Condolence Correspondence, Vol. 14, Issue 39

Dear Etiquetteer: How long does one really have to write a condolence note after someone dies? Is it still acceptable to send a note a couple months later?

Dear Condoling:

Condolences really should be written and sent as soon as one learns of a death. Etiquetteer will never forget the Busy Executive who, on learning of the death of a colleague's parent, reached instantly for the box of notecards and began penning his condolence. This is why it always helps to have a box of Perfectly Proper stationery on hand, as well as postage stamps that don't look too celebratory.

The later one puts off a condolence, the harder it feels to write. That does not, in fact, make it harder to write; it just feels that way. Late condolences, which for the purposes of this column Etiquetteer will define as condolences written later than two weeks after the death, should include at least one of two subjects: specific reminiscences to cast a positive light on the deceased, whether humorous, inspiring, or otherwise; and the knowledge that the writer remains concerned about the recipient even after the funeral has taken place. Etiquetteer advises correspondents to avoid "If there's anything I can do . . . " or its variations unless one really is ready to do anything when the condoled call for help.

Condolences and National Card and Letter Writing Month, Vol. 14, Issue 19

Dear Etiquetteer: Is the term, "I'm sorry" an appropriate response upon hearing of a death in the family of a friend? I see so much of that on Facebook, while I had thought that extending sympathy or condolences would be a more proper response.

Dear Condoling:

Your query shows a discerning attitude about how we use language, which Etiquetteer can only admire and wish more people would adopt. This led Etiquetteer to examine more closely the definition of "sorry." For a moment Etiquetteer thought the word might imply personal responsibility for what one was sorry for. As it turns out, one definition is ""Feeling regret, compunction, sympathy . . . " and another is "suggestive of grief or suffering," so Etiquetteer can say that "I'm sorry" is an appropriate response to the news of a death. I'm sorry.

Now, is it the most appropriate response? Like you, Etiquetteer would rather see "My condolences" or "My sympathies" used instead, because those words are more specific to the occasion. "I'm sorry" is used every time an apology is made. One cannot say "My condolences for forgetting to attend your birthday dinner," for instance. And online, "I'm sorry" looks rather like a throwaway comment, which (Etiquetteer must hasten to add before the brickbats fly) is surely not the intent of those commenting.

Etiquetteer remains ambivalent about online condolences, whether on social media or through the online guest books of funeral homes. This is not to say that such things aren't, or can't be, Proper; this only reflects Etiquetteer's ambivalence. Condolences serve two purposes: to express sympathy to the bereaved by sharing positive thoughts and memories of the deceased; and, through the act of thoughtful writing, to assist oneself through the grieving process. What is attractive about expressing sympathy online is its immediacy, and the swift expression of condolences remains a very important part of expressing them. But the pitfalls of Immediate Online Expression are thoughtlessness and indiscretion on one side, and the consciousness of writing for a larger audience than the bereaved on the other. This last can sometimes lead to - how to say it? - an Escalation of Histrionics that becomes less about the impact of the deceased and more about the individual grief of each commenter. Just as it is improper to steal the spotlight from the bride at a wedding, so is it improper to steal the spotlight from the deceased. Often that form of writing is best left to one's personal, offline journal.

 

Etiquetteer learned only recently that April is National Card and Letter Writing Month. Considering the query above, it's essential to note that online comments on a message board do not replace the need for a handwritten condolence note. Nor will Etiquetteer accept the complaint that this is stuffy and old-fashioned. If anything, the understandable rush to adopt online communications has made handwritten letters and notes that much more significant and special to the recipients! The Lovely Note of Thanks (especially for wedding gifts), the Get Well Card, and even the Letter for No Reason give us opportunities for creativity and thoughtfulness unavailable online, because the audience is the Recipient Alone. And the thrill of seeing an envelope in one's mailbox that isn't a bill or junk mail remains fresh.

Unfortunately Etiquetteer has mailed exactly two handwritten pieces of correspondence this month. Let's all do better than that in the remaining week of National Card and Letter Writing Month, and in the months beyond!

Today is the last official day to vote in Etiquetteer's Spring Madness of Pet Peeves, and my goodness, what is to come afterward . . . This round determines the champion pet peeve in each division. NEXT week we'll see the divisions compete against each other: Weddings vs. Driving and Traffic, and Dining Out/Table Manners vs. General Peeves! So far these look like difficult choices. Please vote today!

Grieving Online, Vol. 13, Issue 58

Dear Etiquetteer: Recently a friend of mine passed away unexpectedly at a young age (under 50). You can imagine people’s shock and distress and sorrow. What are the rules for posting about one’s grief over the passing of a loved one in the era of social media? It seems that letting the family announce the death first on social media would be important. Also, it seems that many people had to outdo each other with stories of how horrible it was to them that this person passed away. Also there were speculations and rumors about the cause of death and all sorts of gossip out in the public. What advice could Etiquetteer provide?

Dear Bereaved:

First, let Etiquetteer offer condolences on the death of your friend. It's expected that the death of a friend, regardless of age or circumstances, will bring up many memories along with feelings of sadness - indeed, many emotions. And it's understandable that the bereaved will be drawn closer to others who knew the deceased to grieve together. But how we express ourselves in person doesn't always translate the same way online, especially when grieving.

The ways we communicate in the 21st century haven't necessarily adapted well to Perfect Propriety. For instance, social media now creates a public (or at least highly visible) record of information that used to be shared by whispering behind one's fan or privately in a letter to only one person. (Do you remember letters? While Etiquetteer does enjoy the convenience of email, the intimacy of letters is missed. Etiquetteer misses them even more than he misses fans for those gossiping old biddies . . . um, Great Ladies.)

It is understandable that people want to share their grief, but many don't always understand that respecting the feelings of others, especially the family, is even more important. It's necessarily thoughtful to wait until the family has made a death announcement before sharing the news (and one's reactions to it) oneself online. Imagine learning about the death of your son or daughter from Facebook! Etiquetteer would like to see everyone spared this sort of shock. One complication is that the family can't always be assumed to be using the same social media. Before expressing one's grief publicly in a social media post, it's best to confirm the news with the family or someone closer to the family than oneself.

Freedom of Speech is the most valuable American freedom, and as such, it needs to be used responsibly. Etiquetteer deplores the Grief Sweepstakes you describe - "I'm the most grief-stricken!" "No, I'M the most grief-stricken!" - which is the mark of a Vulgar Exhibitionist. While not wishing to pooh-pooh anyone's grief at the death of a friend or family member, Etiquetteer must gently remind everyone that it's the deceased that is the proper focus of attention, not one's own emotions at the death of the deceased.

Etiquetteer would vastly prefer to see dialogue about the deceased focus on personal acts of kindness and happy memories rather than (most vulgar of all) speculation on the cause of death. Nothing that might damage the reputation of the deceased should be shared so publicly, online or in person. Etiquetteer still hasn't forgotten attending a small funeral several years ago during which one of the mourners shared many Jolly Recollections of illegal activities committed by the deceased.

In short, "Least said, soonest mended" is the best advice. And don't let the immediacy of the Internet keep you from writing a Lovely Note of Condolence by hand and mailing it to the family.

Would you rather Etiquetteer discuss something more pleasant during the holiday season? It's up to you! Send Etiquetteer a query at <queries> at etiquetteer.com.

Mourning and Help Wanteds, Vol. 6, Issue 13

Dear Etiquetteer:Last week my mother called me to tell me the child of neighborhood acquaintances had died. It was a baby, and I guess it was sudden and unexpected. I haven’t seen these people in awhile, and I wasn’t sure if I should have gone to the funeral or not. I haven’t seen these folks in a very long time, and I wouldn’t want them to think I was intruding. We also, I know, have different opinions about gay marriage; would they think I was rubbing it in their faces? Dear Sympathizing: Conventional wisdom has always been "When in doubt, don’t." But whenever attending a funeral is in question, Etiquetteer says DO. The bereaved are more likely to be grateful for any effort taken to console them, rather than think of slights and disagreements. And if they WERE to think of slights and disagreements, then they wouldn’t be very worthy of consolation, would they? But that would be their fault for thinking it, and not yours for going to the funeral. Etiquetteer hopes you will at least send a letter of condolence (not an e-mail) to let them know you’re thinking of them. Dear Etiquetteer: An elderly cousin in North Carolina died last month. She was an eighty-year-old first cousin who had not married, but had a large town full of friends. While she had cousins on the other side of her family, my wife and I were the closest next of kin. We were the ones to make funeral arrangements. While she had already prearranged her funeral, there are those final details to take care of: getting proper clothes for her to be buried in, arranging a time for the funeral service that would fit the church, minister and family that had to make travel arrangements. Finding the cousins on the other side of the family was a problem. We had to be escorted into her apartment by the security man at her group residence to look for her address book. Looking up the phone number of the cousins on the other side along with other friends and finding out who is the custodian for her mentally retarded god child in New Orleans. After recording all the addresses and phone numbers of people we recognized as being our cousin’s close friends, the address book was turned back to the security man. Our cousin had been very generous in helping just about every good cause in town and out. I was informed by the administrator of the county school system that she had given over 90 scholarships. This did not include the city school system.Writing the obituary was really a joy as we included facts about her life. The funeral home had their web site or e-mail address included at the end of the obituary. Yesterday, I received from the funeral home several copies of e-mails from some of those who had received college education due to her scholarships. These are people that could not make the funeral due to time or may not have known until days later. And, if they had come to the funeral, I would not have the email to read again in my mourning time or to share with those other cousins. Dear Next of Kin:Permit Etiquetteer to offer you sincere sympathy on your bereavement, and also congratulate you on handling all the arrangements with such organization. But Etiquetteer must take issue with you over one tiny item. Whether mourners attend the funeral or not, they still must write a Perfectly Proper letter of condolence to the family. So if everyone was pulling their weight, you’d have these stories to read later anyway, whether you’d met the people at the funeral or not. Dear Etiquetteer:I put an ad for a Medical Assistant on [Insert Name of No-Cost On-line Community Here] last week, outlining job responsibilities with instructions to call and speak with the office manager, leaving her name and office number. Almost immediately, I started to receive e-mails with résumé attachments!I deleted the first ten or so, thinking that, if they cannot read and follow instructions, then they could never work for me.But dozens of responses kept coming in via e-mail. And we did eventually start to review them - thinking maybe we are not keeping up with the times. Who doesn't want to be au courant? But, we did get a near equal number responding in the manner suggested.While reviewing the applications I also noted one e-mail address in particular, because it included the word "sexy." My first impulse was to e-mail them and tell them if they were to ever be taken seriously for a position as a Medical Assistant (and not a call girl) they should change the e-mail address! But, I didn't.So my questions for you are:1. Is this what society has come to? If so, do I have to accept this?2. Should I have expected this 50/50 split in responses - i.e. those who can follow instructions versus those who cannot - considering the medium I chose to advertise the position?3. Why do I seem to notice (and then have to relay) all the oddities I observe daily - like sexy's e-mail address? Or is that a question for the shrink? You don't have to answer that last one! Dear Ad Doctor: Etiquetteer very much fears that this is what society has come to, but you do not have to accept it. You will aid and abet Perfect Propriety by not advertising on [Insert Name of No-Cost On-line Community Here]. Etiquetteer promises you’ll get better responses by going directly to medical communities on-line. The first rule of any advertising is "target your market!" As to the even split between responsible applicants and ignorant doofuses unable to read what’s put before them, Etiquetteer isn’t really surprised. While it’s common now to expect to respond to something seen on-line via e-mail, that’s no excuse for missing the instructions not to do so altogether. Really, Etiquetteer doesn’t see why you shouldn’t reply to them via e-mail that their applications will not be considered because they were sent improperly. As for your last question, Etiquetteer’s Polite Explanation is that you notice these sexual references because they are Absolutely Improper in the workplace. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify etiquetteer.com.

Invitations and Condolences, Vol. 6, Issue 10

INVITATIONS and CONDOLENCES Vol. 6, Issue 10, March 11, 2007
		Dear Etiquetteer: Please tell me whether I was right in a dispute about how an invitation was to be worded. At a school where I’m involved a new dining hall was to be dedicated at a catered dinner for major donors. The invitation used the phrase "the honour of your presence." I saidno, that the term should be "the pleasure of your company." "The honour of your presence" is only for marriages held in a house of worship, isn’t that so? Using that phrase for a dinner to dedicate a dining hall was ludicrous to me. Happily the school staff listened to me and changed the invitation in time. But if I’m not correct I’ll take you to dinner. Dear Honored Guest: You are correct, but Etiquetteer has to tell you what a great deal of fun it’s been researching "chapter and verse" on this. While no one’s ever specifically said "‘the honour of your presence’ may only be used on wedding invitations for church weddings," examples for invitations of charity balls and other such functions (with which Etiquetteer would group invitations to university dining hall dedications) always use the form "the pleasure of your company." And from that Etiquetteer infers that you are correct. While checking up on this issue Etiquetteer has been vastly entertained reading about relics of bygone days like train cards for country weddings (when a private train is engaged for guests), cards of admittance to church weddings (for weddings when the general public is not allowed into the church), and invitations to the weddings of young widows issued by her parents. Dear Etiquetteer: I received an e-mail, sprayed to a number of members of an informal group to which I belong, that someone we all knew had a death in his family. I've seen this person off and on for a few minutes or so at a time, here and there over the years as part of this group. Otherwise we never socialized. We’ve never been to each other’s homes. I've always enjoyed his company whenever our paths have crossed. To contact him, all I have is one of his e-mail addresses. I was raised that when one heard of a death one dropped everything, made food if possible, and immediately went to the house of the bereaved to offer any and all assistance: cook, make beds for arriving family, mow the lawn, whatever they asked. If the bereaved were more distant one called them on the phone but, under all circumstances, send them a contemporaneous, handwritten notice of condolence. This ran into an iceberg a number of years ago when, after having sent my handwritten note of condolence, I overheard at the wake that the family thought I was cheap not to have purchased a sympathy card. Further, although my ancestors on my father’s side are Protestant, my mother’s side is devout Catholic, and I have been often faulted for not bringing a Mass card to the wake. To further compound my confusion, in this case, the only way I have to communicate is this person’s e-mail address, and I don't even know if that is his main e-mail address. I've e-mailed a mutual friend asking if he could provide a street address and any particulars as to the arrangements since I feel that condolences by e-mail are far below par and that the more proper course is to send a sympathy card with a personal note of condolence. In this new strange world, what is the proper etiquette? A sudden death, especially of anyone other than the elderly is a horrid, emotionally wrenching situation whatever the relationship between the survivor and the deceased. I feel that an e-mail is so de minimis in the face of such heartbreaking circumstances. Can Etiquetteer help? Dear Condoling: First of all, Etiquetteer has to say that a bereaved person who is going to criticize the way a condolence is sent does not deserve to be condoled. Etiquetteer can only identify these people as Trash Pure and Simple if they can’t realize that correspondence on one’s own stationery is much more meaningful and intimate than on some pre-printed sympathy card (especially the kind with some treacly poem inside). Etiquetteer bets they didn’t even bother to write you back the mandatory Note of Thanks . . . Second, if you’re not a practicing Catholic yourself, Etiquetteer sees no reason for you to send a Mass to the bereaved, even if they themselves are practicing Catholics. As your acquaintance with the bereaved is slight, in spite of its long standing, Etiquetteer doesn’t think it necessary for you to provide food or attend the funeral, as you already well know. Tracking down the street address, through mutual friends, or even an on-line directory, really is the best plan of action to send a Perfectly Proper Condolence Note. If you know the name of the deceased, check for the death announcements in the relevant newpaper (again, frequently on-line), and the church or funeral home might be able to assist you. Should all these avenues still leave you without the information you need, Etiquetteer would allow you to e-mail your acquaintance with your condolences and a request for his street address (without of course, implying that you want it handy for the next time he has a death in the family). Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

Reader Response, Vol. 6, Issue 5

READER RESPONSE Vol. 6, Issue 5, February 4, 2007
		Dear Etiquetteer: You and your recent column were on my mind last night when I was at the symphony. The woman behind me rattled her bracelet through the entire evening. At the end I turned around and asked her sweetly if she had enjoyed the concert. After receiving a favorable reply, I asked her if she was aware that her bracelet jingled through the entire concert. She said that she wondered why the people around her were so agitated and she thanked me for letting her know. She was clueless! She asked her friend to remind her not to wear the bracelet to future concerts! One can only hope. Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer commends you on your non-confrontational approach to addressing this problem. Turning around and snarling "Take off those **** bracelets!" would not have helped the situation. Etiquetteer’s mother was right as usual: you catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar. Dear Etiquetteer: Here's another take on the gift/no gift thing. My wife and I discussed this quite heavily when we were planning our wedding, and I think we came up with a fairly classy solution. Our basic premise about gifts was that giving should always be spontaneous and never expected. No one should feel bad for not giving a gift, and no one should feel bad for giving one either. When we got married, we created a website for information for our guests. (This was in 1996, when the web was still new.) The wedding invitation included a map and schedule of events, and an invitation to visit the wedding website for more information. The website had an FAQ section that included the following, under the heading of "Gifts": You have already given us the best possible gifts: your love and kindness, as our family and friends. The nicest wedding gift you could give us is to share the day with us, either in person or in spirit. Thus, you should feel free to ignore the whole wedding gift and registry racket. "Gift and registry" was a link to a separate page on our site. The gift and registry page started out with a restatement of the above, and was followed by: "However, because some of you have asked us whether and where we are registered, we have enlisted the help of our dear friend C****** S*****, who is helping us tremendously in coordinating the wedding. Feel free to address inquiries about gifts to her, or to [Insert Name of Bride’s Mother here]." We communicated our feelings about gifts to these allies, along with information about where we were registered for anyone who wanted it. Just as in business, reaching a human at the other end instead of a machine (or in this case, a one-liner on a wedding invitation) made for a much more pleasant experience for everyone involved. Etiquetteer responds: It’s always refreshing to hear from a Happy Couple who are more concerned with their guests’ experience than with strong-arming them into showering them with Expensive Gifts. And certainly this is the traditional role of the Mother of the Bride (and the Mother of the Groom, too). Dear Etiquetteer: I have to write a condolence letter to the wife of a recently departed friend. Is she still Mrs. John Doe? Mrs. Jane Doe? Ms. Jane Doe? Dear Condoling: "Mrs. John Doe" is most Perfectly Proper unless she used her maiden name during married life. You would never address Ms. Jane Jehosphat as "Mrs. John Doe;" the militant feminists would mince your vitals into bits. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

Random Questions, Vol. 5, Issue 6

Dear Etiquetteer:I may be one of the few people in the country under 40 who has never belonged to a gym, so the whole gym culture is a bit of a mystery to me. However, I recently moved into a condo building with a nicely equipped fitness room in the basement and am trying to turn over a new leaf with morning visits to use the equipment. The room includes a television, and I've noticed that it's usually tuned to news programs. Is this required viewing while working out? On a couple of occasions when I've been in the room alone, I've taken charge of the remote and turned on some lighter fare, like reruns of "The Nanny." But I always feel awkward when someone comes in and I offer to turn the TV back to the news. The response is always very nice and people don't usually seem to mind, but am I breaking some unwritten code of the gym? Is there an acceptable range of appropriate gym viewing, somewhere between Teletubbies and soft porn? And are there any other rules I should know about?Dear Viewed and Viewing:You don’t need to feel guilty about watching "The Nanny" during your workout (though of course Etiquetteer would prefer reruns of "Upstairs Downstairs"). You don’t even need to offer to change channels when others show up in the workout room, though that is courteous. While Etiquetteer suspects that audiovisual programming is handled by the staff at large gyms, in your condo complex folks should be free to ask to change the channel . . . and not be offended if they’re turned down. Dear Etiquetteer:I just got an invitation to a rehearsal dinner with "evening casual" on it. What on earth does that mean? Can I wear black?Dear Invited:Once upon a time this used to be so easy. Etiquetteer still remembers when everyone understood that "Informal" meant suits and ties for the gentlemen and appropriate dresses for the ladies. Alas the day, everybody’s aggressive embrace of the casual has made getting dressed much more complicated.Etiquetteer imagines that "evening casual" means a blazer but no denim or khaki and no neckties for the men. Ladies could wear something shiny or sequinned that didn’t look too dressy. For instance, a silk mandarin jacket or a shiny silk blouse over slacks might do.As for black, Etiquetteer doesn’t understand why everyone’s so fond of it when there are more beautiful colors in the world. For a rehearsal dinner black should be fine, just don’t wear it to the wedding! Dear Etiquetteer:I need some etiquette advice, the subject: responding to condolence cards. My father passed away two weeks ago. What’s proper as far as how soon I must respond to cards and notices of donations in Dad’s name? Surely they can't expect someone in the midst of all there is to handle with someone's passing to write back quickly . . . but then again, it IS the Deep South. Is something short like "Thank you so much for your kind donation in Dad's name. I know he would have appreciated it" enough? That seems kind of abrupt.Dear Bereaved:Permit Etiquetteer to offer condolences at this difficult time.So, what's Perfectly Proper under the circumstances? Respond to those cards and letters now; don’t put it off, or it will become an impossible burden to you later, and Etiquetteer knows from experience, too. Even if you only decide to do a limited number a day — say five or six — you'll eventually get to the last one. Are you the only person able to write them? Draft other family members to assist who can respond for all of you. And don’t forget that your response may bevery short, even only one sentence, e.g. "Thank you for thinking of us," "God bless you for your beautiful note about Dad," or some such. But don't delay. It may seem insurmountable now, but Etiquetteer promises you the notes won’t be answered later. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify@etiquetteer.com.

The Etiquette of Death, Vol. 4, Issue 42

Dear Etiquetteer:My son died 13 days ago and I am feeling horrible heart-wrenching pain and grief. The funeral was last week and it was wonderful and touching to see so many of his friends there. I was amazed and comforted by the number of people that came to show their respect.The problem is, I was made fun of from my mother and her friend because I didn't stand by the casket and "receive" from 3:00 pm to 8:00pm. I didn't know I was supposed to do that! There wasn't a "line of people". It was a huge amount of people and the funeral home opened up two more rooms to hold people. I went from person to person and I was being introduced to people. I just remember hugging and crying and meeting and thanking countless people.So, in addition to the insurmountable grief I have, I also feel that I did something wrong! What should I have done? Dear Bereaved: Etiquetteer’s heart bled reading your letter, and not just because of your grief. What vicious jackals your mother and her friend are, to "make fun of" you at such a vulnerable moment! Such wickedness, such absence of compassion! Etiquetteer cannot condemn them enough and is so sorry you had to put up with this taunting along with everything else. It is usual for stated times for the family to receive to be published in funeral announcements, and Etiquetteer is assuming that your family did so. The world knows that Etiquetteer loves a receiving line. But after extensive research, Etiquetteer cannot find chapter and verse in any of the standard American etiquette books requiring the family to receive by the coffin. The tradition is there, but it’s local custom or religious requirement more than anything that dictates what to do. Etiquetteer vividly remembers his grandfather’s funeral in 1974, which took place in the South, when the family received at the funeral home, but not in the same room with the casket. But Etiquetteer has also attended New England funerals of Catholic families who have received next to deceased in an open casket.So Etiquetteer really cannot fault you for receiving your son’s mourners as you did, but it is not an approach Etiquetteer would permit at a wedding. All that remains to be said is that you and your family have Etiquetteer’s sympathy on the death of your son, and Etiquetteer’s sorrow that your mother has expressed her own grief by criticizing you. Dear Etiquetteer: Today I received a tragic e-mail message from a cousin. Her husband was a career military man so they have lived in many countries as well as U.S. cities; hence, the message she was sending was forwarded to 65 people. This made her use of e-mail quite understandable.The message was to inform all of her husband's death. She told of his final illness and that he is to be buried in Arlington National Cemetery. Due to the many deaths of past and present service people, however, the next available time for a military funeral won't be for twelve weeks. Since they have adult children as well as many friends on base, I understand why she didn't have time to write notes or make personal calls, and I feel that she doesn't have time to handle so many incoming calls and notes. So, though I have never e-mailed a sympathy note, today I did just that because I wanted to extend condolences immediately.Later, I will call and write a note, as well as make a memorial contribution, but I'm puzzled as to when. I have never experienced this situation and wonder if Etiquetteer can suggest ways to ease the burden of families facing this long wait for closure. Sad duties are the most difficult. Dear Mourning: You raise an issue with which Etiquetteer has had to wrestle for some time: e-mail notification of death. Two or three years ago Etiquetteer got three such notices in five weeks. Needless to say they were each quite a jolt, and made Etiquetteer a little grumpy about how casual things were becoming.But then Etiquetteer changed his mind. Previous innovations in technology all were used to announce one’s death, like the telephone and the telegram, so much so that earlier etiquette books included instructions for the giving and receiving of these communications. Etiquetteer, after some initial reluctance, sees no reason to keep e-mail from replacing the telegram, but encourages the same unadorned style of the telegram in composing it, such as: I regret to inform you of the death of Catherine Elizabeth Schulz on Sunday, March 4, after a long illness. A private funeral service will take place on Friday, March 9, at All Saints Church. A memorial service will be scheduled later. In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to [Insert Bereaved’s Choice of Charity Here]. Smith Funeral Home, 15 Main Street, Anytown, handling all arrangements.   Note the specific elements that are included here: Identity of the deceased. This should be obvious, but the griefstricken sometimes forget the most obvious things. Date and cause of death. This may be as specific or vague as the family wishes, e.g. "after a long battle with tuberculosis" or "died suddenly." Funeral arrangements. If the general public was to be invited to the funeral, more information would be provided, as in "A funeral service will take place on Friday, March 9 at 11:00 AM, All Saints Church, 112 11th Street, Anytown." Information about flowers and contributions. People always want to know. Information about the funeral home. Hopefully that will keep people from pestering the bereaved directly with questions about parking. Assuming that the person sending the e-mail is a member of the family, Etiquetteer recommends closing with something like "Your thoughts and prayers at this sad time are most appreciated."The subject line of the e-mail should let people know that it’s the news of someone’s death, as in "Death of Catherine Elizabeth Schulz." It should NOT be something as ambiguous or neutral as "Sad News" or "I’m Sorry to Tell You," which provide more of a shock to the reader or could be mistaken for spam. Etiquetteer also thinks this is not the place to include photos of the deceased or decorative graphics. In some subsequent e-mail, perhaps, but not the first one.Now back to your question. Your e-mail condolence on receiving the news substitutes your need to telephone the bereaved, but not the condolence note. Take care of that and the memorial contribution you want to make now. In the months leading up to the memorial service, check in with the family once or twice, or as often as you would usually. If you live nearby, invite them to dinner at your home, or bring food to them at their home. After the services, continue to be in touch. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify@etiquetteer.com.

Reader Response, Vol. 2, Issue 13

On Condolences: Maybe my upbringing was rigid, but I was always trained that one never, ever sent a commercial sympathy card; the handwritten letter was mandatory. As you know, people think they need to be creative, and this need really needs to be extirpated when it comes to this arena. Personal anecdotes aside -- which are wonderful if you have them, but often are unavailable because you are comforting someone you know over a loss of someone you don't know -- there is a good reason why expressions of sympathy in writing and in person are ritualistic and formulaic: because it is all really quite beyond words. That is precisely why rituals and formulas were invented: as code to express the inexpressible, the unfathomable. Now, if we could only bring back some form of mourning clothing to warn innocents that someone in grief is in their midst. Since black is the new black, and is politically incorrect as mourning, I nominate good old gray, white and lavender/dull purple. Once indicating half mourning, it’s now a color combination one rarely sees (therefore hard to be confused with anything else) and actually looks good on most people, regardless of their "season."  On Call Waiting: I take exception to the your answer regarding Call Waiting. Although I agree that one must do one’s best not to interrupt the conversation at hand, there are always exceptions. As the mother of small children I occasionally need medical advice. Call Waiting allows me to rest assured that the return call from their pediatrician is not missed. That said, when awaiting such a call, I always preface any personal conversation with the caveat that another call may come in and I will have to take it. I also never initiate a call. So I suppose I both agree and disagree with you! On Bad Toys for Good Children: My husband adamantly disagrees with your advice! He thinks since our child is only four, if we don't want a certain toy, we should go ahead and say so! We kind of did when he was a baby and we have an [Evil Toy I] free home. Now if we could just get rid of [Evil Toy II]! Ugh! Even his babysitter gave him a one for Christmas. Now she is so sick of the boys fighting with them she doesn't want our son to bring his when he goes to her house. It's a fine line parents have to walk when it comes to appropriate toys! Etiquetteer responds: That’s true, but your husband needs to remember that nobody cares what you want or how you feel. On Etiquette Books: I suppose for some of us (and I daresay we are a particular crew), one is loyal to one's "first" etiquette book. For me, Amy Vanderbilt's Etiquette will always have pride of place. (I speak only of the editions published before her death, of course.) I have read and re-read it over the years. It was my favorite high school graduation gift, though I had of course been aware of it for years as it had a prominent perch in our home library. Miss Vanderbilt had her own way of creating characters. I have never forgotten such ruffians as "the hatless and gloveless man" and "the tieless man." I must confess that Miss Manners is a siren, but in her way, Miss Vanderbilt remains my muse. On Cummerbunds: NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Heaven forfend!!!! A cummerbund’s pleats go up!!!! They are for opera tickets and as our ancestors used to say tongue-in-cheek: "Up to catch the soup."Etiquetteer responds: With a certain amount of horror, Etiquetteer is forced to concede. If our sainted ancestors were using their cummerbunds as bibs and file cabinets, one can see why the Brahmins don’t run things any more. All the more reason to forego it for a Proper Waistcoat. Find yourself at a manners crossroads and don't know where to go? Ask Etiquetteer! Click on "Contact" below and e-mail your question for a later column. 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 on the "Contact" page. Etiquetteer's next regular column will appear on the weekend of May 3. Whether something additional appears between now and then, Etiquetteer hopes that you'll spend a Perfectly Proper Religious Holiday of Your Choice.

(c) 2002, 2003 Etiquetteer.com. All Rights Reserved