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.

 

Bridal Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 9

Dear Etiquetteer:

We would like to avoid sending reception cards as they would be redundant. Our reception and ceremony will be at the same place. The reception will follow the ceremony. Can I just indicate on the invitation that the reception will follow the ceremony? Do I need to indicate the reception site? Do I need to state the ending time of the reception? We have the place until 8:00 PM, but want to wrap things up at 7:00 PM.

Dear Conserving:

The reception card was originally created when more people were invited to the wedding than the reception. Indeed, people preferred to be invited to the wedding. Nowadays the preference is for the reception. People would rather, to use a vulgar expression, "get their money’s worth" for their wedding gift by strapping on the feed bag.

If everyone invited to the wedding is also invited to the reception, the Perfectly Proper form to use is to add "And following in the Reimenschneider Room." If the reception were in a different place you could add the address on the line below:

And following at the Hotel California

45678 Lakeshore Drive

Etiquetteer knows from bitter experience that if you want everyone out by 8:00 PM, then an end time of 7:00 PM should definitely be indicated. A lady always knows when to leave a party, but alas, ladies aren’t what they used to be. Add the times like this: "And following until seven o’clock in the Reimenschneider Room."

Dear Etiquetteer:

I’ve been asked to play guitar and sing at a friend’s wedding. Do you have any recommendations?

Dear Stringing:

Obviously "Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring" is nice for Christian weddings – the guitar is in some ways the perfect instrument for this piece – but Etiquetteer is not aware of any vocals for it. Talk to the Happy Couple and see what they like and dislike in music. Etiquetteer attended a wedding last year at which the groom’s sister played a song by The Platters. Just please avoid "Because," "Oh Promise Me," "Ah, Sweet Mystery of Life," "Evergreen," and of course "My Heart Will Go On." Not only are they less than great for a guitar, they’ve become cliché.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I like my last name and would rather keep it after I get married. My family name is really well known, I’m extended special privileges because of it, and I’m really afraid people won’t recognize me as much with my husband’s name. Is this sufficient to keep my maiden name?

Dear Bride to Be:

Once assumed that a bride would take her husband’s name, now it’s entirely up to you what you would like to do, for whatever reasons you choose. You could, like one of Etiquetteer’s successful cousins, use both names in your married life, e.g. "Ms. Cousin Maiden Married." Observe that no hyphen is used.

But take heed from the experience of two of Etiquetteer’s lady friends. When they married each kept her maiden name, but ended up adopting her husband’s name after the birth of her second child. Each wanted to have the same last name as her children. So if you’re planning to have children, you might as well take your husband’s name when you marry and forget the bother later.

And Etiquetteer has one more thing to say to you, though you didn’t ask: if Etiquetteer ever hears you saying "Don’t you know who I am?" to get some of those "special privileges" you covet so much, Etiquetteer is going to Wag an Admonitory Digit at you.

Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

 

Dinner with Friends, Vol. 6, Issue 8

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently, my husband and I planned a dinner engagement with friends. The most mutually convenient plan was for us to host a dinner, and I was happy to do so.Under normal circumstances, I typically inquire as to a guest's food allergies or socio-cultural food-related concerns. However, we've dined with these friends on many prior occasions, and they have no such predilections.

This time was different.

In three separate communications prior to the dinner, the couple repeatedly requested an accounting of my proposed menu. They mentioned that they were "dieting" and wanted to make certain that dinner was "healthy."

As I am not the White House chef, nor a professional caterer, I don't make it a habit to pre-approve my menu with my guests. I also don't serve "unhealthy" meals, e.g., fast food, foods I consider to be heavily processed, or foods containing poison, etc.

My response to my guests was to acquiesce, provide them with the proposed menu, and go from there. They offered to bring dessert, to which I responded that I had planned only on serving a fat-free hot chocolate in lieu of dessert given their oft-mentioned "diet."

My quandary: did I behave in a Perfectly Proper manner? Did they? Should I kindly suggest to them that this is not really very polite on their part and as such, should be refrained from unless an individual is faced with a life-threatening food allergy or an applicable religious conviction?

Dear Hostess Fricassee:

Well, you certainly were plucked and trussed by your guests! How sad that they seem to value their "diet" more than your generous hospitality. Etiquetteer does understand how important diets are to the people on them, but it’s Beyond Improper to enlist friends to accommodate them that much. As usual in these situations, Etiquetteer would like to serve a Perfectly Proper serving of "shut up and eat!"

You were more than accommodating in allowing your guests to vet your menu in advance, so much so that Etiquetteer thinks they took advantage of your friendship. Since it’s never a good idea to tell people they’re rude in so many words, you’ll have to approach this from another angle. Should they, or others, try that in the future, Etiquetteer encourages you to respond "Gosh, I’m probably not going to decide what to cook until that day. Perhaps you should host if that’s going to be a problem." (Some people would call this passive-aggressive; Etiquetteer calls it cagey and astute.)If these "friends" for whom you’ve bent over backwards didn’t send a Lovely Note afterward, Etiquetteer would seriously reevaluate how much you want to cater to them.

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do I really have to offer to help in the kitchen after dinner?

Dear Scullery Shirker:

The only thing you have to do after dinner is send a Lovely Note. Of course if your hosts ask you to help, Etiquetteer expects you to do so cheerfully. You’ll also note how lonely it is to sit by yourself in the dining room with everyone else in the kitchen washing up.

On the other hand, Etiquetteer has noticed an interesting trend in Middle-Class Homes With No Help (which is to say Middle-Class Homes) for kitchens to become large enough to accommodate guests. This way the hosts can continue to prepare dinner without leaving their guests all alone in the living room. Even Etiquetteer has set up a cozy nook in the kitchen with two armchairs and a cocktail table so company can nibble on hors d’oeuvres and chat while Etiquetteer wrestles with the risotto. This is a far cry from the day when guests never saw the "working" part of a household, and while Etiquetteer sometimes mourns this situation, it certainly does make things easier.

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.

 

Free Speech vs. Perfect Propriety, Vol. 6, Issue 7


FREE SPEECH vs. PERFECT PROPRIETY

Vol. 6, Issue 7, February 19, 2007

 

"Cousin Marie says politicians aren’t gentlemen," may be Etiquetteer’s favorite quotation from all Agatha Christie’s mysteries. Then there’s Henry Fonda in Jezebel, who said, "I believe it was Voltaire who said ‘I disagree with everything you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’" These two quotations come to the heart of a living civics lesson that took place in Massachusetts this month, bringing together a state senator, a high school, Facebook, American Idol, and differing political ideologies. The result has been less about the ideologies and more about Free Speech vs. Perfect Propriety. Both have taken a beating.

In brief, Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, was scheduled to make an appearance at a high school in his district to discuss his conservative positions. A student with more liberal positions than Senator Brown created a page on Facebook.com, the popular social networking website, in the days or weeks before the senator’s appearance. Students posted profane comments on the page, some very personal, about both the senator and his daughter, a former American Idol contestant. Photos of the senator with devil horns and pitchfork added were posted as well.

Senator Brown became aware of these comments before his appearance at the high school. He brought a copy with him and proceeded to read, word for four-letter word, many of the profane comments written about him and his daughter to the eighty sophomores present. Teachers were horrified that a state senator was swearing in front of an entire high school. One student was quoted as saying, "He was doing it loudly and pretty angrily." There has been some hand wringing about childishness and just how a state senator ought to act. Senator Brown’s response: "If the kids are old enough to write it, they’re old enough to hear it."

Etiquetteer sides with Senator Brown. This may surprise you.

Free speech is one of the most precious cornerstones of our Great Nation. We should all be able to say what we want without fear of government surveillance, whether it’s "I love the war," "I hate the war," or even "You’re wearing that?" But Etiquetteer also believes that, if you’re going to exercise this right, you might at least have something to say. Profanity is easy, unoriginal, and distracting. What kind of a person are you if that's the best you can do with free speech? And it certainly has not escaped Etiquetteer’s notice that no one is talking about the issues anymore, only the profanity.

It’s not surprising to see adolescents behave like, well, adolescents. Etiquetteer does not condemn the kids who made the profane postings. But it is important for adolescents (and all of us) to know that actions have consequences. Comments made in the public square, whether on the Internet, the newspaper, or anywhere, may be heard by anyone. When you say something, you’re responsible for what you said. You shouldn’t be surprised if someone calls you on it, especially if it’s personal. Senator Brown did that in a very dramatic and public way. Etiquetteer hopes that it impressed on these students these lessons:

  • Personal attacks don’t further a discussion of issues.
  • Post something on the Web and anyone can read it, even people you don’t want to read it.
  • Profanity still has the ability to shock. That makes it the lowest common denominator when trying to get attention. Use more class and think of another way to make your point.

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.

 

A Gentleman’s Accessories, Vol. 6, Issue 6

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently, I decided to use my 1920's pocket watch. For convenience, I've been thinking about using a watch fob. However, are there rules about where the fob hangs from? Also, does the metal of the fob have to match the metal of the watch?

Dear Timely:

A watch fob usually hangs at the other end of the watch chain. If you were wearing your pocket watch on a waistcoat, you’d put the watch in the pocket on one side, loop the chain through a buttonhole in the center, and stick the fob in the other pocket. With a pair of jeans – more common these days, alas – you put the watch in the watch pocket, loop the chain through a belt loop and then clip the chain to the belt loop. That would expose the fob; some might find that too showy.

Believe it or not, Etiquetteer has actually seen photographs of 19th century gentlemen with their watch chains looped through their lapel buttonholes, with their watches in their breast pockets! That fashion, Etiquetteer can safely say, is now as outmoded as spats.

Curiously, none of the etiquette writers of the past laid down any guidelines on whether the fob and chain had to match. Indeed, sometimes fobs were set with precious or semi-precious stones with a seal carved into them; Etiquetteer imagines they were actually used with sealing wax on letters.

The dictum those etiquette writers do lay down, however, is that all of a gentleman’s jewelry be as plain and unostentatious as possible. Remember what that little gnomish woman said in Unzipped: "Fussy, finished!" So as you commence your search for a Perfectly Proper fob, permit Etiquetteer to steer you to some of the better antique stores for assistance. As the late Amy Vanderbilt once said, "Heirlooms are never out of fashion."

Dear Etiquetteer:

For Christmas I was given some handkerchiefs with my first initial on them. The only problem with that is that I’m a guy. I was always taught that men have their last initials on handkerchiefs. Do I give them back and ask for the correct initial or keep them and have hankies that are wrong?

Dear Initialed:

First of all, no, you may not ask the giver to exchange the gift. Good heavens . . . just use those handkerchiefs anyway! Etiquetteer hopes you aren’t calling so much attention to them that people would notice the initial in the first place.

Marking linens (handkerchiefs, sheets, towels, underwear, etc.) with initials and monograms got started to be sure everyone got their own laundry back from the laundress, not as a status symbol. While it’s Perfectly Proper to have your handkerchiefs marked, it’s bad form to show it off.

Second, you are, in fact, correct about initials. A gentleman’s linen, when not monogrammed with all three initials, is embroidered with only his last initial. Ladies use the first initial.

Dear Etiquetteer: Is there a comfortable way to wear a tie bar? I just got one and I can’t stop wrestling with it during the day.

Dear Fit to be Tied: Etiquetteer considers the tie bar an unnecessary accessory for a gentleman nowadays. It’s actually a little déclassé as far as Etiquetteer is concerned -- not quite as bad as dental grills and other gangsta bling, but definitely not for the discriminating gentleman. Please just tuck it gently into your jewelry box and forget all about it.

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.

 

Restaurant and Random Issues, Vol. 6, Issue 2

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently at a Fine Dining Establishment we were told that there was no room to accommodate our party. As we were putting on our coats one of the waiters came past, who turned out to be a social acquaintance, and asked if we were having lunch there. We said we had hoped to, and explained the predicament while continuing to put on our coats. "Wait a moment." he said, and shortly we were squeezed into a cozy but otherwise charming table for a delicious lunch.

Though he was not our waiter, I did thank him afterwards and slipped him a tip, since I felt he had acted in a professional capacity as much as in a social capacity. Was this proper? When is it proper to tip friends or acquaintances, and how much is appropriate when indirect service is rendered?

Dear Well Led and Well Fed:

Interacting with personal friends working as service personnel does sometimes feel tricky. When friends do each other favors, they respond in kind with another favor or a Token of Gratitude, not Cold Hard Cash. But Etiquetteer thinks you acted correctly in slipping a consideration to your waiter/acquaintance because of his position in the restaurant. Had he waited on your table, you would have tipped him as you would any other.

Dear Etiquetteer:

My wife and I were out to dinner with friends not too long ago, and I started the meal with a delicious crab bisque. As I got down near the bottom, I tilted the bowl toward me to get to the last of the soup, and my wife nudged me to stop. And, she added, I should be pushing my spoon away from me rather than pulling it towards me. Was I wrong to tilt the bowl, and is that idea of spooning away from your body real etiquette or merely an old wives tale?

Dear Spooning:

Etiquetteer hates to tell you, but your wife is correct. Etiquetteer’s Beloved Grandmother even had a rhyme about it: something something "Like little ships that sail to sea/I tip my spoon away from me." Etiquetteer believes that you have less of a chance of slopping a bowl of soup on you if it's facing the other direction. So when getting down to those last excellent drops of crab bisque, please tip your bowl and spoon toward the table.

Etiquetteer hopes Your Lovely Wife didn't correct you verbally before people, which is certainly not Perfectly Proper. Nothing more than a raised eyebrow or gentle nudge should be required.

Dear Etiquetteer:

How do you address an envelope for a thank-you note if the wife is a doctor? Mr. and Mrs. John Doe seems right. Mr. and Dr. John Doe doesn’t seem right. But I'm open to suggestion.

Dear Corresponding:

That’s good, because ignoring a lady’s professional title is a bad idea. Put Dr. Jane Doe on the first line and Mr. John Doe on the second line. Please note that these are in alphabetical order; if they had different last names, they'd be in alphabetical order regardless of gender, e.g. Dr. Jane Adler/Mr. John Doe.

Dear Etiquetteer:

This came up with my wife, and then a few days later in a conversation with another couple. What is the proper etiquette for a man and a woman approaching a revolving door? I thought the man should go first. My friend proposed that, if the door is already moving, the woman should go first, otherwise, the man should go first.

Dear Revolving:

This is really a question of safety and chivalry. The gentleman goes first to keep the door from speeding out of control, thereby knocking to her knees some poor lady in spike heels or platform shoes. It doesn’t matter whether or not the door is already moving. Gentlemen similarly go in front of ladies when descending staircases or getting out of buses.

Dear Etiquetteer:

President Ford’s funeral was over a week ago. How come all the flags are still at half-staff?

Dear Flagging:

Because the period of official of mourning set by President Bush is 30 days from the date of death of President Ford. The Flag Code indicates that this is established by the President of the United States by proclamation at the time. You may find the President’s proclamation here.

While researching this, Etiquetteer also found out that when one raises the flag when it’s supposed to be at half-staff, one must first raise the flag all the way to the top of the staff and then lower it halfway down the flagpole. For two years in elementary school Etiquetteer got stuck with . . . uh, gladly took on the duty of raising and lowering the flag at school each day and understood that half-staff only meant one flag-length from the top of the flagpole. What a relief to find out what True Perfect Propriety is now.

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 and Lovely Notes, Vol. 6, Issue 1

Readers alternately applauded and chastised Etiquetteer for rewriting "Away in a Manger" recently. One was even inspired to reply in verse!

Now now, dear Etiquetteer, I do so believe

You've never tried to find a sitter on Christmas Eve

My cherub was quiet all the way here in the car

But the lights and the music have brought out her voice thus far

 

Please do forgive parents, they really do mean well

And are in emotional agony trying their babe's cries to quell

Instruct, please, the ushers for next year to gently take

Parents with crying babes to nursery as their job, and make

 

The parents, who are mortified that NOW their babe is loud, oh, not good

Tried so hard to make this service, so meaningful from their own childhood

Some have never stepped foot in this church, or haven't in years

And the stress of the season has the parents close to tears

 

All they wanted, to a person, I bet, was one peaceful hour

Full of the sounds and songs of Christmas Eve, the glory and its power

It is not our place, as adults, to turn struggling ones away

But to offer comfort, and the nursery, and a hope for a better day

 

Seriously Etiquetteer, lots of new parents, particularly, seem to turn up at a church on Christmas Eve, hoping for some of what they remember of the magic of Christmas. They don't know, most of them where the church nursery is - never mind that it is staffed with patient and experienced volunteers, even on Christmas Eve.

Etiquetteer responds: Your spirited defense of New Parents is most appreciated, and you are quite right to point out that ushers have a duty to "keep the peace" by directing Those With Unruly Children to the church nursery. But Etiquetteer stands fast against those who behave in church as they would at a stadium, allowing their children to caterwaul or even walk around without any restraint.

From a former altar boy: I loved the new version of the Christmas hymn! I yowled out loud when I read it.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer can only hope you weren’t in church at the time.

From a devoted son: My parents insisted on Christmas Eve services this year, and though I am far less pious in my old age than they are in theirs, I agreed.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that at [Insert Name of Church Here] holds a children's service at 4:00 PM, with children both welcomed and participating in the activities (with the requisite meltdowns and bawling), followed by several grown-up services. That struck me as a perfectly proper solution to your own Christmas Eve lament.

I'm also wondering, what is the right age for children to send Perfectly Proper notes of thanks on their own stationary for gifts received? I have several young nieces and nephews from whom I have never received a thank-you note. To me, "thank-you duties" aren't complete without the note, even though, when the family is together, verbal thanks may have been exchanged at the time the gift was bestowed. Do these on-the-spot thanks substitute for written sentiments?

Etiquetteer responds: What a wonderful idea! Etiquetteer heartily encourages other churches to adopt a children’s service and grown-up services.

As to Lovely Notes of Thanks, Etiquetteer started giving his nephews and niece boxes of appropriate stationery when they turned six. When time permitted, Etiquetteer would actually sit down with them the day after Christmas to be sure those Lovely Notes got written. Ah, happy times . . .

On the other hand, Etiquetteer was completely charmed by his niece this year, who smilingly hand-delivered a Perfectly Proper Lovely Note not half an hour after the gifts had been opened.

You are quite correct that verbal thanks do not substitute for a Lovely Note. And as Etiquetteer writes this, That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much blushes with shame, since he hasn’t even started his Lovely Notes yet!

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.

 

Netiquette: Invitations, Vol. 5, Issue 30

Dear Etiquetteer:

In the age of e-mail invitations for dinners and barbecues I submit to you the following situation. Recently a friend of mine invited a group of us to his house for dinner. He apparently used an old e-mail list so that he could contact a large group of us all at the same time. He did not, however, take into account that he had included an e-mail address for a woman that one of our friends broke up with over a year ago. That friend has since moved on to date a very nice (very sane) woman and the two are currently living together. The other woman (let's just call her the crazy one to be clear) does not assume that she was invited by mistake and hits the dreaded reply to all button to say that she misses us all terribly and that she had recently had a dream about our friend.

How does one now uninvite the crazy one to the barbecue without being outright mean (I personally don't care since I never liked this person to begin with, but most people would be afraid of hurting her feelings)?

Dear Invited and Appalled:

Here we see the disadvantages of the cut and paste commands. The three extra minutes the host saved not typing in each individual address are more than lost now that he’s invited someone he didn’t want to see ever again (and which it seems few of his other guests would either). Etiquetteer cannot stress enough that reviewing the To: field before hitting Send on any e-mail, not just invitations, will save a multitude of anxiety later.

It’s quite natural to assume that when one receives a party invitation one is actually being invited to a party. Etiquetteer cannot fault the Ex-Girlfriend in Question for that. But Etiquetteer still has to Wag an Admonitory Digit at her anyway for sending her reply to the entire guest list (never Perfectly Proper for large gatherings) and even more for including a personal message to her ex-boyfriend. Personal correspondence should be just that: personal. And let’s face it, telling your ex-boyfriend (and all his friends) that you just had a dream about him a year after the break-up conjures up images of Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction. (On the other hand, if they’re serving rabbit at the barbecue, that might come in handy . . .)

The Host, if he’s not willing to let the invitation stand and welcome the Ex-Girlfriend in Question to his barbecue, now has the embarrassing duty of rescinding his invitation. He needs to do this in person (or at the very least by phone, and Etiquetteer does not mean voicemail) and he needs to do itimmediately. He must spread the embarrassment and self-abasement over himself thickly and explain that the invitation was sent in error. He may have to put up with some tears and/or temper. Etiquetteer does not care; it’s his own fault for not checking the guest list before sending the invitation.

Many people would say it’s mean to take back an invitation like this. Etiquetteer suggests the Host needs to weigh what would be meaner for the Ex-Girlfriend in Question: hearing that she’s not really invited to a party she’s already publicly expressed excitement about attending, or actually attending the party and being snubbed by everyone there.

Or he could cancel the party altogether and then reschedule it (preferably for another day) with the correct guest list. The two e-mail messages should not go out back to back. The Ex-Girlfriend in Question will be sure to find out if she’s been snubbed.

 

Random Issues, Vol. 5, Issue 29

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do you think the term "Lezbollah" will ever take off as a way to describe lesbian activists?

Dear Tiresome:

Oh please. "Lezbollah" is rather like one of those words from the David Letterman Top Ten List of Words That Never Caught On, "Hitleriffic:" it sounds really catchy and upbeat, but it’s Wildly Inappropriate. Etiquetteer recommends another semester of PC 101 for you.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I’ve just had the terrible experience of cleaning out my closet and finding a Christmas gift I was supposed to give to one of my neighbors last Christmas. She must think I’ve snubbed her! How can I correct this now?

Dear Absentminded:

Clearly you must invite your neighbor over for "Christmas in August" one evening. Serve Christmas cookies on red and green napkins, pour a glass of cold eggnog, and give her her present. You could even put on a Santa hat and those annoying Christmas light bulb earrings that blink on and off. Just think of this as an opportunity to grovel in a reallyspectacular way. Remember what they say in real estate: if you can’

t hide it, paint it red!

Dear Etiquetteer:

Do you think you can handle another wedding question? My fiancé and I are getting married later this year and are working out what we want the attendants to wear. The women aren’t a problem; we’ve already told them to wear black (you’ll probably get us in trouble for that). We’ve come to a disagreement about the men, though. Both of us will have on tuxedos, but the guests are just being told to come in jackets and ties. We think that asking the men to wear a dark gray suit would be OK, but we feel bad about asking them to buy a suit. And they’d all have to be the same suit, so they’d look uniform in the photos. On the other hand, there aren’t a lot of rental places that will rent suits. What would you advise us to do?

Dear Grooming:

Elope, just to keep those poor ladies from having to wear black to a wedding!

No, no, seriously, let’s look at this from the beginning. Etiquetteer feels compelled to remind you that this is the sacrament of Marriage, not a summer stock production number. Etiquetteer has some grave concerns about the ideas you’ve suggested. First and foremost, what’s all this about you being in black tie and your attendants in suits? One is evening clothes and the other is day clothes; to combine them as you suggest will look tacky. While Etiquetteer is not fond of combining a formally dressed wedding party with casually dressed wedding guests – a particularly American custom –

Etiquetteer would rather see you and your men attendants all in tuxedos or all in dark suits (that need not match). That will certainly promote the uniformity you claim to seek. You can provide different boutonnieres for yourselves to shake up the mix.

 

Lovely Notes and Wedding Entrées, Vol. 5, Issue 28

Dear Etiquetteer:

Not too long ago, I attended a lovely and informative, and not a little grand, buffet luncheon in the gardens of a stately house. The event was actually a fund-raiser for an Old New England Institution of which I am a very junior member, actually billed as celebrating the accession to Director of said institution of a good, talented, and engaging man who is a friend of mine. I attended both to support him and to get to see said stately house, which is architecturally significant, in the midst of restoration and not open to the public. My gut instinct, despite being a 'paying customer,' is to write an Etiquetteer-approved Lovely Note to mine hosts (the event WAS wonderful, and I fear the clock has already ticked a bit long). Perhaps it could be couched in terms of "Thank you so much for opening your home in support of O.N.E.I. and providing a brilliant, informative, and delightful afternoon for me, as for all - bravo!"

My only discomfort with that is that I don't know these people, nor they me. Plus, I am in a profession where I don't want to seem like I'm self-promoting. And my reticent English side is suggesting that maybe it would be considered too forward or gauche even to mention it in this crowd. The only other minor complication is that I met the hostess but very briefly and I don't believe she shares the patronymic of the host, who was the only person listed on the invitation; this, however, I can ferret out from my friend the Director, I suppose.

What are your thoughts, o great guru of that which is or is not gauche?

Dear Well-Feted:

It’s a rare day when Etiquetteer advises against writing a Lovely Note. Today is that rare day. After attending a fund-raiser, you are the one who should be getting the Lovely Note! In this case it would be from that Old New England Institution and it will tell you how lovely you are to have shown up to support the new Director; then, in much smaller type at the bottom, will cut to the chase and tell you about your tax deduction.

Etiquetteer rather agrees with your "English side" in this situation. This event really introduced you to the Stately House as a Stately House and not as a Home. In other words, being greeted by the hosts in their Stately House at a fund-raiser is not a social introduction. To write them privately, no matter how pure your motives, would be considered "pushy" by the recipients. The best way to communicate your thanks is through your mutual friend, the new Director of O.N.E.I. The next time you speak or e-mail, tell him "And please do tell Belshazzar Grandee and his wife how much I appreciated their opening their home for your party. It was all the more special because of their hospitality."

One last thing: it’s no minor thing to be uncertain about your hostess’s last name! Etiquetteer has been bruised often enough by assuming that "Mrs. Belshazzar Grandee" would be Perfectly Proper only to find out that "Ms. Shrieking Militant Feminist Termagent" was her real name. Life was much simpler when women didn’t have any choices, but that does not excuse Oppression. While more complicated, Life in General is much better now.

Dear Etiquetteer:

My fiancé and I are planning a small wedding of just immediate family and close friends. This nevertheless has created a list of 60. To keep costs down we'd originally planned a buffet dinner with an option between a vegetarian pasta and chicken option for the main course. After the tasting at the caterer, however, we were so impressed by the quality of both dishes and by the elegant presentation that we've decided that everyone would likely enjoy both dishes and to make it a sit-down dinner. The oh-so-tasty pasta will be the first course with the chicken as entree. Since the increase in costs has knocked a dent in our budget, we will not offer a second entree option.

Some are saying we simply must offer a second entree choice, declaring that not everyone will like the elegant chicken dish we've selected. We're doing our best to accommodate guests with specific needs. A vegan relative and a friend with significant food allergies will each receive special meals. The caterer has told us they are unable to provide a whole different, formally-plated entrée without another significant hit to our budget.

We'd like to balance generous hospitality at a memorable event with a reasonable budget. Can you advise?

Dear Too Hot in the Kitchen:

First, allow Etiquetteer to congratulate you and your fiancé on your impending marriage and wish you a long life of Perfect Propriety together.

Etiquetteer is delighted that you’re only serving one entrée. Etiquetteer’s favorite entrée at special occasions like weddings has always been "Shut Up and Eat." Whether everyone "likes" it or not makes no difference. They aren’t attending your wedding because of what you’re serving at the reception. Besides, it’s an additional hassle to track down all the last responders to find out not only if they’re coming to the wedding but also what they want to eat. So offer only your elegant chicken with Etiquetteer’s blessing.

 

Seersucker and Antique Pricetags, Vol. 5, Issue 27

Dear Etiquetteer:

I have a dilemma over whether it would be appropriate to wear seersucker to a wedding this weekend. The dress is not specified and the wedding begins at 7:00 PM. Is this too late in the evening to wear my seersucker suit? Do I need to wear a dark suit? I'd greatly appreciate your help.

Dear Wedding Guest:

Etiquetteer is delighted to hear from you and to offer assistance. Thank you for writing!

If the Happy Couple didn't specify what to wear on the wedding invitation, then they deserve what they get. And seersucker during the summer months is no different from a dark suit in the winter. By all means wear your seersucker suit (with white bucks) with Perfect Propriety to the wedding, and please report back and let Etiquetteer know how it went. Actually, Etiquetteer is dying to find out what everyone else wore since the dress code was never specified!

Dear Etiquetteer:

Recently I gave a friend an antique vase I’d found tucked in a corner of a closet. I have no idea where it came from, but it had obviously been in that closet for some years. A pricetag was on the bottom, which must have reflected the price of the vase at some point. I left it on when I gave the vase to my friend because I’

d always heard that you keep the pricetag on an antique. But that really goes against taking the pricetag off any other kind of gift. What should I have done?

Dear Tagged:

Had you heard that? Etiquetteer once heard that if you put a knife under the bed, you cut the pain in two . . .

Etiquetteer thinks you are confusing a couple different types of tags. Antiquarians and historians and those sorts of people are always interested in preserving as much of the past as possible. That means that original tags affixed by the makers need to be kept on antiques. This is more typical of furniture; Betty C. Monkman’s wonderful book “The White House: Its Historic Furnishings and First Families”

has a wonderful section on this topic. But that does not mean that you keep anything other than the original pricetag on an antique gift. Etiquetteer has no idea what you might be digging up in your closet, but please remove pricetags before presenting your finds as gifts.

 

Reader Response: Holiday Gift Guide, Vol. 6, Issue 40

Dear Etiquetteer:

I've read your gift guide for this year and I have a few comments/suggests. Your gift guide is great for those who are not on a very limited budget. If you are, or if you are shopping for that special person who has everything, I have a few suggestions:

1) I know you are not a big fan of the gift card. I, however, love them because I take the time to find out if there might be a remodeling project the recipient might be planning yet just has saved the money to complete it. A gift card to their local home improvement center can be just the thing to complete that project or get that project started.

2) For the couple on a very limited budget and very little time, a gift card to a favorite restaurant and a night of your time to babysit if needed. Sometime that is their only night out whether or not they have kids the couple can afford.

3) There may be that special someone who has almost everything. Get them a gift card for a good bottle of wine or liquor of their choosing if they enjoy such things. Use your imagination.

4) For that elderly person on a limited budget, a gift card to [Insert Names of Big-Box Store Here] can be used for everyday items they may need. A gift card to their pharmacy to assist with their medications can be a blessing. Even a gift card for their local grocery store is greatly appreciated.

5) For children, savings bonds are great. It teaches them to save and invest wisely and it can grow along with them. Also stick in a dollar or more just to give them a little money in their pocket. Gift cards to [Insert Name of Big-Box Store Here] makes those kids feel like they are big.

6) For the elderly that want to remain at home, pay some on their caregiver services if they require them or even yard maintenance services for during the summer. This can give them that feeling of independence.

Just think outside the box. The more creative and individualized the gift, the more meaningful and appreciated. Ask people what they want. If they won't tell you, ask their family, friends, neighbors, or caregivers. Even making some cookies or candy for your shut-in neighbor or just spending a little time with them or those in the nursing homes that their families live away and can't be with them for the holidays. With the economic times like they are, the least gesture of kindness can make this the best holiday season ever.

Dear Giving Lovingly:

Well, Etiquetteer has had to rub his chin thoughtfully contemplating what you suggest. Your heart is so very much in the right place, and if you know Etiquetteer doesn’t really like gift cards, then you know Etiquetteer well!

And why is that? Because gift cards set an expectation that one deserves to get a gift that one wants, when in fact all one might deserve is a lump of coal. And really, Etiquetteer doesn’t think a gift card is that imaginative; in effect, it’s like giving in and saying, "I have no idea what to get you, so here’s some money that just isn’t cash." One also wants to avoid making the recipient feel like he or she is receiving charity. A gift should make one feel special; not that one looks like one needs help paying the bills.

Some of the other situations you describe could be addressed more imaginatively with a gift basket rather than a gift card. For the elderly, why not fill a beautiful basket with everyday necessities and a few gourmet treats and wrap it all up with a big shiny bow? Or for the person who has everything, a basket of holiday greens or other plants?

But for the family on a limited budget or undergoing a home renovation, a gift card to dinner and or the cinema (plus babysitting services) or a home improvement shop could be the perfect gift to give. And as an early recipient of savings bonds, Etiquetteer can vouch for their resulting long-lasting gratitude.

Etiquetteer was so glad to see you mention homemade holiday treats. Tins of cookies and other goodies should always be welcome in season. Really, Etiquetteer doesn’t know how he’ll face Christmas without Mrs. Keith’sincomparable shortbread hearts!

You may be surprised to learn that Etiquetteer isn’t a fan of asking people what they want for presents. It can lead to disappointment if you can’t find what they ask for, if it’s more than you want to spend, or if you just plain decide to get them something else. But detective work with mutual friends and relatives is fair game and very instructive.

Etiquetteer wants to thank you for your generous and well-meant thoughts. Would that everyone could be so Perfectly Proper!

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.

 

Food Allergies, Vol. 5, Issue 26

Dear Etiquetteer:

In the last five years I have developed a strange spectrum of food allergies, from celery (who knew one could even be allergic to something like celery?) to lemon juice, "tree nuts," beef (I can have dairy, just not the cow itself), and more. I read ingredient labels before I purchase anything, and have to instruct waiters very specifically when dining out (no lemon in my water, thank you, I'm allergic). I always have an epi-pen with me, inhalers, Benadryl, all the medications for emergencies.

I e-mail an updated "Foods of Death" list before any family gathering, and my sister, for example, prepared two different bowls of pasta salad for a recent celebration: one with celery and mayonnaise, and one without celery, and with Miracle Whip (no lemon juice).

But it can get awkward at casual gatherings, when I have to be very selective, and ask questions quietly. On a couple occasions, people have felt bad when I did not eat their refreshments. The worst was a barbecue gathering of people from a professional association we belong to, out in a distant state, where I ended up only able to eat one person’s pasta salad, corn chips and desserts. Hardly a nutritious day, but I explained that one day wouldn’t malnourish me for life, and I wasn’t upset. It was, however, quite awkward.

I don’t want to be a diva and demand special treatment from people (except my siblings, who say, "Well, we always knew you were weird!"), but I don’t want people to feel bad either, when they notice that I’m not eating. What’s a person to do? There’s a quandary for Etiquetteer!

Dear Allergic:

Modern medicine has created so many problems for Society! If you were just dead of undiagnosed allergies people wouldn’t have all the difficulties of feeding guests with restricted diets. On the other hand, you’d be dead, which is Entirely Unacceptable.

Etiquetteer sympathizes with you in your plight, which you seem to be handling with dignity and discretion. Etiquetteer applauds your desire not to be a diva; it never gets people very far anyway.

But Etiquetteer has to Wag an Admonitory Digit, however, at your hosts. No matter how disappointed they may be that you can’t eat what they’re serving, it’s very bad manners for them to let you see it. There’s nothing you can do about that but change the subject. If they carry on to an unacceptable level, simply say to them what you told Etiquetteer: that you don’t want to be a diva and demand special treatment, and that talking about your diet is rather boring.

Do you know what Gloria Swanson used to do? In her later years she became a strict vegetarian and what was known at the time as a "health nut." When she was invited to a dinner party she’d pack her own little sandwich or whatever in her purse and slip it to the butler when she arrived.* It would magically appear on her plate when dinner was served. Now you’ll observe that this only works in a household with servants – it’s so hard to find good help nowadays – but this would work equally well at a potluck like the one you described. Just bring your own.

You could also "head ’em off at the pass" by entertaining them in your own home with recipes that accommodate your allergies. Thinking people will put two and two together after a casual reference.

*Ethel Merman, on the other hand, was invited to a Passover seder by Jule Styne and brought a ham sandwich. Etiquetteer does notrecommend that approach.

 

Netiquette, Vol. 5, Issue 25

Dear Etiquetteer:

How should we communicate professionalism through our e-mail since almost all online communication is so informal? And how much should we read into the online communication we receive? Once upon a time, people would have different stationery appropriate for different types of communication: simple and formal for business and something more expressive or whimsical for personal. Nowadays, people seem to think that one size fits all for e-mail communication. For example, one of my friends uses the e-mail userid "Sally6969" for much of her communication (although she does have a separate e-mail address for work). Now I happen to know that Sally was born in 1969, but don't you think her e-mail address might communicate something, well, different? In addition, I have seen resumes from people with e-mail addresses like "krazykat" or "fancynancy." Maybe these folks were named "Katherine" and "Nancy," but what are the guidelines here? And how do we remind our friends and colleagues about such things if they are, indeed, giving the wrong impression?

Dear Impressionable in Cyberspace:

First impressions last, even on the Internet . . . especially on the Internet, one might say. The use of a whimsical userid, which probably would not excite comment with social correspondence, doesn’t always make the right impression when used professionally. The women behind "krazykat" or "fancynancy," who Etiquetteer is sure are perfectly capable in their careers, would have made a better impression with a more neutral-sounding userid on a resume. Most people create one based on their names, such as "kjones" or "katharinej" or "fnancy."

Etiquetteer knows this from personal experience. At the start of his professional career, when Etiquetteer was in his mid-twenties and e-mail was not yet an international communcations phenomenon, Etiquetteer chose the userid "fun." That gave rise to much amusement over the years, but didn’t really convince people that Etiquetteer was very reliable, capable, or, yes, professional. Now Etiquetteer uses a userid based on Etiquetteer’s proper name, and gets along much better.

It’s also possible to give offense. Etiquetteer knows one woman who left an online discussion group she helped found because one man’s userid expressed his fondness for a specific sex act. Now that it’s possible for people to have an infinite number of e-mail addresses, Etiquetteer encourages everyone to tailor their userids for their communications.

Beyond userids – to get back to your original question – one conveys professionalism in e-mail by using all the rules of professional correspondence. These include proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation, no heavy-handed use of bold or italic type, and absolutely no animated .gifs! To be Perfectly Professional one shouldn’t even use those smiley icons, like :-) (though Etiquetteer will confess to using them occasionally if it’s necessary to emphasize that something is supposed to be funny).

Etiquetteer’s Dear Mother used to say, "A word to the wise is sufficient." When you see friends or colleagues conveying less than a professional impression in professional correspondence, gently suggest that they edit their correspondence a little more before hitting the Send button. Etiquetteer’s Dear Mother also used to say, "Less is more."

 

 

Reader Response to Coffee Service, Vol. 4, Issue 24

A couple readers have already made memorable responses to Etiquetteer's column on Perfectly Proper coffee service in an era with too many kinds of coffee, sweeteners, and dairy products:

From a Southern development professional: I will try to follow your advice and "make do" without my preferred non-dairy creamer (either powdered or liquid) even though I am lactose intolerant and any dairy creamer causes me some, er, discomfort later on. I will take it black instead I think.

Etiquetteer responds: Really, you ought to start traveling with your own supply of non-dairy creamer. Like those who have to take pills at mealtime, your non-dairy creamer keeps your health in check and, significantly, keeps you and those around you from experiencing your "discomfort."

From a distinguished Southern matron: I hate to ruin your day but this is the year 2006 and the coffee ritual has changed in the last hundred years! I must admit to being a bit put off when one of my house guests pulled a bottle of "creamer" from her suitcase since she didn't want to inconvenience me with buying a special hazelnut fakery. You've already shown us ways to offer sweetener packets at home and I really like them better.

Also you failed to note that clear glass containers sized for this purpose and used in restaurants are available everywhere.

As to the disposal of the paper packets, I fold the empty packet so the server can see it's empty, then place it on the saucer or on the table beside the mug. Bye the bye, you'll be happy to know that should I come to your house for coffee I drink it black, as Nature intended it to be drunk.

Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer is really going to have to Wag an Admonitory Digit at your house guest. Contrary to the reader above, whose special stash is used to manage a medical condition, your house guest dishonors your preparations for her enjoyment by indulging in personal preference. The message she’s sending is that anything you do for her will not be good enough. Some people may think Etiquetteer is being harsh here, but Etiquetteer remains firm that bringing one’s own refreshments to a party looks like one cares more about one’s own desires than about the feelings of others.

And as to those little glass containers, may the Deity of Your Choice protect us from the day when we all have to decorate our homes just like restaurants. Etiquetteer would rather see something more harmonious to achieve true Perfect Propriety.

Dear Etiquetteer: 

A very dear friend just announced her engagement, and I have a two-part inquiry for you:

Part 1: Is it true that the location and wedding dress should achieve some kind of harmony and set a tone for the event? For example, an afternoon garden wedding for 60 people might not warrant the donning of a bejeweled gown complete with train and ballgown skirt?

Part 2: What is the most Perfectly Proper way to indicate the above to a dear friend?

Dear Meddling:

Etiquetteer must agree with you that a wedding dress should be appropriate for the time and place of the wedding. American brides, however, have been flouting this Pillar of Perfect Propriety for decades. Somehow they believe that just because some man offered his hand in marriage they have the Divine Right to wear the Biggest Dress in the World anywhere they want.

Before you say anything to your friend, Etiquetteer wants you to think very carefully about whether or not it’s any of your business to comment on her wedding plans. It might not be.

 

 

Coffee Service, Vol. 5, Issue 23

Once upon a time it was so easy to offer someone a cup of coffee, but science got in the way. All one needed was coffee, cream, and sugar. Everyone understood this and took as much or as little coffee as they wished. The implements of a Perfectly Proper coffee service became enshrined over time: cup and saucer, spoon, sugar bowl, cream pitcher, and coffee pot. This simple arrangement got complicated by scientific progress and, as always, personal preference. Never mind that personal preference would be used to trump courtesy . . .

First science brought us decaffeinated coffee, then artificial sweetener, then a rainbow of artificial sweeteners. Dieters went one step further and began putting milk in their coffee instead of cream; Science accommodated them by creating fat free milk, 1%, 2%, and the Deity of Your Choice only know how many other kinds of milk different from whole milk. Etiquetteer even knows people who prefer powdered milk substitute to real milk. Woe betide anyone offering the simple hospitality of their home who forgets any of these items! Their guests will transform themselves into pursuing Furies, following them from dining room to kitchen to larder looking for the perfect combination of ingredients without which they could not possibly consume a cup of coffee.

Engineers, however, have come to the rescue, at least partly. The invention of the two-part percolator saved a great deal of trouble; one can serve fully-leaded coffee on one side and decaf on the other. Etiquetteer's only gripe is that they forgot how to do so in sterling silver. Percolating coffee urns of the 1930s and 1940s were made in silver or chromium to resemble antique coffee urns. The invention of plastic ended that product line, alas, and we are faced with really casual-looking coffee pots drafted into formal service.

The service of artificial sweeteners, however, has required more ingenuity on the part of hosts and hostesses. Obviously another serving piece is required, but what to add? Etiquetteer saw a particularly elegant solution at a formal dinner recently. The coffee tray was passed with a silver sugar and creamer and the addition of a small silver urn stuffed with Familiar Pink Packets. This urn was in a different pattern from the other pieces, but it was so clearly Perfectly Proper that Etiquetteer could not endorse it more highly. For everyday service at Etiquetteer’

s house, the china sugar and creamer have been supplemented with a pewter sugar bowl perfectly suited to the size of the Famliar Pink Packets.

Etiquetteer finds the remaining solution in guest behavior modification. Please, if you aren’t offered the dairy or sweetener choices you prefer, make do with what you’re offered! One cup of coffee with cream instead of milk, or Sweet ‘n’

Low instead of Splenda, is not going to wreak your diet.

Dear Etiquetteer:

What on earth am I supposed to do with the sugar packet after I’ve emptied it into my coffee? Shouldn’

t we have a little glass or something on the table for that?

Dear Sweetened:

Etiquetteer never thought he’d pine for the days of rampant indoor smoking, but the fact is that when ashtrays were still standard features on dining tables, that’s where everyone put their used packets. Nowadays, in the absence of a saucer, people put them almost anywhere unobtrusive: bread plates, under the rim of service plates, even folded neatly and put back in the bowl from which it came. Clever hosts and hostesses draft the slops bowl from their tea service for this purpose, since it has a cover. But Etiquetteer can’t see restaurants doing this across the board. When it’

s just you faced with a bare table, Etiquetteer suggests you roll up the packet into a small ball and slip it into your purse or pocket.