Etiquetteer Reviews Emily Post's Etiquette: The Centennial Edition, Vol. 21, Issue 61

There were etiquette books before Emily Post’s Etiquette in 1922. But she set a new standard in how to write about Perfect Propriety and, without realizing it, became the grandmother of all American etiquette writers. So what could be more Perfectly Proper than that her great-great-grandchildren, Lizzie Post and Daniel Post Senning, set a new standard themselves to honor the 100th anniversary of Emily’s legacy? Emily Post’s Etiquette: The Centennial Edition is the definitive etiquette book for our times, streamlining Emily’s charm and correct instincts into engaging, readable prose for 21st-century situations. Etiquetteer couldn’t be more pleased; buy this book.

One of the most prominent things that’s changed about how Americans think of manners is that they don’t feel the need to ape the rich or take their cues from aristocratic ladies*. And the authors acknowledge this almost right away. “While Emily’s status in society was that of an older, wealthy white woman, her advice was anchored in principles that were effective and accessible for all, creating a long-lasting and adaptable foundation for her work.” Throughout the new edition, other cultures and traditions are treated sensitively, something most etiquette books rarely had to consider in Emily’s day. We recognize that traditions of good behavior come from many different places.

Emily’s language reflected her upbringing and status, and Etiquetteer has always found her books charming . . . if a bit rambling**. The authors of the centennial edition have taken a different, less remote approach: “We hope it will feel like a conversation about etiquette and not like an encyclopedia.” They have achieved this goal hands down, making the centennial edition just as tough to put down as Emily’s books, but with a fresh new Postian voice. Etiquetteer just hankers to chat with them over coffee.

One reason Emily Post’s books were fun for a little boy to read was her cast of characters: The Worldlys, the Oldnames, the Eminents, the Onceweres, Mr. Clubwin Doe, and of course the Gildings. “It will not do to ask the Bob Gildings, not because of the difference in age but because Lucy Gilding smokes like a furnace straight through dinner and is miserable unless she can play bridge for high stakes . . . while Mrs. Highbrow and Mrs. Oncewere quite possibly disapprove of women’s smoking at all and class all playing for money with ‘gambling.’”*** Mrs. Toplofty’s solution to sitting next to a mortal enemy at dinner remains an important moment in that edition. Mrs. Toplofty doesn’t appear to have survived in the centennial edition, nor Mr. Richan Vulgar and Miss Nono Betta. But Ms. Travelswell joins us, as well as Ms. Inher Heade, Mr. Chival Russ, and Mx. Dullasa Doorknob. Etiquetteer loves them.

Yes, Mx., pronounced Mix. The authors actively embrace the honorific for nonbinary, intersex, and gender-nonconforming people, the greatest shift in the etiquette world since the creation of Ms. “Name and pronoun changes are often part of a person’s transition [from one gender to another] or nonbinary identity, and recognizing any such changes and using a person’s correct names and pronouns is key to showing them support, respect, and basic courtesy.” [Emphasis Etiquetteer’s.] It took about ten years for Ms. to become unremarkable, so Etiquetteer predicts most people will be comfortable with Mx. by 2028. And they note that standards are changing to be less rigid: “A glorious dinner party today can allow us to enjoy gathering and celebrating . . . while no longer requiring us to alternate seating or divide activities by binary gender standards of old . . . anyone who’d like to may head to the study for an after-dinner cigar.”

Etiquetteer does not always agree — perhaps there will be another column later on where Etiquetteer just isn’t yet ready to follow — but everything the authors recommend is given with reasons why manners have evolved. Emily Post’s Etiquette: The Centennial Edition presents a blueprint for a kinder, more Perfectly Proper world. “Etiquette can be learned and employed by anyone,” they write, “at any stage in life, and is a choice that is available to all of us.” Etiquetteer has always referred to going back to Emily Post as “drinking the Pure Milk of the Word.” Now it comes in a delicious new flavor! Etiquetteer is going to curl up in a comfortable chair and start rereading it already. Buy this book. What could be more Perfectly Proper?

*There is a great difference now between Those Who Are Rich and Those Who Are Aristrocratic.

**Etiquetteer is not one to talk, and sees the fingers pointing back at him.

**1950 edition, page 331. How can you not love this?

Fears of Thanksgiving, Vol. 21, Issue 60

The holiday season begins once again in just a few days, bringing the full range of anticipation, from delights to fears. Let Etiquetteer help you through some of the latter, so that your Thanksgiving dinner can be as enjoyable and Perfectly Proper as possible. According to Etiquetteer’s Facebook readers, people are anxious about:

COVID: Alas, COVID remains with us, though masking has become a personal choice. Last week Etiquetteer was chatting with a Lady of New Orleans; her description of the situation there struck Etiquetteer as applying to the country overall: “Well, now you can walk down the street with a mask and not get laughed at, and walk down the street without one and not get attacked.” This may feel like Cold Comfort for those who are at greater risk.

Etiquetteer agrees with Jonathan Wolfe at The New York Times who wrote that it’s best to “plan around the highest-risk person. The calculations are going to be different for a family with older relatives than for a Friendsgiving of twentysomethings where no one is immunocompromised.” That may mean quarantining or increased masking starting a few days before (in other words, now), or declining an invitation. It’s also going to mean Candid, Honest Conversation with everyone on the guest list about showing consideration for those attending who have a greater COVID risk.

POLITICAL DISCUSSION: Abraham Lincoln, who fixed Thanksgiving only a couple weeks after Election Day, should really have thought that through a little more carefully. Politics and Religion have always been Subjects to Avoid, and that hasn’t changed in this century. Don’t you raise either topic, and if they come up, say “I would like it much better if we didn’t talk about that today, since it’s Thanksgiving,” and then deftly change the subject to something else. If a small clot of guests with Opinions Other Than Your Own gather in a corner to talk politics, that makes it easier to avoid them. But when that clot becomes Everyone But One Other Person, that is a problem. And that’s why we don’t talk politics at the Great Feasts, which are about coming together, not apart.

There may be someone present who is unable to take a hint. If someone persists, someone else — you or your hosts — will have to come right out and say “We aren’t going to talk about politics today, thank you.”* Dear Mother used to say “This is neither the time nor the place,” and she was usually right.

THE COOKING: One reader commented “My brother-in-law’s cooking. He likes to experiment with ‘flavor combinations’ like he’s the second-place contestant on Top Chef.” This can be challenging for a food-oriented holiday like Thanksgiving, when so many people approach the table expecting the same comfortable dishes they enjoy each year. That is probably why so many experimental cooks find Thanksgiving so tempting, because they have a captive audience. If he is only preparing one or two dishes, you may be able to avoid these skillfully, or just take a very small helping and push it about your plate. If he’s responsible for the entire meal, you may want to call a few days ahead (in other words, now) to find out about his plans, and offer to make something you enjoy that makes Thanksgiving special to you.

Etiquetteer wishes you a Truly Happy Thanksgiving free from anxiety of any kind — but please reach out if you need assistance in Perfect Propriety.

*You know Etiquetteer is thinking of Fay Bainter in Jezebel, delivering with stern hauteur the line “This subject is an unwelcome one.”

Dress Codes, Vol. 21, Issue 59

Yesterday a dear friend and reader drew Etiquetteer’s attention to a New York Times “Ask Vanessa” column about getting around a dress code. The woman writing discovered that it was required to wear pastels to an event, and she didn’t look good in pastels. But the way she posed the question was objectionable: “…do I really have to obey? Is there anything we can do about hosts imposing a requirement on guests?” Those pesky hosts! Just wanting to show us a good time in a certain way!

Eventually Vanessa Friedman provided some good fashion advice (choose gray or cream, highlight a darker outfit with an accessory). Etiquetteer would suggest a corsage of fresh flowers — why not? But in the Comments section* comes the advice Etiquetteer really recommends: if you don’t like the dress code, don’t go. Just don’t go! Send a Lovely Note of Regret and be done with it. Should the hosts beg you to come, remain steadfast and mysterious, or tell them you don’t like the dress code on the invitation and prepare for a Discussion About Feelings.

Ms. Friedman does call out the difference between a dress code, which indicates a degree of formality (e.g. formal, informal, business casual, costume, etc.) vs. a theme, often a color. A dress code “does help ameliorate guests’ confusion and insecurity about what to wear to a special event,” she writes, and she’s right. A theme, like a color, should not be thought of as a restriction, but as a framework for creativity. That’s what makes party-giving, and partygoing, fun. Etiquetteer has never forgotten a small dinner in high school to which everyone invited was instructed to wear something beginning with the letter I. We saw everything from Inverness capes to a tiny lightbulb strapped to someone’s wrist to represent an idea. What could be more Perfectly Proper?

The Anti-Elitist Killjoys in the Comments section, however, are having none of it! They just don’t like being told what to wear at all, and are proud of it. One commenter suggested that the hosts had “delusions of grandeur” for commanding people to dress in a certain way**. Etiquetteer can only laugh at these assumptions. Let These People stay home with Dorothy Draper’s “Will to be Dreary.”

A party is designed to be fun! And sometimes hosts add a theme to contribute a visual impact to that sense of fun. The column includes a photo of the famous Diner en Blanc, an event which makes such a fabulous impression because everyone obeys the dress code. It was the same for Truman Capote’s famous Black and White Ball of 1966. Years ago Etiquetteer attended a different White Party, the dress code for which was historically “Cool resourceful white.” One frivolous young man felt that Simply Would Not Do, showed up in some sort of colorful print . . . and was turned away at the door, quite rightly. This is akin to Bette Davis in Jezebel deliberately wearing a red ball gown to an all-white party, and we know what happened to her.

Ultimately you don’t want to look like you didn’t get the memo, like that Kimberly Guilfoyle at Tiffany Trump’s wedding, wearing what could be either black or navy blue with all the Trump women in pastels***. Long story short, if you don’t (or can’t) accommodate the dress code, for whatever reason, decline without sanctimony and enjoy your evening at home.

Bette Davis receiving everyone’s backs in Jezebel.

*So often the Comments section of any news article should be avoided, but not this time.

**That said, the term bridezilla exists for a reason . . .

***Etiquetteer has no idea what dress code information was (or was not) shared with any of the wedding guests.

Family Finances, Vol. 21, Issue 58

Dear Etiquetteer:

My family has four adult-age siblings, with ten children in the next generation. Three of the four of us have paid 100% of our childrens’ college education expenses. One paid zero.

The one who contributed nothing to his childrens’ college expenses is a tradesman who makes a good living in his relatively low-cost-of-living area. In addition to his house and car, he owns a sports car, an RV, a $1,000 turntable for his live-in girlfriend’s vinyl albums, and several expensive bicycles, all bought while his two children were in college. The other three siblings make more. (Our parents, by the way, thought that parents were not required to contribute to their children's education, so they thought it was fine my Brother didn’t pay anything.)

My former sister-in-law has helped both children a bit, but both will graduate with significant student debt. My niece graduated this past May and was recently married; my nephew is a junior in college.

As a big believer in education, I decided earlier this year to help my niece repay her student loans. The dollar amount isn’t that important (it isn’t that much) but I want to show my support. I intend to do the same for my nephew when he graduates.

My question is this: am I obligated to tell my brother I’m helping my niece and, eventually, my nephew? Personally I think it’s none of his business.

Dear Benefactress:

If a relative is old enough to go to college and/or get married, they are old enough to have independent relationships with other relatives without going through their parents. Nor should their parents expect to continue their roles as gatekeepers. Your generosity to your niece and nephew is entirely between the three of you and really doesn’t concern anyone else*. If you, or they, wish to share that information with him, go ahead; but there’s no obligation to tell him, especially given his lack of financial participation.

It’s interesting that you raise this query just as the Season of the Great Feasts approaches. In only a couple weeks most Americans will begin gathering together for Thanksgiving, Hannukah, Christmas, New Year’s, Kwanzaa, etc.** These occasions often cause anxiety about possible arguments. So, as a reminder, it’s best not to talk about money, politics, and religion. Henry Higgins had it right in My Fair Lady: “I’m telling her to stick to the weather and everybody’s health.” Of course that went awry when Eliza Doolittle started bringing up specific symptoms, which is never Perfectly Proper at the dinner table.

Etiquetteer wishes you joy as you forge strong adult relationships with your young relatives.

*Except possibly your niece’s spouse, since the financial decisions of one spouse do impact the other.

**Etiquetteer loves to conclude the season with Twelfth Night.

Unexpected Bequest, Vol. 21, Issue 57

Dear Etiquetteer:

My parents both died in the past year. When emptying out their storage unit my siblings and I found a bag of documents belonging to our step-grandfather. We never met this person (he died before the oldest one of us was born) and we don't know of any relatives of his still alive.

I recently attended my high school reunion and met someone there who did genealogy for a hobby. She researched our step-grandfather and found that he had no children. Without doing significantly more research there's no way for us to find out if he has any blood relations alive.

My question for Etiquetteer is: what should we do with our step-grandfather's documents? There doesn't seem to be anything of value in this bag. Is it OK if I just throw it out? I can't imagine I'll do that, but I'm more likely to do that if you say it's OK.

Dear Beneficiary:

This may come as a shock, but Etiquetteer has no qualm with your disposal of these papers. You have performed due diligence to find other kinfolk who might want them, found no one, and that’s enough. As no surviving family member ever met your grandmother’s husband, and you yourself have determined that there’s nothing of value*, the most Perfectly Proper thing you can do for the smooth running of your own household is to dispose of them.

Etiquetteer understands your reluctance to toss out these papers from personal experience. It feels like erasing someone’s existence when the time comes to clean out of a house and divide a collection of belongings, especially when there are no heirs. And it feels strange, a little like a violation, to throw things in the trash that have been preserved and maintained, sometimes with great care, by their deceased owners. But it’s clear that you have no use for them, nor will your heirs in their turn.

On the day you throw things out, ease the blow by offering up a special toast to your step-grandfather at dinner that night. And next day, start to go through your own papers so that your heirs won’t have to make similar decisions. Marie Kondo’s famous Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up is one very helpful resource**. The Gentle Art of Swedish Death Cleaning is another, but Etiquetteer hasn’t yet delved into it. Etiquetteer wishes you well as you begin this journey.

*Etiquetteer still has some mementos cherished by a deceased relative — for instance, a baseball autographed by an entire high school baseball team — that had value only to the deceased.

**This is how That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much discovered almost 100 empty wire hangers clogging a clothes closet, just one instance of how valuable this book is.

Small Plates, Vol. 21, Issue 56

Are restaurants that specialize in small plates a way of life or a ripoff? Some think it’s marvelous to sample many different things, and others think it’s just a more costly way to order a dinner that may not fill you up. Small plates are exactly that, plates smaller than dinner plates with a small serving of something delightful. That serving, by itself, could not be considered a meal. This style of dining is most often associated with tapas, a galaxy of appetizers from Spain, but dim sum also falls into this category. In the United States it’s not unusual for someone to suggest “dinner” at a small plates restaurant.

If you go, you need to be prepared to share, because that’s part of the ethos of small plates. Three plates for two people is one suggested formula. Everyone has a little bit of the Little Bit, and then moves on to the next Little Bit. Etiquetteer loves what this article from Toast has to say about it: “Small plates service tends to be quite social and collaborative, making it a great choice for large groups or smaller parties who want to try many dishes.” This establishes that those seeking out small plates are ready to experiment, and also to spend lots of time talking about the food.

But what if you’re quite social but also territorial about your food? Dining doesn’t just mean quality, but quantity enough to keep your tummy from waking you in the night. And continuous “debate” about who gets the last Tasty Morsel on each plate is not “social and collaborative.” Etiquetteer was reminded of what Tudor courtier Andrew Barclay* wrote about dinner service at the time of Henry VIII:

"If the dish is pleasant, either flesh or fish,

Ten hands a once swarm in the dish;

And if it be flesh, ten knives shalt thou see

Mangling the flesh, and in the platter flee.

To put there thy hands is peril without fail

Without a gauntlet, or else a glove of mail . . . "

It’s kind of like hip-checking people out of the buffet line, or stationing yourself near the kitchen door at the wedding reception to catch the waiters with their trays.

Etiquetteer enjoys both a hearty meal and an evening of small plates.** If you are more, ahem, cautious about getting your fill, or just not interested in “trying many dishes,” it’s best to be candid when asked to a small plates restaurant. “You know, small plates just aren’t my thing, but I would really love to see you,” you can say, before suggesting another restaurant.

Etiquetteer wishes you a happy, filling, and Perfectly Proper dinner, however small your plates might be.

*Quoted in Alison Weir’s Henry VIII: The King and His Court, page 76.

**Not on the same night, rumors to the contrary.

Theatre Etiquette, Vol. 21, Issue 55

Dear Etiquetteer:

I’ve been really pleased to return to the ballet starting last year, but I’ve noticed the audiences have become incredibly exuberant during the performances. During yesterday‘s performance, whenever the dancers did anything that was particularly athletic people would hoot and holler. It’s very different from how I remember in past years. Maybe it’s a good thing for the ballet that there’s an enthusiastic audience.

However I find myself cringing a bit and feeling like some thing about the etiquette is off here. I know when you attend the symphony one does not clap until the music is completely finished. I’ve even seen conductors, and I mean famous conductors, turn around and glare at the audience when the clapping was premature. Maybe I’m just getting stodgy in my old age. In any case I’d love to hear your thoughts on this issue.

Dear Balletomane:

It may have been Miss Manners who observed that everything in America was slowly being patterned on the Academy Awards or the Super Bowl*. The performance you attended seems to have brought Stadium Behavior into the theatre. Or perhaps it is just a reversion to the etiquette of Elizabethan and Restoration audiences? Maybe the exuberance of the balconies has made it to the dress circle now?

Like you, Etiquetteer would prefer a little more Audience Reaction Restraint — a little more discernment and a little less histrionics. Performers need to earn their applause, and if it’s always there in excess, they have no incentive. Every performance can’t be standing ovation quality, can it? Interestingly, how to applaud/react to a performance isn’t one of the things covered by Broadway Direct’s page on theatre etiquette.

The headline of this piece from Theater Nook really sums up Etiquetteer’s attitude: don’t make a spectacle of yourself. Etiquetteer has never forgotten the man in the audience of the famous Sutherland Horne Pavarotti recital, who can be heard in the applause after one number honking out “Brah-VEE! Brah-VEE!” ostentatiously pluralizing “Bravo!” — no doubt to educate everyone around him. People — this is not necessary, and not really Perfectly Proper. Your reaction to a performance should not call attention to you.

That said, it feels prissy just to sit there while everyone else is losing their minds with excitement, and blocking your view with their standing ovation. Sadly, traditional concert and theatre audiences have seen their reputations move from intelligent and discriminating to snobbish and uptight.

Your question comes at an interesting time for theatre lovers. The internet have been bubbling over with commentary about Lillias White, star of Hadestown, who mistakenly reprimanded an audience member for recording the show with a cellphone. It turned out that the audience member was using a theatre-sanctioned closed captioning device. Etiquetteer feels deeply both for the audience member, who needed to use that device, and for Ms. White.

What exacerbated this situation was that the audience member was sitting in the front row, a prime location for performer distraction. The late Arthur Friedman, distinguished Boston theatre critic, taught Young Etiquetteer long ago that one never glanced through the program during a performance while in the front row, precisely because it could distract the actors. No, Etiquetteer is not going to suggest that anyone who needs to use a device can’t sit in the front row; that’s discrimination. But it does explain why Ms. White noticed it twice.

What’s really responsible for this contretemps is the selfish history of audience cellphone use for illicit recording, and the celebration of performers like Patti Lupone (including by Etiquetteer) for calling them out aggressively during performances. Etiquetteer doesn’t blame Ms. Lupone (and other performers) for demanding audience respect for their work. The behavior that needs to change first is the audience’s. Put away your blessed cellphone and enjoy the show!

*If you have the reference, please let Etiquetteer know.

More on Wearing Diamonds, Vol. 21, Issue 54

A couple nights ago someone told Etiquetteer the (probably apocryphal) story about two ladies at a Newport luncheon back when there were ladies luncheons in Newport. The Established Newport Matron was dressed in conservative good taste, while the Arrival was hung with some serious diamond jewelry. The first, who Etiquetteer understands had been quite restrained until then, couldn’t keep herself from saying “You know it’s really not in the best of taste to wear diamonds at lunch.” “Yes, I thought so, too,” responded the Arrival, “until I had some.”

Ha ha, that’s funny — everybody loves a Snappy Comeback! — but neither of these Newport Ladies comes out well. It’s never really Perfectly Proper to criticize a total stranger publicly that way, to begin with; that Established Newport Matron knew better than that. But preening and Showing Off isn’t Perfectly Proper either. So let’s review (again, briefly) just what’s what about diamonds.

Etiquetteer tends to stick with the traditional rule that diamonds should only be worn after 5:00 PM, excepting engagement and wedding rings, which are always Perfectly Proper. Beforehand, a lady’s generosity to the Annual Fund is more likely to be questioned. Coco Chanel’s rule should be followed: put on everything you think is right, then take one piece off. You might relax this restraint only if you are going to a ball.

As a general rule, when you wake up in the morning, you should ask yourself these three questions:

1. What do I have on my schedule today?

2. What diamonds do I have, and when and where would they look most Perfectly Proper?

3. Was I reincarnated as Queen Mary during the night?

If the answer to the last question is “No,” then some restraint is in order regardless of how you answer the first two questions. No one could, or can, get away with wearing as many diamonds at once as Queen Mary — including her mother-in-law, Queen Alexandra.

Emily Post gives the best definitive advice in the first edition of Etiquette: “Don’t wear too much jewelry; it is in bad taste in the first place, and in the second, is a temptation to a thief.” Etiquetteer wishes you both joy and Perfect Propriety in the wearing of your diamonds.

Napkins and Chins, Vol. 21, Issue 53

Dear Etiquetteer:

The soon to be released film Corsage, about Empress Elisabeth of Austria’s later years, has a trailer with a scene of Emperor Franz Joseph dining. He is depicted in his customary military uniform but with a napkin at his chin. The Habsburg Court’s Spanish etiquette was infamously rigid. It included oddities such as several small tables at court dinners rather than a single long one. I have read a description of Sigmund Freud having a napkin under his chin, but would the kaiserlich und königlich napkin have been so displayed? Or will this movie start chins wagging all throughout die alte Kaiserstadt?

Dear Hapsburgian:

Your query illustrates just why the movies are rarely, if ever, a reliable guide to Perfect Propriety. Filmmakers routinely, out of ignorance or a desire to create a particular impression, allow etiquette errors that strain credulity. Etiquetteer has written before about James Cameron’s Titanic. Another 1997 film, Amistad, depicted a gentleman’s dinner at which all the gentlemen kept their gloves on while eating — an absolute impossibility. And in 2001’s Gosford Park, a footman is shone spitting on a fork to give it a good shine when setting the table, a violation of Perfect Propriety and sanitation. Yecccccchhhhhh!

So whether Franz Joseph ever tucked a napkin under his chin or not, Etiquetteer predicts that this might be a vigorous topic on Austrian monarchy fan websites for only the first week of the movie’s release. As Celeste Holm so memorably said in All About Eve, “Lloyd says that in the theatre a lifetime is a season and a season a lifetime.”

But what about this whole Napkin Under the Chin thing? How did this practice get such a bad reputation? A napkin is supposed to protect our clothing, isn’t it? For more than a few the Danger Zone is less the lap than it is the torso. We are not all sylphs who can sit right at the edge of the table.

The rise of Refinement in the 19th century led to a rejection of anything that appeared greedy or emphasized otherwise normal appetites — for instance, the enjoyment of food. A period etiquette etiquette summed it up succinctly: “Unfold your napkin and lay it across your knees, never pinning it over your breast like an alderman [whom the genteel regarded as virtually synonymous with saloonkeepers] or a slobbering infant.”*

Fast forward a few decades, and Amy Vanderbilt makes the same point, but less judgmentally. “In this country, the napkin is never tucked in at the collar or in the vest, but must be put on the lap and opened lengthwise . . . “** Emily Post Herself notes in Etiquette (1950) that “The only thing that matters is that a napkin shall stay on your lap.” She, at least, acknowledges that not everyone has a lap by suggesting a napkin clip. “. . . [someone] who has a shelving lap will perhaps find it practical to carry a pair of small spring clips with which to clip a too little or too starched napkin to her dress or the edge of his waistcoat. After all, it isn’t much use on the floor!”***

Wait a minute — napkin clips?! Oh yes! Little sterling silver clips, often in pairs, were created in the late 19th century according to Maura Graber in her What Have We Here? compendium. But she also declares “that they were considered ‘not good form.’”***** Despite Graber and the blogger at Maurice Sedwell, Etiquetteer is not entirely convinced that these napkin clips were made to be used at bodice level.

Letitia Baldrige**** suggests a different approach, since “it looks pretty tacky to tie a large napkin bib style around your neck — unless, of course, you are a child.” For “splashy” food, she recommends leaning over the table and holding one corner of the napkin under your chin with your left hand and eating with your right. This approach has the advantage of both protecting one’s clothes and not leaving a napkin permanently around the chin during a meal. With all due respect to Ms. Baldrige, it also sounds like a suggestion from someone who hasn’t had to attempt it at three meals a day.

Where does Etiquetteer stand on this? Well . . . no one should have to leave the table humiliated by a stain when they’re doing the best they can. And life is too short to avoid delicious soups and sauces completely. So, avoid it if you can. But if you feel the need to tuck your napkin under your chin, Etiquetteer will fall back on Marty Feldman’s immortal advice in Young Frankenstein: “Say nothing. Act casual.” What could be more Perfectly Proper?

*Timothy Edward Howard, Excelsior or Essays on Politeness, Education, and the Means of Attaining Success in Life, Part I -- For Young Gentlemen, quoted in Rudeness and Civility, by John Kasson, page 204.

**Amy Vanderbilt’s New Complete Book of Etiquette, 1963 , page 255.

***Etiquette, page 497. Her greatest concern, though, was the lady in a satin evening gown who had to keep her handbag, gloves, and possibly a fan balanced on her lap during dinner.

****Graber also mentions mustache clips!

*****Letitia Baldrige’s New Manners for New Times, 2003, pages 198-199.

Little Courtesies, Vol. 21, Issue 51

“Courtesies of a small and trivial character are the ones which strike deepest in the grateful and appreciating heart.” — Henry Clay

With National Courtesy Month drawing to a close* Etiquetteer has been drawn to consider what might be called the Little Courtesies, the small acts of consideration and kindness that make daily life slightly less onerous — the Oil That Lubricates the Social Machine, if you will. It is always a pleasure to go back to Dear Grandmother’s Enormous Dictionary**, from which Etiquetteer pulled these definitions: “. . . graceful and considerate behavior toward others . . . an act of kindness or favor performed with politeness . . . an expression of respect . . . to treat with civility.” What could be more Perfectly Proper?

Chief among the Little Courtesies are the famous Magic Words “Please” and “Thank you,” to which Etiquetteer would add “Excuse me.” The first two acknowledge that someone is about to do you a favor that they may (or may not) be obligated to do, and that you appreciate it (or should). The last acknowledges that your own behavior has an impact on others that requires their accommodation (for instance, when you’re trying to pass them on the sidewalk).

Forms of address are also important because they show respect for the other person. One of the biggest but most subtle changes over the last 50-60 years has been how to address workers. It’s no longer Perfectly Proper to call out “Waiter!” or “Clerk!” or “Stewardess!”, or even just snap your fingers. Nowadays one says “Excuse me, please” or “Sir” or “Ma’am.” This is an improvement, because it acknowledges the humanity of the staff. There are exceptions. “Doctor and “Nurse” are still Perfectly Proper within medical settings, of course. “Conductor!” on a train is borderline. “Porter!” is obsolete now that we all have wheels on our luggage.

Etiquetteer was amused to see that automobile lights were once called “courtesy lights.” Now they’re an absolute necessity! And so is obedience of local traffic laws, a very big Little Courtesy. Have you considered the power you have over someone’s mood by simply allowing them to merge into your lane? Few things compromise our sense of Perfect Propriety more than the motorist or cyclist who runs a red light, for instance — or the pedestrian who just wanders into traffic secure in the knowledge that motorists have to stop because they aren’t allowed to kill them.

Recently Etiquetteer came within two feet of being hit in a crosswalk by a bicylist who was blithely unconcerned about pedestrians having the right of way***. Disconcerting as that was, the sizzling curse flung at him by another pedestrian was even more jarring. Nor was it helpful. But it illustrates another Little Courtesy: how we use our voices****. Profanity had more impressive power when it was more rarely employed (e.g. Rhett Butler’s famous “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn.”) Now it’s so common the only power it’s retained is to depress us with its ugliness.

Finally, how we remember others can make the greatest difference. You know Etiquetteer is going to mention the Lovely Note of Thanks, but remembering someone’s favorite dishes, anniversaries, and interests reinforces for them that they have made a positive impression, and that you value their presence in your own life. The well-turned compliment, the friendly message for no reason, the unexpected bouquet or inconsequential trinket — these little gestures reinforce and strengthen our relationships, and our sense of community.

Henry David Thoreau once said “A man can suffocate on courtesy.” But Etiquetteer considers him biased, since he rather ostentatiously wrote about preferring a hermit’s life at Walden Pond. Let’s give him his privacy and extend the Little Courtesies round about us. What could be more Perfectly Proper?

*Did you know this was happening? Did Etiquetteer? Have you been more courteous? Less?

**Merriam-Webster 1937, about six inches thick.

***He was most certainly aware that the stoplight was red.

****This will seem rich, since That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much could cut lead pipe his voice is so loud. Well . . . Etiquetteer keeps talking to him about that.

Lobster, Vol. 21, Issue 50

The late Emily Post described lobster as “finger food because otherwise the meat in the claws cannot be eaten, unless the claws have been not only cracked but literally broken in half.”* Etiquetteer thinks of it as Combat Food, because the enemy is formidable, the right weapons are needed, and it’s not always clear who the victor will be.

In your Lobster Armory, you will need for each diner-combatant:

• A bib, to be tied around the neck to protect one’s clothes. No matter if you believe yourself adept enough to go without, Perfect Propriety must be maintained. Wear the bib!

• Lobster crackers, to crack the shells of the large claws, and other bits you’re having trouble with. They are hinged at the very end so that the whole claw can fit inside. Novices might try to use a pair of pliers; don’t make this mistake.

• A nut pick or seafood fork, to poke about inside the various shells for tasty bits you missed.

• A finger bowl, because one’s hands will not come out of this unscathed. Etiquetteer loves it when a thin slice of lemon floats on the top of the warm-but-not-hot water. Of course the modern equivalent of the finger bowl is the moist towelette. Etiquetteer considers more than one per person not just generous, but necessary.

• A waste bowl for all the shells and other detritus. Some restaurants offer a rustic acting-and-appearing bucket as an element of Down Home Local Color.

When served your lobster, first tie on your bib. Then wrench off the large claws, with a minimum of dramatic flourish. “They should be cracked in the kitchen,” notes Amy Vanderbilt**, “but further cracking at table may be needed.” (If they have not been cracked in the kitchen, you are within your rights to ask the waiter to assist you.) You will need to use your bare hands to hold the shell apart so that you can extract the meat with your fork.

The lobster tail is where most of the meat is found, and you may need knife, fork, and fingers to get it all out. Best to get the meat out whole if you can. Once extracted, cut large pieces down to bite size. Then dip your lobster meat into your clarified butter with your fork and consume with Obvious Satisfaction.

For those who are really committed to vanquishing their lobster, there are the small claws to consider. “The small claws are pulled from the body with the fingers,” Mrs. Vanderbilt teaches us, “then the body-ends placed between the teeth so the meat may be extracted by chewing (but without a sucking noise).”*** That sort of Obvious Satisfaction is not Perfectly Proper.

Small wonder Etiquetteer prefers Lobster Newburg! To all the lobster enthusiasts Etiquetteer wishes a Perfectly Proper National Lobster Day today — and to those who prefer it not, a Perfectly Proper avocado salad with vinaigrette.

*Etiquette, by Emily Post, 1950, page 501.

**Amy Vanderbilt’s Complete Book of Etiquette, 1952, page 241.

***Ibid.

Observations on the Funeral of Elizabeth II, Vol. 21, Issue 49

Today’s funeral of her late Majesty Elizabeth II was obviously going to attract a lot of etiquette junkies. So why shouldn’t Etiquetteer offer a few observations along with everyone else?

Handkerchiefs: Etiquetteer couldn’t help noticing the number of bare hands drifting to Facial Features to wipe away tears or scratch. This is done with most Perfect Propriety with a proper, forthright cloth handkerchief — linen, cotton, or silk, Etiquetteer is not here to judge you*. People do go on about their paper tissues, but Etiquetteer remains unmoved. Handkerchiefs for mourning often have a black border; order yours now for the next funeral, as it’s best to be prepared.

Gloves: In the same vein, Etiquetteer misses gloves, and would have loved to see some Perfectly Proper hands gloved in black or white, as appropriate.

Public speaking: Practice, Poise, and Phrasing make all the difference when one has to speak in public, particularly at such an august event as a Royal funeral — not to mention Diction and Enunciation. Etiquetteer can only add that any speaker who can make listeners consider a familiar text in a new way has achieved the goal.

Mourning (Participants):As a rule, mourning is not ostentatious; it doesn’t call attention to itself. All the Royal ladies, unsurprisingly, appeared with unrelieved black; Etiquetteer might have subtracted a bow or two, but that would be “to cavil at the customs of the great.” The severely simple costume of the much-discussed Duchess of Sussex with its with cape takes the honors from Etiquetteer’s point of view, achieving what Shaw’s description of Ann Whitfield’s mourning dress in Man and Superman: “She has devised a mourning costume . . . which does honor to her late father and reveals the family tradition of brave unconventionality.”

Sticklers will recall the custom of the deuil blanc, when Royal ladies would dress in all white for deepest mourning. (The most famous example of this in modern times is Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother’s all-white wardrobe for an unavoidable State visit to France which was complicated by the death of her mother immediately before.) That example obscures another important part of the deuil blanc: seclusion. When Francis II of France died, his widow Mary Queen of Scots had to submit to “forty days of strict seclusion during which she might not for a moment leave her private apartments . . . “** We’ve moved on from that.

It was also more usual that Royal ladies didn’t attend funerals. Sometimes traditions need to be abandoned, and that’s a good example. Consider how very impressively the Princess Royal has participated, and also the granddaughters of the Queen joining a vigil around the coffin with her grandsons.

Mourning Jewelry: Again, mourning is about the absence of display and color. This is why, in general, mourning jewelry is limited to jewelry one wears every day (wedding rings, a string of pearls) and jet. Sentiment plays its part, too, and this is why it’s become more usual to allow jewelry that has a special link to the deceased. Princess Charlotte’s horseshoe brooch was a gift from her great-grandmother, for instance. Queen Camilla also chose a brooch given her by the Queen, which turns out to be a present to Queen Victoria from her Hessian grandchildren for her Diamond Jubilee.

Mourning (Shoes): Moving away from the Family, did you notice the woman marching in the procession wearing black sneakers? Many people would take umbrage over athletic shoes on such an occasion. But we don’t know her relationship with her podiatrist, or how many miles one has to march, and it's best not to judge under the circumstances. Certainly they looked clean and tidy, which could only be Perfectly Proper.

Mourning (Spectators): Did you also observe the mourner wrapped in the Union Jack and sporting a fur hunter's cap? Sorry dear, that’s not showing respect, that’s exhibitionism. That woman was a pair of horns and a tube of face paint away from the Crazed Insurrectionist. This is a funeral, dear, not a football game.

Steadfastness: Etiquetteer could not help noticing the evidence of horses dotting the route; “horse apples” is an old Victorian euphemism. Etiquetteer remained anxious for those marchers who found these in their direct path, but Duty and Protocol allow one to break stride only so much (read: not at all), and admired their self-control. Under the circumstances, they’ll need to tip their bootblacks extra.

*Or perhaps Etiquetteer is . . . 🤔😬

**Mary Queen of Scotland and the Isles, by Stefan Zweig (1935).

Signs for the Tourists, Vol. 21, Issue 48

While traveling in Spain and Malta these last weeks, Etiquetteer has observed quite a few instructions to tourists about how to conduct themselves with Perfect Propriety, especially in houses of worship. So here’s a survey in photographs and commentary of Just What’s What.

Most signage involves both proper dress and respectful behavior, e.g. silence.

At the tiny Chapelle Saint Pierre in Villefranche, uniquely decorated by Jean Cocteau. “This is the house of God. Silence helps to pray. Proper attire is required.”

In the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Blessed Virgin of Ta' Pinu, in Gharb, on the island of Gozo.

Also at Ta’ Pinu. Dress code enforcement was non-existent here, but ladies with bare shoulders voluntarily used the paper shawls provided at the entrance.

A second group has to do with protecting fragile artwork, collections, and buildings. It’s really sad that it’s even necessary to post some of these signs, but then Etiquetteer has never forgotten the elderly lady (a friend of Etiquetteer’s grandmother) who just sat down on an ancient Chinese tombstone inside the Boston Museum of Fine Arts because she wanted to sit down. No dear, that is not Perfectly Proper! She was definitely old enough to know better, too.

At the Museu Picasso, Barcelona. Etiquetteer has rarely seen the Why of “Don’t touch” explained so well.

At the Cittadella, Victoria, Gozo. The limestone walls of this exceedingly old fortress are easily marked. Centuries-old graffiti here may be studied for what life was like in the Cittadella long ago, but you will not be given a chance to impress the archeologists of the future.

At St John’s Co-Cathedral, Valletta, Malta. Who knew, stiletto heels are dangerous for for the polychrome marble floors of this uniquely over-the-top baroque church.

Finally, there are warning signs to keep us, and others, safe. No use falling to a violent death just to get the perfect selfie.

On a parapet in Mdina, Malta. “Danger: Sheer drop with no edge protection. It is prohibited to sit or stand on the bastion.” No one should have to be told this twice.

But the Colosseum in Rome takes the prize for most comprehensive list of instructions. One can only imagine what they’ve been through to have had to spell out that you can’t “write on the walls, enter with masks and costumes, exhibit banners, flags, standards,” etc. Those looking to reenact a gladitorial combat will have to do so among consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes.

Etiquetteer wishes you safe and Perfectly Proper travels!

Etiquetteer outside La Sagrada Familia, Barcelona — where the dress code was not enforced.

Precedence of People and Rules, Vol. 21, Issue 46

“Ladies first” is a general etiquette rule so old its origin seems lost in the mists of Time. “No cutting in line” probably came afterward, but not by much. What happens when these rules collide outside a public bus?

A crowd waiting to board a bus with no guides to mark an unmistakable line includes three people: a man who was one of the first to arrive, a woman who wants to get on board first, and another man who cares about chivalry. The crowd also includes a pack of about six Determined Older Women (DOWs) who are going to board the bus first so they can sit together; their body language, and the way they interfere to admit a straggling member of their party, indicates that a) they don’t care about the rules, and b) it would be unwise to mess with them. No one did.

The DOWs board, and now the brief drama of our three protagonists plays out. The first man is standing directly in front of the bus door. The woman tries to cut in from the right, but the man has moved forward enough that he is going to get onto the bus next. The second man, witnessing this, says “Ladies first!” in a loud enough voice. There are still quite a few people behind waiting to board themselves. So now we have a Situation Pregnant With Possibilities.

A brief exchange of glances between the first two characters sees the woman board and the first man follow her. Likely this was the quickest way to get everyone on the bus without Causing a Scene. No one would gain by responses like “If she was a lady she’d already be on the bus” or “I was here first,” don’t you agree?

But Etiquetteer finds fault with all our protagonists. Etiquetteer understands the burning desire to get on board any vehicle and claim a seat, but the woman in question should have waited her turn. The first man lacks a certain Generosity of Spirit and could have allowed that woman to cut in without inconveniencing himself greatly. The second man, of course, needs to learn how to mind his own business. It really is not Perfectly Proper to correct total strangers in public, except in extreme circumstances, which this was not. (Readers have offered some interesting insights and examples on Etiquetteer’s Facebook page.) Which rule do you think should take precedence, readers: Ladies First, or Don’t Cut?

Etiquetteer wishes you hassle-free transportation with Fellow Citizens Who Know Their Place.

Vomit and Other Crises, Vol. 21, Issue 45

Etiquetteer is still racing through volume one of Chips Channon’s diaries, which certainly paint a picture of English society between the wars. Amidst his account of the giving and receiving of expensive gifts and dinner parties, especially with royalty, Etiquetteer was brought up short by an incident of Violent Embarrassment. Chips and his wife Honor were dining with their next door neighbors, the Duke and Duchess of Kent, at a large dinner before a ball someplace else. “And,” in the words of the late Gloria Upson, “this ghastly thing happened:”

“Toward the end of dinner I noticed that [Peter Beatty, one of Honor’s dinner partners] got up rather hurriedly, and supposed he had had an urgent telephone message! Not at all, for the Duchess of Kent, sitting opposite, also rose and the ladies followed. He had been sick literally in Honor’s lap, and then in his embarrassment turned to . . . his other neighbour, and she had an unpleasant bath of the beaux restes!! I took Honor home and she changed her frock; and then we returned . . . Then we all went on to Lady Portarlington’s ball . . . I had supper with the Duchess of Sutherland, who told me that Honor had gone home; her evening, it seems, had been ruined by her accident, for her spirits had been too damped to enjoy herself.”

We forget sometimes, with our love of weddings, afternoon tea, beautiful stationery, sumptuous table appointments, and intricate rules that etiquette is for every situation, not just the pretty ones. And in a medical crisis such as this, the most Perfectly Proper thing to do is to solve the problem with as much safety and as little embarrassment as possible.

The Duchess of Kent knew instinctively that the most unobtrusive way to get Honor out of the dining room with little fuss was to get all the ladies out, and so she rose and ended the dinner. Etiquetteer has nothing but admiration for Honor Channon, who was game enough to change clothes and “keep the party going” at least for awhile; who could blame her for wanting to leave the ball early? Chips even records that the unfortunate “Peter Beatty has sent Honor a most cringing apology” a few days later; Etiquetteer would have sent flowers as well — and did so after an unfortunate encounter between red wine and ice blue satin.

As to Chips, well . . . certainly it was chivalrous of him to take his wife home (next door) to change, but Etiquetteer would have preferred to see him more solicitous during the ball. But then, for a man who freely admits in his diary that he’s only comfortable around royalty, is it any surprise that he chucked his wife to take supper with a Duchess? Tsk tsk tsk!

A more Perfectly Proper example would have been President William McKinley, who took such care of his usually ill and temperamental wife Ida, who suffered from periodic epileptic seizures. She didn’t, however, let those keep her from attending state dinners in her White House. The solution: the President always seated her to his left and, when her face would begin to convulse with a seizure, he would throw a large dinner napkin over her head and continue with the conversation. Once the seizure had passed, Ida would remove the napkin and resume dinner.

Etiquetteer wishes you smooth and successful dinners attended by guests in states of Complete Health, and the presence of mind to respond to any situation when they are not.

Gifts of Wine, Vol. 21, Issue 44

Dear Etiquetteer:

My husband and I love to have people over for dinner, which we’ve started to do a little more after quarantining for most of 2020 and 2021. The problem is when they bring red wine as a hostess gift. Neither of us drink or serve red wine, and we don’t really know how to stop the “red tide.” Once our friends would bring white or rosé, but sometime during the pandemic the memo went out that bringing red wine to dinner parties was the chic thing to do.

I should be clear that we are not asking people to bring anything. When people do ask, I always tell them, “Please, just bring yourselves.” I’m just not sure if there’s a way I can keep people from bringing red when they don’t ask what they can bring first, and I would love your advice about this.

Dear Reddened:

There is that substantial group of people who have been taught never to show up empty-handed. Etiquetteer sometimes wishes they’d been taught to send a Lovely Note of Thanks the next day, but Etiquetteer usually sweeps away that Uncharitable Thought to focus on their Kindly Intention.

Just as with a bridal registry, it’s never Perfectly Proper to tell people how to spend money on you (until they ask, and then it’s open season.) In your case, subtle cues can help. For instance, when making a verbal invitation, say “We’re going to serve [Insert Recipe Here] because it goes so well with white.” Set an example by bringing a bottle of white or rosé when dining at the homes of your red-toting friends. Comment here and there on your newfound devotion to white wines to plant the seed that Red Is Out of Place at Your House.

When guests do bring red unexpectedly, you could consider serving it to them alone — “Let me open this for you right now!” — but the risk is that they then discover you don’t drink red, feel bad that they brought you a gift you don’t like, and then you’re stuck in an evening-long Discussion About Feelings, which is rather tedious for a dinner party. You might also consider just not inviting Habitual Offenders again. Let them carry the social ball awhile . . . but you already know that friendship is more important than trivialities like hostess gifts.

Etiquetteer’s version of this problem is what to do with all those gift bags friends use, both paper and cloth, when they bring wine gifts to Etiquetteer’s dinners.

As to your accumulated Cellar of Red, careful regifting can ease the pressure on your closet space. Let’s hope the fashion of red wine turns to a fashion of Lovely Notes instead!

Asparagus, Vol. 21, Issue 43

Even from the depths of Sunday morning coffee Etiquetteer doesn’t feel able to address the larger issue of Perfect Propriety and Beauty in retreat from the world stage. So let’s look at something more seasonal, asparagus.

Celebrity vegetable of the 19th century, asparagus was held in such high esteem that it merited its own course in a formal dinner menu, after the roast. It would then be served on its own platter on top of a cloth napkin on a tray offered by the footman. These days it’s more convenient to plate it in the kitchen. Asparagus no longer rates its own spotlight and is served with the main course as other vegetables are.

What really sets it apart now is lingering doubts about how to eat it with Perfect Propriety. It seems inconceivable that asparagus was once properly eaten with the fingers, but such was the case. Is that still Perfectly Proper today? The answer is actually “Sometimes.” Most experts recommend a two-tier approach. Starting with the asparagus tip, cut bite-sized portions from each stalk until you get to the firmer-textured base of the stalk. You may then use your fingers to pick up what’s left and eat it. The fingers are never used if your asparagus is covered in sauce, usually Hollandaise.

Do not pick up an entire stalk of asparagus and attempt to eat the whole thing. This is especially embarrassing if it’s been cooked so limp it just flops over in your hand. What Etiquetteer finds most interesting is how manners have changed to allow the knife. ”More conventional manners demand that only the fork be used” declared Etiquetteer’s beloved Millicent Fenwick in Vogue’s Book of Etiquette back in 1948. But by 1990, Etiquetteer’s beloved Letitia Baldrige teaches us to “cut the vegetable into small manageable portions with your knife and fork as you eat it.”

One hazard unique to asparagus is its fibrous woody ends. This is why you always begin eating asparagus at the tip, and why asparagus should always be served or plated pointing in the same direction.* Attentive cooks will trim off the woody ends before cooking, but in case they don’t, if it looks too splintery, leave that bit on your plate.

Etiquetteer wishes you beautiful consumption of beautiful asparagus with the sauce and company of your choice.

*It also looks terribly sloppy otherwise.

Corporate Event Ghosting, Vol. 21, Issue 42

ETIQUETTEER!

Do you have something to say about how rude it is for people to not show up when they’ve committed to something? It’s become such a problem professionally. I have clients who host events and people RSVP and don’t show up and it’s also been a problem with my women’s networking group. Is this a product of Covid or are people just getting ruder?

Dear Ghosted:

The short answer to your question is yes. Yes, ghosting events (including, to Etiquetteer’s astonishment, job interviews and even new jobs) is a product of COVID, and yes, people are also getting ruder. Avoiding in-person events of any kind has become sort of a meme. Gary Janetti’s book titles Do You Mind If I Cancel? and Start Without Me are just two examples. News flash: COVID, easily transmissible with close human contact, has made people wary of getting out and about, especially now (again!) with the new variants. And not everyone is willing to admit that they might feel anxious about this.

But a lack of concern about the impact one’s behavior has on others predates the pandemic; one might say it’s the perpetual state of society*. Obviously masking is the big pandemic issue — is, it’s still going on. Before the pandemic Etiquetteer noticed it most with people using their personal devices without headphones, so that everyone around them was forced to “enjoy” their phone conversations or Bad Musical Selections. Before personal devices, it was smoking in the no-smoking section.

Another factor is that, unbelievably, after two years of the pandemic, workers are spending 21.5 hours a week in meetings, “an increase of 7.3 hours since the pandemic began.” Is this not insane? No wonder people are ghosting, as so many meetings are actually more productive when they are emails instead.

Etiquetteer still believes that reliability is a cornerstone of Perfect Propriety, particularly in the workplace, where reputations are made and lost on showing up. When plans change — and this can include everything from a death in the family to crippling depression — it’s important to work through whatever difficult emotion there is to notify the organizer that you won’t be there.

How do we handle ghosting by others? The Perfectly Proper way is by showing compassion. If so inclined, after being ghosted, follow up with a text or email along the lines of “I missed you at [Insert Event Here]. I hope you’re OK and not sick with COVID.” Please refrain from sarcasm, but Etiquetteer will allow a certain Cold Civility if the event ghosted was a wedding or funeral, or if the ghost was responsible for part of the program.

It’s sometimes helpful, in advance, to think through a couple Worst Case Scenarios for when one or more people might not make it. The scenarios may never come about, but it can help you feel more prepared for all sorts of issues. Etiquetteer wishes you a packed house, and Strength and Calm when the numbers come up short.

(This is not just in the corporate realm either. That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much, reading your query over Etiquetteer’s shoulder, slowly flushed with shame with the realization that last month (!) after confirming by text attendance at a farewell party next day, he completely forgot about it and didn’t go. The only solution now is groveling and flowers, and perhaps wine.)

*Cleveland Amory suggests this in his excellent book Who Killed Society?, tracing commentary from 1960 all the way back to the founding of the United States from people who felt things were always better in the Good Old Days and always continuously getting worse and worse.

Free Beach Etiquette

Dear Etiquetteer:

I hope some day you publish etiquette rules for naturists. That would be fresh and international! Most people do not know how to behave at a naturist venue.

Dear Naturist:

Thank you for asking; Etiquetteer will address your specific questions below. Every place is a Perfectly Proper place for etiquette, including — some may be scandalized to consider it — the nude beach. With most of the world gripped by an appalling heat wave that may tempt many people to doff their duds, Etiquetteer, with some anxiety, submits some guidelines for Perfectly Proper enjoyment of a free beach, pool, or resort.

First-timers first need to decide why they are going. Curiosity, a personal challenge, the need for freedom — these are not uncommon reasons.

This may seem counterintuitive for a visit to a nude beach, but one of the most important considerations when going is Privacy. More people than you think are going because they want to be on their own and aren't in a Mix and Mingle Mood. Perfectly Proper beachgoers respect the personal space of others by not establishing themselves too close (at least not until the beach or pool gets crowded), not persisting in unwelcome conversation, and especially not taking clandestine photos (more on that later). Your consideration of others helps foster a safe environment for all.

Gawkers are not unknown at textile beaches. But their behavior is creepier at free beaches because beachgoers, both male and female, can feel more vulnerable without clothes. Let's just stop it with the unwelcome staring, shall we? Be at the beach for yourself, not the view.

Speaking of the view, it's also rude to comment on the appearance of others. No one is obligated to look attractive to you, and derogatory remarks, no matter how sotto voce, are Not Perfectly Proper. In her wonderful book On Going Naked, Jan Gay remembered young Americans at a 1930s German nudist camp: “. . . young men who were rather rude and silly and inclined to make 'smart cracks' about the appearance of the women. The guests here were largely family groups with a preponderance of mature women . . . Several of the Germans present understood English and realized the impoliteness of their American visitors, but they did not betray their awareness . . . they bore with the rudeness of these Americans much in the spirit of martyrs enduring for a just cause.” “If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all” remains good advice.

Your gear should include everything you'd ordinarily take to the beach except a bathing suit: hat, sunglasses, umbrella, towel, snacks and drinks, thick paperback novel,* and most important, sun block. If you're going alone, you might consider bringing a sunblock applicator with a long handle, like this one. It will help you can take care of your back without Offers of Unwelcome Assistance.

And now to answer your specific questions:

How should a man deal with spontaneous and visible “excitement?”

Gentlemen always ask about this first, mostly out of fear. The most common question about nude beaches has the simplest solution. Just roll over or use a towel for cover until you feel calmer. After all the anxiety, most men find that this is not actually a problem.

At a resort with chairs and chaise longues around, how can I feel more comfortable sitting where others have sat before?

This is why you bring your own towel (or two) everywhere, to sit on. Towels are totally de rigueur. The fastidious may also wish to bring their own spray cleaner and paper towels, but that could easily appear fussy or paranoid.

Can you kiss in the pool?

“Nude is not lewd” as naturists say often, but Excessive Public Display of Affection undercuts that assertion. Beyond a quick peck, Etiquetteer would suggest you get a room.

Can you take pictures? In which circumstances?

Absolutely not without complete, total, and utter consent from everyone who shows up in the photo, even from a distance. Sad to say, reputations are still made and lost on the internet, no matter how casually those vacation snapshots have been shared. You really need to be rigorous about this. AANR also mentions the implications of photographing children, accidentally or on purpose. “Totally avoid taking photos of nude under-age children at the beach as it just isn’t worth the confrontation you will be inviting.”

How does one attend a naturist wedding?

Many guests might prefer just to send a gift! If you're going to go, it’s important to honor the dress code, which is an easy out if that’s beyond your comfort level. If it's just the Happy Couple appearing au naturel . . . well, once again, your comfort is the most important thing to consider.

Is it decent to wear intimate jewelry?

Coco Chanel’s classic advice “Put on everything you think is right and take one piece off” has fresh meaning here. This is very much a matter of personal taste. Waist chains and piercings tend to attract attention, which is not what everyone wants at a nude beach or resort. Etiquetteer would subtract rather than add jewelry.

Should you shave your nether regions before a naturist vacation?

Good grooming is essential whenever one goes out in public, but shaving or depilation is really more a matter of personal aesthetics. Fashions have changed over the centuries. Ancient Romans would regularly depilate themselves at the baths, a custom that ended when the Goths dropped in. If you’re going to go nude at the beach, present yourself in the way you are most comfortable, whatever that is.

You may read more about free beach etiquette at The American Associaiton of Nude Recreation.

*Etiquetteer's two favorites will always be The Thorn Birds and Valley of the Dolls.

Etiquette Errors in the Diaries of Chips Channon, Vol. 21, Issue 41

Henry “Chips” Channon, a naturalized British subject born into Chicago wealth, made his most enduring mark on English history after his death, in his remarkable diaries. It helps that he knew All Society, including Edward VIII and Mrs. Simpson, Winston Churchill, Duff and Diana Cooper, and those prominent society hostesses Laura Corrigan and Lady Emerald Cunard, among many others. It doesn’t hurt to live next door to the Duke and Duchess of Kent either.

Often our view of the past is obscured by misty images of Perfection — a court ball, for instance, or a garden party — so that we forget that people have always misbehaved. “Chips” records some marvelous social faux pas in Volume One, which cover the years 1918-1938, illustrating just why some etiquette rules ought to be followed. For instance:

Don’t go where you aren’t invited. “There was an unfortunate scene,” “Chips” recorded, at Lord Revelstoke’s ball on June 27, 1923. “Ronald Storrs . . . had dined with Lady Lovat and had somehow been cajoled by her and Lady [Emerald] Cunard and others to accompany them uninvited to the ball, they having said ‘it would be all right.’ I saw him arrive and dance several times. Suddenly Lord Revelstoke, very angry, went up to him and in none too courteous language turned him out. People discussed nothing else in whispers, most thinking that it had been very careless and underbred of [Storrs] to have come and rather worse for his unwilling host to order him out . . . “ So no one comes out of this covered in glory, but Etiquetteer really blames Lady Lovat and Lady Cunard for persuading (bullying?) Storrs into going. It’s their carelessness with their host’s generosity that caused the whole fuss to begin with. Naughty naughty girls!

Don’t dawdle. Make up your mind! On March 5, 1935, George Gage, a viscount by this time, showed up at a cocktail party and “took seven minutes to decide whether he wanted a cocktail or whisky and soda!“ Always have your drink order ready when approaching the bar, or being approached with a tray. You may always order something else for the next round.

If punctuality is the politeness of kings, when the king is punctual, be early to be polite. One of the greatest social events of “Chips’” life was when King Edward VIII came to dinner at his home, 3 Belgrave Square, on June 11, 1936. One of the tenets of royal etiquette is that the monarch arrives last and departs first. “Dinner was announced, doors were flung open and no Lady Cunard.” That Emerald, making trouble again! “When we had arrived there was a gap next to the King, where Emerald should have sat, and several moments of anxiety on my part until she arrived, apologetically*. Princess Marina whispered ‘Quand le roi dîne, on s'arrange pour être à l'heure**.’” Remember dahlings, early is on time, on time is late, late is absent.

Mark Twain may have said “Don’t let the truth get the way of a good story,” but don’t let a good story compromise global diplomacy. “Chips” overhead Emerald (she really is a troublemaker!) on the phone with Ribbentrop (!) inviting him to the opera. “She then suddenly said ‘Corbin, the French Ambassador, wants to meet you very much. He says that you are perfectly charming.’ The German’s voice dropped with surprise . . . I asked Emerald whether Corbin had ever said such a thing, she laughingly admitted that she had invented it on the spur of the moment. Will her whimsical invitation have repercussions on the political situation in Europe?” When you hobnob with ambassadors, the “little white lie” can create a lot of trouble.

Lady Emerald Cunard, that naughty hostess

*”When the king dines, one arranges to be on time.”

**Etiquetteer vaguely remembers Dominick Dunne reporting on just such a contretemps between Raquel Welch and Princess Margaret at some sort of luncheon in the Caribbean. Ms. Welch, arriving after the start of the luncheon, made her curtsey tableside. Her Royal Highness greeted her with a glance at her wristwatch to make a point.