Office Etiquette, Vol. 9, Issue 7

Dear Etiquetteer: I have been working at a job for the past several months in an office where the staff have desks close together, and separated only by thin walls that merely block the view of other desks rather than sounds. Most people use quiet voices when speaking on the phone or talking with co-workers at their desks, in order to not disturb others. The building is old, with linoleum floors, and we all work to keep noise to a minimum.

You may be able to predict where this is leading, but here goes. We have a guy who recently started working who is so full of himself that he makes sure everyone can hear his every word - and I do mean every word.  I think he has taps on his heels, because he dances when he walks, and it sounds like Fred Astaire has returned from the grave! And when he laughs, it is so loud, and goes on for so long, that it feels like we're in Northridge, California, in 1994 while his deep voice just bellows on and on! He apparently finds this charming, even though this is an office, and others are trying to work! He also has a gross habit of sneezing and coughing quite often, and when he does, he completely "lets go." I've read that when a person sneezes, the speed of the air emanating from one's mouth is usually somewhere around 80 miles/hour. In his case, it's more like the speed of light, and we're talking about breaking the sound barrier! What's with this guy? He doesn't attempt to cover his mouth, minimize the sound, or any other measure that would show a small sense of consideration for others.

Since you have written about so many topics regarding etiquette, maybe you can guide us on how we can get this guy to "TONE IT DOWN."  Any ideas?

Dear Unnerved:

Etiquetteer was rather unnerved himself to receive your query, because it bears a strong resemblance to someone Etiquetteer knows very well: That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much. In fact, if you change the workplace from an old floor with linoleum floors to a new building with carpeting and cubicles, you have that rather gregarious man's workplace.

You mention all the distinctive characteristics of That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much in your query: the bellowing laugh, the heavy tread (sometimes referred to as "elephantine"), the loud conversational tone, and even the vigorous sneezing. Etiquetteer sometimes despairs at getting him to see the error of his ways. Possibly getting him to Cultivate a More Distinguished Tone will help (for instance, Greer Garson in "Mrs. Miniver" speaks in a low, clear, distinctive voice suited both to ladies and gentlemen -- how she escaped recording "Old Man River" in her later years Etiquetteer does not understand). This Sort of Voice is particularly helpful over the telephone.

But to return more specifically to the Loud Newcomer in Your Office: do you believe that he is really aware that he's creating trouble in the office? Certainly it's obvious to the rest of you, but this Loud Newcomer appears to be more oblivious than malicious. Somebody has to say something to him about it. While it never feels comfortable to correct someone's behavior, one begins by assuming that the offender is unaware. "Boaz, we're working in a very old building without much privacy at all, and I wonder if you're aware how much sound carries up here. I'm sorry to have to say this, but your voice comes off a lot louder than you probably think it is. Could you please make an effort to speak more quietly?"

If no one in the office has the courage to do speak out, Loud Newcomer's supervisor gets the job. That's why offices have supervisors. And if that doesn't help (but it almost always does), you may have to resort to wisecracks like "Louder, so my mother in [Insert Name of Distant City Here] can hear you!"

No, Etiquetteer is NOT really recommending that approach!

These problems never go away on their own. Etiquetteer wishes you and your Quieter Colleagues the best of luck as you approach Loud Newcomer with a Respectful Request to Keep Quiet.

Like many Perfectly Proper People, Etiquetteer mourns the death of Elizabeth Post, the worthy successor of Emily Post in the Post Panoply of Perfect Propriety.

Please do send your own etiquette queries to Etiquetteer at queries_at_etiqueteer_dot_com!

Modes of Address, Vol. 9, Issue 6

Dear Etiquetteer: As a person who takes minutes for our Board of Directors meetings, I noticed that when I was absent and our lawyer was acting-Secretary he used "Messrs." to begin a list of the members present which included both men and women (the women are married but have not taken their husbands names). "Messrs. John Doe, Jane Smith, Jim First, John Second, John First, Julie Jones, and Fritz Doe were present." Is this correct? If not how would you handle this one in the Corporate Minutes?

Dear Recording:

Perfect Propriety does not include referring to someone by a Gender They Are Not. Etiquetteer suspects that your Pinch-Hitting Lawyer was unaware of the abbreviation of the French plural for ladies, "Mesdames," which is "Mmes." The example you gave would be correctly written "Messrs. John Doe, Jim First, Jim Second, John First, and Fritz Doe, and Mmes. Jane Smith and Julie Jones were present."

Now, before the Militant Feminists and/or the Politically Correct start attacking Etiquetteer about gender distinctions and precedence and whatnot, allow Etiquetteer to explain that gender-specific honorifics are helpful when reading such documents afterward. Gender-neutral names confuse readers. Pat, Robin, Dakota, Andy, Lindsay, Ryan, etc. are frequently used for both genders. Many people are also not familiar with names from other countries.  For instance, is Sanjay a man or a woman? Using gender-specific honorifics in meeting minutes, whether or not individuals use or like them*, is necessary to communicate accurately.

*Etiquetteer, as always, doesn't care if someone doesn't "like" using an honorific. Whether people do or don't "like" a convention of Perfect Propriety is immaterial.

Cigarette Holders, Vol. 9, Issue 5

Dear Etiquetteer: Cigarette holders: pro or con?

Dear Holding:

The short answer is con. But if you're asking Etiquetteer, that means you want more than the short answer . . .

These days we see cigarette holders only on the stage. Quite possibly the last person to use a cigarette holder Without Ostentation was President Franklin D. Roosevelt,* who used a short plain cigarette holder. They seem to have fallen out of fashion because (Etiquetteer will hazard a guess) cigarette filters became standard and better. The only true purpose of a cigarette holder now is to keep from staining one's fingers with nicotine.

The danger of using a holder is that one might end up ostentatiously waving it about and making Grand Gestures, which would be Very Improper and call negative attention to oneself. (On the other hand, if one considers the ways that Margo Channing and Addison DeWitt smoke their cigarettes in All About Eve, it is the former who is more ostentatious, but the latter who is using a cigarette holder.) For gentlemen, there is the danger of appearing effeminate, cigarette holders no longer being considered a masculine accessory. The only type of cigarette holder a gentleman could use discreetly would be the very shortest kind, and severely plain.

Ladies who smoke have more leeway to use longer and more decorative holders if they choose. Even so, the lengthy and bejeweled holders of a past era no longer appear very elegant. This may have to do with the backlash against smoking in the last 30 years or so. Accessories that call attention to the Filthy Habit are not, perhaps, so welcome. It's been a long time since Patrick Dennis walked into Beekman Place and saw his Auntie Mame using an arms-length bamboo holder!

*The tyranny of Political Correctness has forced FDR to be depicted in his wheelchair (which he went to great lengths to conceal) and without his cigarette holder (which the entire world saw him using).

Splitting a Restaurant Check, Vol. 9, Issue 4

Dear Etiquetteer: The topic of split checks in a group dining setting came up, and we would love to hear you weigh in on this. My friend was stuck with a $150 extra bill because her group of 35 friends couldn't, or wouldn't, calculate their fair share. As a generous, and prosperous, friend, she simply covered the difference. As often as you dine with friends, large or small groups, you must have the perfect solution, if one exists.

Dear Splitting:

You raise a sore subject for many people, including Etiquetteer. One always wants to give one's friends, or the People With Whom One Dines, the benefit of the doubt. What's that old saying "Better to assume incompetence than malice," or something like that? This goes only so far when one is left holding the bag for $150, or even less. The issue of a split check becomes more complicated the larger a party is, so much so that there's no Perfect Solution. Etiquetteer does have ways, however, to mitigate disaster.

First and foremost, every split check dinner party should have a leader who can be counted on to be sure that the check is paid in full and that everyone pays their fair share. Usually this is the organizer of the party, but if that person's math skills are less than stellar (like Etiquetteer's), an accountant type in the party should be gracefully drafted to assist.

Second, no one leaves until the check is brought and reviewed! So often this is how trouble begins, and Etiquetteer knows from experience. Etiquetteer himself led a pre-theatre dinner party once. Having to leave early to distribute tickets to other theatregoers, Etiquetteer was horrified to learn that a member of the party was stuck with an outsize portion of the bill because 60% of the guests left before or during the arrival of the check. And even when people leave "what I think I owe" they should overestimate rather than underestimate. Of course Etiquetteer doesn't want to suggest that they deliberately underestimate -- remember the benefit of the doubt -- but repeat occurrences will help you judge.

Third, when dining out in a large party -- say eight or more -- everyone should be prepared to pay a little more than they think they'll owe. Why? The most obvious reason, and one of the most tiresome to Etiquetteer, is debate over the amount of the tip. Many restaurants add a pre-announced percentage to the bill of large parties for a gratuity (and Etiquetteer usually doesn't blame them). When they don't, the personal opinions of diners can legitimately disagree over the quality of service, but it's an awful waste of time, and not very enjoyable. When tipping in large parties, err on the side of overtipping for the sole reason of not spending a lot of time talking about it.

The other is that, for very large parties like the one your friend attended, it can take as long as the dinner to divide the check! The most expedient solution, as the world knows, is to divide the check equally by the number of diners. And, as the world knows, this leads to automatic resentment from those who ordered less (often for budgetary reasons). The most resentment, as Etiquetteer has seen, is usually directed at those of the party who drank more alcohol than others -- not because of their behavior, but because of the cost. Even the best of friends get unhappy if they feel they're subsidizing someone's bottle of wine. Depending on the party, it may be better to divide the bar bill separately from the meal bill.

Fourth, if worse comes to worst, insist on a separate check for yourself and/or the two or three people seated with you. So many restaurants now allow multiple credit cards to pay for one large check. And indeed, Etiquetteer dines semi-annually at a lovely restaurant with a large party, and the waitress automatically brings separate checks for all 20-plus diners.

Etiquetteer's solution for troublemakers, as it is so frequently, is exclusion. If people aren't going to behave with Perfect Propriety, there's no reason to subject yourself to their, in this case, costly behavior. Stop inviting them. This doesn't mean that you need not socialize with them at all, just not in split check situations.

But if this type of situation comes up frequently and always makes you unhappy, the best solution is not to dine out in large parties. When accepting an invitation, confirm that there won't be more than six (or four, or whatever limit you set) in the party.

Regifting, or the Yankee Swap, Vol. 9, Issue 3

Dear Etiquetteer: Now with the holidays well past us there seem to be people who are now well into re-gifting.  The extreme of this is the Re-Gift Party where a carefully chosen guest list is asked to bring at least one gift for which he/she wants to swap for someone else's unwanted gift.  (This seems to be somewhat akin to the ugly Santa exchange.) There are also people, like myself, who think a Goodwill donation is better.  Of course, we also have that person who thinks it better to ask the recipient if their gift can be used and if not, please give it back!  Having just declined an invitation to a re-gift party, I would like to know if there couldn't be a respectful manner in which to deal with unwanted and/or non-useful items that arrive in fancy gift wraps.

Dear Super-Gifted:

Etiquetteer knows the sort of function you describe as a Yankee Swap or a White Elephant Party. Once upon a time such affairs did not follow hard on the heels of Christmas as a rule. They were given more in the spirit of thrifty housecleaning, e.g. "I have no use for this, but surely someone else does." In that respect, they promote recycling and could be promoted among the ostentatiously "green" set. (They might even find a way to attach carbon offsets to it.)

When approached with the proper Sense of Humor, Yankee Swaps can be a great deal of fun. The basic procedure (of which there are several variations) goes like this: each guest that has brought an Item of Possible Usefulness/Amusement to Others draws a number from a hat. Then, in numerical order, guests are allowed to choose the Item They Prefer from the other selections. Suspense is introduced in this way: each subsequent guest may also choose an Item They Prefer, even if someone before them has chosen it! For instance, if Guest Number One chose a funny deck of playing cards, Guest Number Three could claim it; Guest Number One would then have to choose another Item. But Guest Number Six might equally want that deck of cards, and could then "steal" them from Guest Number Three! When all guest have had the opportunity to choose a gift, the Swap ends when Guest Number One declares s/he is happy with the Item In Hand, or make choose any Item another guest has. So that deck of funny cards could then finally be claimed at the end, leaving Guest Number Six holding the Item that Guest Number One had ended up with.

Etiquetteer thinks the principal purpose of a Swap or Regift Party really isn't getting rid of unwanted stuff, but Mere Amusement. Problems come up when guests move beyond Amusement to Greed. And you must be careful not to bring an Item that another guest gave you, to prevent Publicly Hurt Feelings.

You did the right thing in declining an invitation to a party into which you couldn't enter with the Proper Spirit. A more practical and generous solution to housecleaning, as you point out, is to donate Items No Longer Useful to Oneself to charity. It is also a Perfectly Proper way to acquire a tax deduction.

Etiquetteer is delighted to receive your questions about all manner of Perfect Propriety at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Random Issues, Vol. 9, Issue 2

Dear Etiquetteer:

Last night, I took a dear friend as my guest to an expensive art gallery dinner, held in honor of a newly opened show. It was meant to be a special treat for us, as my friend is just emerging into social life again, after a devastating divorce.

Unfortunately, we were seated at a table of loud, bawdy drunks, who had come as a group, and found each other hilarious. After attempting polite introductions and brief small talk with our fellow diners, we two girlfriends tried to converse quietly together. But conversation was rendered impossible by the group's rude comments, and shenanigans such as dinner rolls being thrown across the table.

The room was otherwise full, and no alternative seats were available. The gallery owner ignored the situation. I was mortified to subject my friend to such obnoxious buffoonery. She is not native to the US, and the group even mocked the pronunciation of her name. We left as soon as the dessert had been served.

What on earth can one do to rescue such an evening, short of leaving as soon as possible? I apologized to my friend for the disastrous experience. As her her host, what else should I have done?

Dear Subjected:

Etiquetteer can only respond to you with the deepest compassion. The only thing worse than dining with "a table of loud, bawdy drunks, who had come as a group, and found each other hilarious" is dining with "a table of loud, bawdy drunks, who had come as a group, and found each other hilarious" who are your closest friends of whom you expected better.

The best way to guarantee your enjoyment at the sort of dinner you describe, which sounds suspiciously like a fund-raiser, is to round up enough friends and acquaintances to fill a table. As you have sadly learned, when Money is the only criterion for entrée, ladies and gentlemen are not safe from Bad Manners. (The roll-throwing tempted Etiquetteer to hope that perhaps these drunken bawds had once read P.G. Wodehouse, but this does not really seem likely. There are restaurants that cater to the roll-throwing crowd, like Lambert's Café, a more likely influence.)

It seems that you did everything possible at the time to salvage the evening, except speaking directly with the gallery owner. You indicate that s/he was ignoring the situation; you had the power to call it to his/her attention in no uncertain terms, by beckoning, or at worst, leaving your table and going to him/her. Another temporary solution might have been to take your dessert into the lobby.

Now that this ghastly dinner is behind you, Etiquetteer encourages you to create a new social opportunity for your newly-divorced friend: a dinner party in your own home given in her honor, with your own friends whose Perfect Propriety you know well enough in advance. You may also correspond with the gallery owner and sever any possible future connection with that organization.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I am a new, part-time teacher at my school.  I teach music in a building that is away from the main building and I very rarely socialize with other teachers; I'm just not around them much and don't eat lunch with them or chat in the teacher's lounge.  I received an invitation to a bridal shower for one of my coworkers.  He is getting married soon and I only know him by his last name.  I met his wife at the Christmas staff party, but can't remember her name.

What should I do about this shower?  I don't want to go, because I don't know the groom at all, and I know the bride even less.  Do I have to send a gift if I wimp out on attending?

Dear Teaching:

Undoubtedly this invitation was sent to all school faculty as a courtesy, and the groom didn't want you (or others) to feel left out. At least, that's how Etiquetteer could explain this situation charitably. (Whoever heard of a groom inviting professional colleagues to his fiancée's bridal shower?!) You need not attend, or send a gift, but please do send a Lovely Note of Congratulations to the Happy Couple on your most Perfectly Proper stationery.

The Signs of 2009: An Etiquetteer Photo Essay, Vol. 9, Issue 1

To ring in the New Year, Etiquetteer returns to the Old, Anno Domini MMIX, and some signs of varying Perfect Propriety. First we have a couple signs from a flea market in Newfane, Vermont:

This should be everyone's guiding maxim every day, but for behavior, not spelling.

Etiquetteer doesn't know how many places you have been to where a "Post No Weapons" sign has been in evidence. For Etiquetteer the last time might have been 1981, at a Detroit cinema for a screening of The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Then this gem turned up at a cemetery in Vermont:

Etiquetteer could not agree more. Nothing brings down the tone of one's grief more than faded, cracked, and flaking plastic flowers.

Anno Domini MMIX also saw the rise of swine flu, also known as the Bad Piggies, H1N1, or Heinie Flu. This led to all sorts of extravagant signage, such as this:

Seen at the Interlochen Center for the Arts, Interlochen, Michigan.

Issues of public hygiene then lead Etiquetteer to these two notices from a Boston church bathroom:

These notices were certainly a surprise to Etiquetteer! But it turns out that the church in question ministers a great deal to the homeless and indigent, for whom such instruction is sometimes necessary.

Then we come to the issue of tipping:

Seen at a restaurant in Lake Charles, Louisiana, one in which you have to order your food at a counter and then have it brought to you. A healthy debate ensued over whether or not the waiters and waitresses had to work as hard as those who take orders tableside as well.

Finally, two signs from businesses in Greater Boston who seek more Perfect Propriety from their customers:

Rosie's Bakery, Inman Square

Leavitt & Peirce, Harvard Square

Etiquetteer could certainly not agree more with this brisk sentiment!

And with that, Etiquetteer bids you a hearty Happy New Year! Your future etiquette queries are eagerly welcomed at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Holiday Greetings (Verbal), Vol. 8, Issue 25

Dear Etiquetteer: I know there's no easy answer on this one. But as December 25th rolls around each year, I tell people whose faith I know, "Merry Christmas," and tell some folks "Happy Holidays" if I am not sure, or if I want to encompass New Years, too. Yet some people seem to think that, by not wishing someone "Merry Christmas," I am contributing to the downfall of society and the secularization of America, and others find "Merry Christmas" to be presumptuous and biased toward one faith.

I simply don't know what counts as proper these days. Life certainly was easier growing up in a small town when I knew what church each person attended. I'm not afraid of offending the overly picky, but what IS proper? When new acquaintances ask gingerly if I celebrate Christmas, I smile and tell them "Absolutely! With bells on!" as that's really the only time I wear my jingle bell bracelet for an extended length of time!

Dear Greeting:

Perhaps, instead of using words at all, you could just ring your jingle bells at them with a big smile and let them construe that gesture as they may. On the other hand, that might peg you as the Crazy Jingle Bell Lady or lead your community theatre to cast you in "Crimes of the Heart," so scratch that.

While many are saddened by the secularization of Christmas, including Etiquetteer, it's an even sadder day when Christians respond critically to a pleasant greeting because it isn't Perfectly Christian. Really, it's enough to make Etiquetteer bark "Bah, humbug!" and just stay home by the Christmas tree in Perfect Propriety. They'd be Better Off -- and Better Christians, too -- by cheerfully replying "I love celebrating Christmas!" instead of making you feel bad.

What is Perfectly Proper is what you are already doing: using specific holiday greetings when you know the holiday a person celebrates, and using the generic "Happy Holidays" when you do not. Etiquetteer was about to say that after December 25 you could safely switch to "Happy New Year" for all, but of course the traditional Twelve Days of Christmas keep right on going until Twelfth Night in January.

Etiquetteer is delighted to wish you a Merry Christmas!

This being the Sunday after Thanksgiving, Etiquetteer would like to remind you that no time could be more Perfectly Proper to send those Thanksgiving Lovely Notes of Thanks to the homes where you enjoyed hospitality this year.

Perfect Propriety at Holiday Meals, Vol. 8, Issue 24

A dear friend of Etiquetteer's forwarded recently two rather dispiriting (but unintentionally very funny) articles about family holiday dinners sabotaged by bad behavior. The first was a letter with dinner assignments and cooking instructions for a family Thanksgiving; the overprecise hostess just comes off as bossy. The second gives a list of family horror stories; be sure to read the last one, when a man kicks out his abusive in-laws on Christmas Eve! These stories got Etiquetteer to thinking about some basic rules for the holidays:

1. It's a dinner table, not a Roman arena: the Winter Holidays - Thanksgiving, Hannukah, Christmas Kwanzaa - are designed for us to come together in a spirit of Gratitude, Festivity, and most of all Love. Theoretically, we love our families and our friends. In practice, however, we all know that Love needs help when it's abraded by the desire to settle old scores or rehash long-ago arguments. Unfortunately, the stereotypical American mother-in-law who thought her offspring could have done better is the best example of this. Remember Etiquetteer's basic precept: no one cares what you want or how you feel. This is not the time, and if someone brings up an unwelcome topic or tries to rib you into a response, just reply "This really isn't the time" and change the subject.
2. Keep the conversation light: Professor Henry Higgins instructed Eliza Doolittle to discuss only "the weather and everybody's health," with disastrous results. Rather than confine table talk to only two topics, Etiquetteer will only restrict you from discussing Politics, Religion, and of course Reference to Bodily Functions. Please also keep from pressing someone's hot buttons, too! We all have them; there's no use denying it. And they are unique. If you know someone will be set off by mentioning how the church was redecorated, say, or that Oprah Winfrey decided to end her talk show, don't do it.
3. Shut up and eat!: Reading that second piece, Etiquetteer flushed with shame reading about the elderly mother circling the buffet for sweet potatoes and marshmallows. One year when Etiquetteer was very young and not yet versed in the ways of Perfect Propriety, his lovely grandmother made lamb for Thanksgiving. Young Etiquetteer huffily refused to taste a morsel; one had turkey on Thanksgiving! If you can't find your favorite dish, too bad. When you get home, you can make it for yourself.
4. Roll with the punches: Perfect Propriety does not mean Perfection. One responds to Imperfection with Perfect Propriety. Etiquetteer was appalled, and sorry for the recipients, reading that first letter with all the Thanksgiving cooking instructions. When one hosts a holiday meal that is really a potluck, one cannot expect One's Own Perfection out of the guests - who are also theoretically People You Love. If someone brings yams instead of mashed potatoes, or forgets a serving spoon, or anything, your negative reaction could mar the day more than their omission. Don't make them feel bad with a hissy-fit or snarkiness.

In the end, if you cannot approach the Festive Board with Love and Sincerity, perhaps it is better for you to be alone.

Due to distance and the proximity of Thanksgiving and Christmas, Etiquetteer has not celebrated the former with his family for 30 years. In the interim Etiquetteer has been welcomed into the homes of friends or the families of friends. So very very often the Warmth of Fellowship we crave at the holidays has been found around these tables. On Thanksgiving Day, which this year will be spent with cousins through the Mayflower, you may be sure Etiquetteer will lift a glass in thanks all the households where he has been made welcome.

Etiquetteer knows you are eager to resolve some question of Perfect Propriety before the rest of the Winter Holidays come! Please send your queries to <queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com>.

Seating on Public Transportation, Vol. 8, Issue 23

Dear Etiquetteer:  

Recently a very large person, walking with a cane, boarded the subway.  While my first instinct was to offer my seat, that seat alone would not have accommodated this very large person, and the adjacent seat-holders were themselves elderly and/or infirm.  So although offering my seat might seem, at first glance, the gentlemanly thing to do, it would  force otherwise deserving passengers out of a seat, or put the very large person in an embarrassing situation.  What should I have done?

Dear Seated:

Etiquetteer must commend you for your discerning observation, and also for your concern for others on public transportation. How many times does one see the elderly or the pregnant standing with difficulty in a train full of the selfish and the oblivious?

Your summary of the situation indicates that you're "damned if you do and damned if you don't." Whether you keep your seat or surrender it, someone will be inconvenienced. Etiquetteer can only offer you the Lady Sylvia McCordle Solution, which she so elegantly presented in Gosford Park. At the least sign of trouble, just walk away. When Mr. Weissman offered to reverse the long distance charges, when George spilled coffee in the lap of that impostor, when Lady Sylvia couldn't honestly return a compliment about Mabel's evening dress, she just walked away.

In your case, Etiquetteer suggests you leave your seat and move into another car. This way you needn't linger to observe the outcome.

For those of you on Facebook, Etiquetteer has set up a fan page, from which he links to and comments on articles in the news media.

Disrespect in Congress, Vol. 8, Issue 22

It is with no little reluctance that Etiquetteer takes up the issue of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-udesby) and his outburst on the floor of the Senate during President Barack Obama's speech on healthcare Wednesday, September 10. Never has the decorum of the government of the United States acheived such an insulting low. Well, at least once before, when Rep. Preston Brooks violently caned Senator Charles Sumner on May 22, 1856. And Etiquetteer hopes it isn't a coincidence that Rep. Brooks and Rep. Wilson both represented the state of South Carolina. Both were sad days for the nation, and Etiquetteer prays fervently that civil war will not follow this latest breach of Perfect Propriety. It's generally acknowledged that Rep. Wilson's behavior was inexcusable, even by his own party, so Etiquetteer has no need of rehashing it. (On the other hand, didn't his mother ever teach him that it's rude to interrupt? Etiquetteer's mother certainly did!) Rep. Wilson did himself no favors by declaring on CNN (according to The New York Times [see final paragraph]) that the Republican Party told him to apologize. An apology carries more weight if one can believe it comes unprompted, so this gives Rep. Wilson another opportunity to depict himself, and all politicians, as insincere.

One Female Acquaintance expressed delight at this turn of events as it "highlighted the absence of content" in the President's speech. Let us then turn to a question posed to Etiquetteer by an Elderly Gentleman For Whom Etiquetteer Holds No Little Affection: Just how can you call the President of the United States a liar if you can't do so on the floor of the Senate? Etiquetteer can only suggest that you finesse it by concentrating on the issues instead of personalities. In this particular case, Rep. Wilson's issue with the President's healthcare legislation was that no method existed to verify an applicant's citizenship, thereby allowing the possibility that illegal immigrants might receive healthcare funded by American taxpayers. This transforms "The President is a liar!" into "The President is [Insert Adjective of Your Choice Here] mistaken!" You then hastily back it up with well-researched facts and figures.

As it turns out, to Etiquetteer's and perhaps the nation's sorrow, both these politicians have been exposed as mistaken since Wednesday's unseemly outburst. Turns out that Rep. Wilson voted to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants with federal funds in 2003, and President Obama's healthcare plan did not, in fact, have any such mechanism (but at least according to this article, it's in the works).

Fatalistically, Etiquetteer sees the United States descending into Chaos due to a lack of Perfect Propriety. Free speech is more than a freedom, it is a Sacred Trust, and Etiquetteer grieves deeply that so many thousands of Americans are using their Freedom of Speech in Anger and without Reason. There can be no debate, there can be no unity, while each side demonizes the other. (And have we not already seen this in the last 40 years with the abortion debate?) One side is not all-black, the other not all-white; each has the full spectrum of color and nuance. Etiquetteer implores you to look beyond the personalities involved, and your own emotions, and engage in this important national debate with Knowledge, Reason, and Compassion.

Brief Words on Summer Clothes for Ladies, Vol. 8, Issue 21

Even though Labor Day is licking at the heels of Etiquetteer's meticulous white bucks, it's not too late to say a few well-chosen words about Summer Clothes:  

• Ladies always wear matching lingerie. This is doubly important when wearing a gauzy white sundress. And if you're wearing a gauzy white sundress and Etiquetteer can tell you have on a blue brassiere and navel-eclipsing white underpants, you're doing it wrong. Etiquetteer vigorously recommends a white slip!
• Nothing makes a lady look more like a slattern than a visible bra strap. For heaven's sake, either sew a loop into the straps of your dress into which to thread your bra strap or wear a strapless bra. And if you're wearing a "wife-beater" style tanktop, just go right back home and change. You're no lady.
• Black is slimming, but not if a) you have steatopygic buttocks, b) the black you have on is tights or stirrup pants, and c) you're wearing a crop top.
• If whatever you're wearing tells the world you haven't had a bikini wax lately, you're WAY underdressed.

Really, it's a pity more ladies don't take after the wardrobes of Charlotte Greenwood in Down Argentine Way (Travis Banton) or Barbara Stanwyck in Titanic (Dorothy Jeakins). But Etiquetteer can dream, can't he . . . 

Etiquetteer welcomes all your queries on manners at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Dress Code, Vol. 8, Issue 20

Dear Etiquetteer: We have a wedding to attend in November that requests "cocktail" attire.  What exactly is that?  When my brother got married he requested festive attire (and clarified what that was) but my date and I were the only ones festively attired. What should we do?

Dear Undressed:

You've hit upon a source of frustration for Etiquetteer and millions of people. The dress code on an invitation is supposed to clarify what to wear, not confuse. Could we all please return to the basic dress codes?:

Casual: Jeans, khakis, T-shirts, etc. Perfect Propriety is maintained when you wear clean and tidy casual clothes, without rips, tears, stains, or anything that's been through a BeDazzler.

Informal: Khakis or dress slacks, sport jackets (great opportunity for you to wear your tweed or linen). No sneakers or flip flops! No jeans.

Business Attire: Conservative dark suits and ties. If this is for an evening function, ladies can wear cocktail dresses. Be sure not to use "Business Dress" on the invitation, as some Tiresome Old Duffer, thinking he's original and funny, will call and ask what kind of dress he should wear.

Black Tie: A traditional tuxedo with a black bow tie and black cummerbund or waistcoat. Ladies wear floor-length dinner dresses (which are not ball gowns).

"Festive" or "Creative" Black Tie: Adding thematic or outrageous accessories to one's outfit using the basic Black Tie description above as a framework.

There's no point in adding "White Tie," as no one ever wears it any more (to Etiquetteer's chagrin).

So to answer your question at last, "Cocktail Attire" falls into Etiquetteer's definition of "Business Attire," not least because the cocktail hour traditionally begins at 5:00 PM. Please do report back on what you see the other guests wearing at this November wedding!

Etiquetteer will eagerly receive all your questions about Perfect Propriety at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Dating, Vol. 8, Issue 19

Dear Etiquetteer:  

When and how does one give out one's business card in a way to best ensure future contact?  I am a single gay man newly out of grad school and trying to be more social.  I have been chatting with new people and giving out my business card at the end of our conversations.  Every week in the the local rag there's increasing numbers of ads from people in a section called "Missed Connections."  People lament that they were talking with somebody but didn't exchange their numbers, and I never want to be one of those people.  I know that in general it is hard for many people to ever make follow-up calls and contact after an initial meeting. But to compound that, gay men are somewhat socially retarded with intimacy and self-esteem issues.  A friend says that giving out my number without receiving theirs gives away my power, that the other person is totally in control.  I say that actions speak louder than words and if a person wants to be in touch they will either give me their card in return or call or email after we meet.  The only way that somebody might contact me is if they have my contact information.

 

At what point in a social engagement is it most appropriate to give out my business card and when I do what can I say which might guarantee that the recipient might feel more socially secure that I don't expect marriage and might result in them actually contacting me for future social interaction?

Dear Carding:

You may be surprised to hear Etiquetteer agreeing with your friend, but the fact is, once you give someone your number, there's nothing for you to do but sit by the phone. And what's powerful about that?

Allow Etiquetteer to suggest that you let actions speak louder than words in a different way, by asking the Object of Your Interest to supply his phone number (or e-mail address) with the question "May I phone you sometime?" That way you not only express Considered Interest in the other person, but also willingness to Act On It. This is supposed to be received as Flattery, and Etiquetteer hopes it is. If contact information is not forthcoming, however, please don't take it personally (difficult though that is). This simply means that the other person has a More Limited Vision.

Now, all that aside, Etiquetteer wishes that you and others would stop using business cards for dating. Some people just don't want to give out their work information to others they are meeting for the first time, which Etiquetteer completely respects. It's high time to bring back the visiting card of old, but with the addition of appropriate contact information. One's name is engraved in the center, with contact information in the lower right corner, such as:

Mr. Gervais Pauncey Friggidyboo

paunceyfoot@[Insert ISP Here]

(222) 222-2222

After all, you are certainly not representing your workplace in the dating world! (And if you are, Etiquetteer has to wonder just what sort of Industry you're in.)

Etiquetteer will eagerly accept your queries on all sort of manners at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Missing Silver, Vol 8, Issue 18

Dear Etiquetteer: I have a set of silverplate silverware handed down to me from my grandmother I'd love to start using more often.  A story I once read stated that preparations for having dinner guests included counting the silver before and after the dinner.

Pray tell, what would I do if the silver count was less after the dinner than before the dinner?

Dear Silvered:

Etiquetteer had to laugh a little to himself reading your query, since this is not the sort of situation Emily Post ever discussed in her landmark tome Etiquette. Mrs. Post was more concerned that one had the correct implements for service and that they were spotlessly polished than possible theft!

Missing silverware is more likely to be a concern someplace like the White House, where entertainments are given on a massive scale and guests are eager for a souvenir to mark what might be a once-in-a-lifetime occasion. (Indeed, in the 19th century it was not unknown for rapacious citizens to make off with bits of drapery, rugs, and upholstery!)

To accuse guests of one's home of theft, however, is a colossal breach of hospitality. Should you find a teaspoon or some such missing after a dinner party, Etiquetteer would encourage you first to assume that it's been mislaid somewhere in the house. "Turn the dump upside-down" as they say in the detective movies; 99 times out of 100 you'll find it under the dining room table, behind a lamp in the living room, or stuck in the dishwasher someplace. Etiquetteer imagines it could even turn up under the sofa cushions! (There's also that old joke about the young priest who hid the vicar's sterling silver ladle in the housekeeper's bed . . . .)

But for that hundredth time, Etiquetteer encourages you to attribute the missing piece to absentmindedness rather than malice and chalk it up as a casualty to a good party.

Etiquetteer is eager to receive all your manners queries at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

The Arrest of Henry Louis Gates, Jr., Vol. 8, Issue 17

With everyone sounding off about the recent arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. -- and the subsequent brouhaha complete with the usual charges of racism, and even the President of the United States chiming in (without necessarily checking all his facts) -- Etiquetteer sees no reason not to join the discussion. Long story short, both Professor Gates and the arresting officer, Larry Crowley, are at fault and should apologize. A little Perfect Propriety could have prevented this scandal. Etiquetteer does sympathize with Professor Gates up to a point. It is a terrible thing to be locked out of one's home; Etiquetteer himself has been locked out of his home with nothing but his pajamas and a migraine, and can offer True Compassion on that point. It's doubly terrible to return home after a long overseas journey (and we all know how difficult air travel is) to find oneself locked out of one's home. And then it's triply terrible to be mistaken for a burglar burgling one's own home by law enforcement! 

But, as Etiquetteer's mother has often said, "When you lose your temper, you lose your point." And according to the police report, helpfully provided by The Smoking Gun, Professor Gates played the race card as soon as Officer Crowley arrived at his home. Had he introduced himself, indicated that he was in his own home and, most importantly, done so without yelling, this need not have happened.

Etiquetteer has been contemplating all day the arrogance of elite college faculty, snobbery and disdain that operate completely outside race. And lo and behold, Joan Venocchi of The Boston Globe made the same connection in her column. The clue to Gates's true behavior is the phrase "You have no idea who you're messing with," a close cousin to the Six Worst Words in the American Language, "Don't you know who I am?!" And once someone starts to pull that kind of attitude, it's over. And then calling the police and asking to speak to the chief . . . now honestly, who gets to speak to the chief? Did Professor Gates think that his position as a Harvard faculty member made him important enough to talk to the chief? Etiquetteer does not think so.

That said, there's no reason Officer Crowley could not have given his name and badge number when requested, even though he had identified himself the first time Professor Gates asked him. And he should not have arrested Professor Gates, for two reasons. First, Professor Gates was, in fact, in his own home. Second, the spectre of Professor Gates yelling on his front lawn after the police left would have made a very poor impression of him on his neighbors, an impression of his own making.

It's unfortunate to Etiquetteer that this national discussion will be cast in terms of racism instead of elitism. Good manners on everyone's part would have kept this from happening:

• Professor Gates should have kept his voice down, even though he was undoubtedly tired, frustrated, and angry.
• He should not have followed Officer Crowley out of the house continuing to yell at him.
• Officer Crowley should have identified himself each time he was asked.
• Officer Crowley should not have arrested Professor Gates. Even though he must have felt justified in doing so, it smacks of vengeance.

Etiquetteer asks them both to remember the cry of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" The time has come for each of them to make up and shake hands. Etiquetteer just hopes they won't do that on a talk show.

Etiquetteer is always pleased to receive your questions about manners at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Michael Jackson's Funeral and Relationship Jewelry, Vol. 8, Issue 16

Much has already been said about last week's funeral of Michael Jackson, so Etiquetteer will confine himself only to the following observations:

• The sisters of the deceased, Janet and LaToya Jackson, looked like real ladies in their mourning. The best mourning is severely plain black, which they both achieved with respect for the deceased and elegance for their figures. Etiquetteer was particularly grateful that they both wore hats; it's a pity that it takes a funeral for some ladies to find a good hat. One can only wish that the tens of thousands of mourners who won tickets to the memorial service had dressed with equal respect.
• The pallbearers, the brothers of the deceased, all wore one glove to memorialize the deceased's most famous accessory. Some declare this was a vulgar or gimmicky gesture, but Etiquetteer finds it a Perfectly Proper and loving, albeit atypical, tribute. 

Dear Etiquetteer: I am in a serious relationship, and my boyfriend recently suggested that I start looking at rings. Thrilling! However, because of my occupation, I rarely can wear jewelry on my hands. I certainly wouldn't wear something so precious as an engagement ring when it could so easily be lost or damaged. He is asking for my input; should I suggest something other than a ring? I am at a loss. Please help. Dear Bare Hands: For millennia rings have been the traditional jewel to signify a relationship. Now many people find them useful to prevent themselves looking like fools flirting with people already in relationships. Not everyone is made to wear rings, and some have particularly bad luck in hanging on to rings. Indeed, Etiquetter himself has lost three family rings! So you have Etiquetteer's sympathy in your quest for meanginful but safe jewelry to acknowledge your relationship.  Since in your case a ring is an occupational hazard, Etiquetteer would like to suggest a small necklace or chain, from which you could hang a ring (if that symbol is important to your boyfriend) or maybe a small pendant. The pendant (or even the chain) could have a meaningful inscription. The Duke of Windsor memorably gave his Duchess (who rapaciously received stunning jewels from him on many occasions) a show-stopping sapphire bracelet on the morning of their wedding inscribed "For our contract" with the date.  Allow Etiquetteer to wish you and your beau a happy adventure as you consider your own personal symbols! Your own etiquette queries are always welcome at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com!

Business Dinner Etiquette Part I, Vol. 8, Issue 14

When you're dining out with colleagues, clients, or volunteers for business, it's the business that's more important, not the dinner. A successful business dinner in North America -- or at least a business dinner which is pleasanter and more focused -- can depend on how distracted you or others are by your food or other stimuli. Herewith, Etiquetteer's Eight Tips for Business Dinners:

1. First and foremost, your electronic devices have not been invited. Tweets, beeps, and dings from your iPhone, Blackberry, etc., will distract you and your colleague from the purpose of your dinner. Unless you're expecting information pertinent to your discussion, turn them off and keep them in your purse or pocket.

2. That said, at a business dinner it's sometimes necessary to have papers on the table or to take notes on a PDA. Try to do so as unobtrusively as possible.

3. Don't order difficult or messy food. The  more you have to pay attention to what's on your plate and how to get it into your mouth without making a mess, the less attention you have to pay to your colleague. French onion soup, stringy pasta, chicken or fish with lots of bones, etc. have been known to defeat experts. Etiquetteer was once defeated by a cherry tomato in a salad! Too round and glossy for a fork tine to penetrate, Etiquetteer chased it all over the salad plate, only to be rewarded with a shot of tomato guts on his white shirt. A Pyrrhic victory, to be sure.

3a. A quick pasta tutorial: spaghetti, linguine, angel hair, and vermicelli are stringy and troublesome. Gnocchi, tortellini, ziti, farfalle, and orzo pastas are more diner-friendly.

4. Don't be difficult about your food. Oddly enough, the central purpose of a business dinner isn't dinner; it's business! If you have more than two questions for the waiter, or need to be extra-precise with instructions, again, you're distracting from your real reason for meeting with your colleague. Keep your order simple. Allergies in many restaurants can be accommodated by telling your waiter "Please, no [Insert Foodstuff To Which You Are Allergic Here], I have a fatal allergy."

5. Don't take a long time to decide. For goodness sake, it's just food! If you end up not liking your dinner, you can always snack on something later at home, or call room service. Thinking people will even arrive at the restaurant knowing what they want to order, having checked the menu online in advance. Etiquetteer highly recommends this procedure.

6. Don't bury your face in your plate. Sometimes even simple food drags us completely into our dinner plates. Don't forget to look up and remain engaged with your colleague with eye contact. During one business meeting in which Etiquetteer was mentally drifting away, a colleague quickly called him back to attention by using his name in a sentence. Trust Etiquetteer, this is effective!

7. All the usual table manners apply: don't talk with your mouth full, no elbows on the table, don't gesture with your silverware, don't put used silverware on the tablecloth, etc.

8. Many people have been taught that it's rude to talk about the food. These days it's polite to ask a dining companion in a restaurant how they like their dinner, but it needn't become your central topic of conversation.

More on this subject again soon!

Please send all your etiquette questions to Etiquetteer at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Debating a Fanatic, Vol. 7, Issue 16

This morning Etiquetteer was drifting casually through his archives and found this query from last year's election cycle that somehow didn't make it into print. So here it is now: Dear Etiquetteer:

We're in an election year, and I'm hearing a lot of rhetoric about the Founding Fathers "original" intentions of founding the United States as a Christian nation. Of course they never had ANY such intention and explicitly excluded all references to Christianity in both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The two people to whom I've spoken about this got very belligerent and almost yelled at me about what God wants for this country.  So my question is, how on earth can I debate with someone who is so stubborn about their views?  

Dear Debating:

The kind of person it sounds like you've encountered is what Etiquetteer would define as a fanatic. You raise a number of very important issues, but the first and most important thing Etiquetteer can tell you is this: when you go up against a fanatic, you are fated to lose. Fanatics do not listen to reason. Period. So no matter how well-reasoned your argument, they will undoubtedly find a way around it, or a way to use it to reinforce their own views. So choose your battles wisely, and don't expect to change anyone's minds.

Fanatics come in all stripes and embrace all creeds, colors, and dogmas. From conservative Christians who will only be satisfied when America is a Christian theocracy to proponents of cold fusion to boycotters of grapes, every cause has its fanatics. Really, Etiquetteer suggests that you shun these people. Don't engage them in conversation at all. Leave the room. Frequently they melt down under their own frenzy. On the other hand, some might suggest, that's how Adolf Hitler came to power.

If you're really intent on engaging in thoughtful, reasoned discussion, however, Etiquetteer has a few tips. First, and most important, keep calm. Etiquetteer's dear mother has always said "When  you lose your temper, you lose your point." And Etiquetteer has seen, time and again, how very true that is. (The corollary Old Saying to this is "Give a man enough rope and he'll hang himself," but that's not something Etiquetteer's dear mother ever said.)

Next, stick to the facts. In the specific example you cite, you can always say "It's interesting you should mention that since the Founding Fathers deliberately excluded reference to Christianity and all other belief systems in the Declaration of Independence. When did you read it last? And what do you think of that?" 

Last, but far from least, consider the situation with a sense of humor. Fanatics can be hilarious when they get going! Read some of H.L. Mencken's essays when he refers to the "booboisie" to get in the mood. And keeping your own sense of humor will keep YOU from turning into a fanatic, too.

Etiquetteer will be more than delighted to receive your questions about all sorts manners (and the people who make or break them) at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

A Cell Phone Haiku, Vol. 8, Issue 13

While searching for a Perfectly Proper chocolate croissant, Etiquetteer happened upon Canto 6 Bakery. In in this little gem of a bakery, Etiquetteer spied this tiny reminder that cashiers enjoy courtesy as much as their customers do:

Etiquetteer couldn't have said it better himself.

Should you happen to have some sort of question about manners of any sort, especially now that we can start wearing white linen again, please send an e-mail to queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.