“I suggest ya put on a tie! — Frau Blücher, of course, in Young Frankenstein
Last week a friend and reader forwarded this very interesting article from The New York Times about the return of dress codes to certain white-tablecloth restaurants. Etiquetteer rejoiced openly, clearly One of Those People “eager to dress up again after an epoch of record-level dowdiness.” But Etiquetteer would much rather keep it simple — “Business attire,” “smart casual” — and leave out all the precious euphemisms. Among other examples, the article included “New York swagger,” “upscale fashionable dress code strongly enforced,” and possibly the most easily abused, “We expect our guests to bring their best.” That is far too open to interpretation!
It’s impossible to ignore, though, that all standards of dress, in almost all situations, are more greatly open to interpretation than ever before. Etiquetteer blames the insidious advent of athleisure wear, the invasive species of clothing. In the meantime, ladies have more or less decided that leggings are Perfectly Proper, but whether they are dressy enough to be considered “smart casual” still causes confusion. Leggings are the pantsuits of the 21st-century. And you’ll notice very few people have a problem with ladies in trousers now.
The real issue, of course, is that too often what does or doesn’t meet the letter and/or spirit of a restaurant’s dress code is left “to the discretion of the management” — and that is not applied equally to all, which is Not Perfectly Proper. The article unflinchingly addresses that dress codes, often, were created to exclude based on race, gender, class, or just Not Being the Right Sort. And let’s face it, it’s deeply embarrassing to be turned away from a restaurant — anyplace — because what you’re wearing doesn’t measure up*.
As a general rule, Etiquetteer doesn’t look at the comments, but mercy goodness, the reverse snobbery flaming out from Those People Who Disparage Dress Codes And Those Who Love Them! Etiquetteer doesn’t consider them morally purer — just angrier. Dress codes have their place — Etiquetteer likes them because they underscore a sense of Occasion — but as more than one angry commenter pointed out, if you don’t like the dress code someplace, don’t go. What could be simpler?
Someone also pointed out that “No shirt, no shoes, no service” is also a dress code. So, it could be argued, is “No shirt, no shoes, no problem.” But often the market can’t, ahem, bear it. O’Naturel, the first restaurant nu in Paris**, opened in November, 2017 — and closed in February, 2019, after a great deal of lack of interest. Will the market support this refreshed crop of (clothed) dress standards for dining out? Time will tell!
In the meantime, let Etiquetteer ask this: are people who dress one way better or more Perfectly Proper than those who dress another? Etiquetteer thinks it depends entirely on how sharply you sneer at those dressing differently from yourself. The sharper the sneer, the less Perfectly Proper. Perhaps you can confine yourself to a gentle uptilting of your nose, whether you have on leggings, Daisy Dukes, or Chanel.
All Etiquetteer can do now is wish you Bon appétit!
*And this has happened to Etiquetteer, unforgettably when popping into the Savoy in London on a whim way back in Etiquetteer’s Callow Youth, hoping for afternoon tea seulement seul. The headwaiter was very nice about it, apologetically saying “You’ll have to have a jacket” . . . which Etiquetteer clearly didn’t have. But that was that. Un autre temps!
**Yes, a nudist restaurant in Paris! Etiquetteer is not making this up, you know.