
Baby Gifts and Baby Names, Vol 12, Issue 14
This week's birth of the Prince of Cambridge has afflicted monarchists and royal-watchers with a bad case of the Goo-Goo Gagas. As Etiquetteer pointed out on his Facebook page, there are an awful lot of people who want to know what to do to celebrate the Royal Birth in terms of gift-giving, celebrating, etc. While Etiquetteer is rarely averse to lifting a glass of Champagne (the most Perfectly Proper beverage with which to celebrate a birth), Etiquetteer is obliged to remind you all that, unless you're already personally acquainted with the Royal Family, and as lovely and kind a family as they are supposed to be, they don't know you and probably won't be paying any attention to anything you happen to send their way, whether a tangible gift or a Lovely Note.
Etiquetteer would like to suggest that those who are not personal friends of the Family, or current Heads of State, acknowledge the Prince of Cambridge's birth by doing something for a newborn in their own community. Plenty of babies come into this world with nothing, including responsible parents. Whether making a donation of money, handmade Little Garments, or other Things Infants Need, you'll make a greater difference where it counts. And you may always send with your donation a Little Note indicating that your gift is made "in honor of the birth of the Prince of Cambridge." Search the Web or call your local hospital for specific organizations and guidelines.
You may then reward yourself with a glass of Champagne (use your nicest crystal) and a slice of white cake iced in white with the royal monogram.
Some expectant parents are a little too eager to suggest gifts for Baby, but Etiquetteer always believes that a copy of that essential volume Pat the Bunny is appropriate. (Come to think of it, Etiquetteer still has the two-volume Winnie-the-Pooh he received at birth from an uncle.) There are many novelty onesies in the shops; choose wisely and tastefully from among them. Pride in schools and sports teams rates high, and you would not, for instance, send a Yale onesie to a Harvard family, or Boston Red Sox booties to those who hold season tickets to Yankee Stadium. Godparents should give a piece of sterling silver engraved with Baby's initials. No, not an epergne or candelabra! (One Liberace was enough, thank you.) A sterling silver rattle or teething ring is most Perfectly Proper, and practical, too. When teething, chilled silver is soothing to Baby's hot gums.
Perhaps motivated by the birth of the Prince, GQ has joined the fun with this list of rules for how not to name a baby. Etiquetteer has deplored the vogue in recent years to alter the spelling of established names, which will only condemn the Poor Child to endless spellings and reminders of "No, it's with a Y" or something of that sort. The GQ rule #7 is well taken. It would be interesting to hear from the many men and women born in the mid-1970s named "Kunta Kinte" or "Kizzy" after Alex Haley's blockbuster Roots was published and televised. How have they used, adapted, or rejected their names that were fashionable when they were born but almost unfamiliar now?
And yet Fashion has affected the naming of babies as it affects everything, and the popularity of certain names comes and goes. In the 17th and 18th centuries Biblical and allegorical names were popular. Indeed, Etiquetteer can count four Obadiahs, three Shubaels, two Pentecosts, a Freedom, and a Desire in his own family tree. But the best advice is the simplest, and comes from the world of clothes shopping: you can never go wrong with a classic.
Reflections on Wedding Invitations, Gifts, and Attitudes, Vol. 12, Issue 13
Etiquetteer has been relieved of the burden of wedding invitations this summer. Consider that sentence for a moment. Isn't it a pity that so many people consider an invitation to a wedding a burden, rather than a Happy Occasion to celebrate a Joyous Marriage with friends and relations? Etiquetteer is of the completely subjective and entirely unresearched opinion that there are two causes: the expense of attending a wedding for a guest (especially travel, which is not only expensive but inconvenient) and the selfish behavior of brides that led to the coining of the term "bridezilla" several years ago. These two causes combine in the selection of a gift for the Happy Couple. Etiquetteer was deeply sorry to read last week about a bride who was sufficiently unbalanced to call out her friends on social media for what she perceived as their inadequate generosity. First of all it's vulgar in the extreme to mention how much money was spent to entertain your guests. You invite friends (or the friends of your parents) to a wedding for the pleasure of their company, not because you expect them to cover the costs of their own entertainment*. Second, your wedding is not as important to your friends as it is to you; no doubt there are other, more important claims on their resources than your Gaping Maw of Bridal Need. And third, criticizing someone so bluntly on social media about their behavior is just as bad as, if not worse than, doing so to their faces. Brides who follow this example deserve to lose a lot of friends.
With the advent of social media, some confusion has also spread over how to interpret how one receives knowledge of a wedding -- or, to be completely candid, when to suspect that the only reason you're hearing is that the Happy Couple expects a gift. Over at Etiquetteer's Facebook page (speaking of social media), Etiquetteer recalled learning of the wedding of a Friend of Etiquetteer's Youth from Dear Mother; the invitation had been addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. [Parents of Etiquetteer] and Etiquetteer," which is far from Perfectly Proper. Why, you ask? Because at the time the invitation was sent, Etiquetteer was not only well over the Age of Consent, but also not living under the parental roof. Anyone over the age of 21 deserves his or her own engraved invitation sent to his or her own address; attempting to economize by doubling up invitations to parents and grown children makes you look shabby. Saying you can't find that person's address no longer serves as an excuse, thanks to the Internet.
This led to the question of how to respond to wedding invitations from Long Unheard-of Schoolfellows who haven't been heard from in so long that their motives are suspect. Back before the Internet (and before brides expected everyone to Travel the Earth on Command), wedding announcements were sent instead of invitations, something along the lines of
Mr. and Mrs. Fairleigh Freshness
announce the marriage of their daughter
Miss Dewy Freshness
to Mr. Manley Firmness
on [Insert Date Here].
Frequently a little address card would be included so that recipients would know where the Happy Couple would be living. You must remember that this was before the days of "Live Together First:"
Mr. and Mrs. Manley Firmness
After [Insert Date After Honeymoon Here]
5456 Cottage Lane, Apartment Six
Verdant Greens, New Jersey
Receipt of a wedding announcement was taken as information that the Happy Couple felt you should know, but not with the expectation of a gift. As much as Etiquetteer enjoys social media and other electronic communications, Etiquetteer would rather like to see engraved wedding announcements come back.
Should you receive a wedding invitation from someone you haven't heard of in many years, put pen to paper at once and send a Lovely Note of Congratulations along with your Infinite Regret that you cannot attend in person. And that concludes your obligation.
*If the costs are really bothering you, have a simpler wedding and invite fewer people.