Summer House Guests, Vol. 7, Issue 9

Dear Etiquetteer: Now that spring is here the dread of summer is nearly upon me. Why dread you ask?  It's the awkwardness of addressing the expectations of vacation guests. My family has a wonderful home by the shore that we like to share with friends and extended family, inviting them down for a few days and sometimes more. Since the house is shared by now two going on three generations summer weeks are at a premium. We do make an effort to show our friends a good time and every getaway has been problem-free. However, this seems to spark the dilemma. Once friends have visited with us once there's an expectation that they can join us again and again. Starting this season I'll get the inquiry calls, "So, I need to schedule my time off at work. I was thinking second week of August for our vacation."  The feared "our."  One friend was even so bold last July as to want to leave her cardigan behind so it awaits her for this summer!  I do enjoy spending time with dear friends but would like some of our precious vacation time just to ourselves. It's also nice to mix it up a little too, to spread the joy with other friends so to speak. How does one handle these sticky situations with grace?Dear Hijacked Hostess:Etiquetteer understands and sympathizes with you completely. When guests begin to treat generous hospitality as a right rather than a gift, it’s a sign that the hospitality must be withdrawn. But Etiquetteer also understands how that feeling can be encouraged. The phrase “Oh come anytime, we’d love to have you” has much more of an impact on the recipient that you can imagine. And Etiquetteer has learned from hard-won experience not to use it any more. What is that old phrase, “You can’t appreciate what you have until it’s gone”? This year Etiquetteer thinks you should not invite anyone at all to join you at your family’s summer retreat. It’s time for your summer guests to realize that, as guests, they don’t call the shots or set the dates. You don’t OWE them a vacation house! While you might be tempted to invite just one, or maybe even two, friends to join you, Etiquetteer does not recommend this. Take this one summer for your family to enjoy in splendid, blissful solitude. Next year, if your friends seem appropriate chastened, you might resume your summer invitations.

Mourning Clothes, Vol. 7, Issue 8

Dear Etiquetteer: I am puzzled at funeral fashions these days. Whatever happened to tasteful subdued dignified attire for funerals? I behold now the advent of funeral “flair” with a combination of puzzlement and dread. Dear Mourning: Like you, Etiquetteer is sometimes puzzled by what passes at funerals and memorial services these days. Unfortunately most people are too stupid to understand the original color code of mourning clothes, from deep mourning (all black with no ornamentation) to half mourning (black, white, gray, purple, brown, and sometimes green). These days a lady wearing black is more likely to be mistaken for a bridesmaid than a widow! Appearing all in black now is more likely to initiate the Question of Humorous Intent “Who died?” Humor is seen fleeing the room when the deceased is identified. Etiquetteer’s point is that mourning clothes are supposed to prevent stupid questions, not prompt them.Etiquetteer blames this Sad State of Affairs on Sally Kellerman, whose character in the 1980 sex comedy Serial wore white, with ostentatious spirituality, to a memorial service. (Actually, Etiquetteer really blames Coco Chanel, who famously designed the Little Black Dress after her lover Boy Capel was killed in a plane crash).These days Etiquetteer feels fortunate if everyone attending a funeral shows up neatly dressed without athletic shoes/clothes and without denim. One should be somberly dressed: no skin visible from neck to knees, no ostentatious bling (that’s redundant but Etiquetteer really wanted to make the point), nothing that looks fussy. And it seems necessary now to point out that one's shoes should be CLEAN!What one does see more of these days is mourning buttons or T shirts with the picture of the deceased on them. You may be surprised to find out that Etiquettteer rather likes this custom. It hearkens to the mourning ribbons and badges that used to be handed out when presidents were assassinated. Some beautiful examples from Abraham Lincoln’s funeral observances may be found at the Gilder Lehrman Institute for American History at http://www.gilderlehrman.org/collection/docs_archive/docs_archive_lincoln.html Last week Etiquetteer saw in the press a bolder example of the memorial T-shirt. At the sentencing of convicted murderer Daniel Tavares, the families of his victims, Beverly and Brian Mauck, all wore T-shirts with pictures of the deceased underneath the legend “Among the Angels.” Obviously this was not a funeral, but Etiquetteer was moved by this visible call for justice. To some, however, such attire might not be appropriate in a court of law. What do you think, readers? Please share your opinion at query (at) etiquetteer.com.In case you needed more proof that “low riders” are not Perfectly Proper, seacoastonline.com reported February 21 that a young woman was tossed off a bus because the driver could see her, ahem, rear cleavage – enough of it that he was offended. The young woman in question gave her address as a homeless shelter, and appears to have been in and out of trouble with the law over the last few months. Now if Etiquetteer was going to be flippant (which is easy to do) he would declare that it’s a good thing the look of the early 1960s is coming back and why isn’t Grace Kelly her role model anyway. But it seems clear that this young woman is what is called “acting out,” seeking negative attention. Apparently she is being helped by a mental health center in her area. So without flippancy, Etiquetteer can only turn to the title of that Victorian tearjerker “She Is More to Be Pitied Than Censured,” and hope that she will choose Perfect Propriety for her lot in the future. Have you had enough of that revolting troll checking you out in the locker room? Feel like a prude but just don’t want someone’s, uh, business in your face while you’re dressing? Sick and tired of workout benches glistening with the sweat of another? Etiquetteer is preparing a simple guideline for a future issue on Perfect Propriety at the Gym and is eager to hear from you at query (at) etiquetteer.com.

Wedding Invitations, Vol. 7, Issue 7

Dear Etiquetteer: I find myself at a loss to deal with a situation involving the upcoming nuptials of my cousin. Upon hearing of her engagement, I was so overcome with excitement (One can sell the cow after giving the milk away for free!) that I offered to make the wedding cake for the reception.  I've never undertaken such an effort and have put my heart and soul into preparing for the task -- including baking, freezing, transporting and decorating a "preview" cake to serve 70 or so guests at the "Jack and Jill" shower last weekend. Imagine my shock, when, upon opening the invitation, that the words "and guest" were nowhere to be found.  While my partner of eleven years and I were still having discussions about whether he would join me, my feelings are somewhat bruised at him not being included. I've received a suggestion that I submit my reply card for two, but I bristle at the thought that my own familiarity with the conventions of etiquette could be called into question. Your reply is anxiously awaited. Dear Burned Baker: First of all, you'll be surprised to learn that Etiquetteer really does not like "and guest." If you're inviting someone to a wedding -- and not just someone's partner of eleven years, anyone -- you ought to know their name and address. Adding "and guest" to an invitation is just sloppy, and it also doesn't give hosts enough control over their own guest lists. Suppose you put "and guest" on an invitation to someone and they brought as their guest someone who is your sworn enemy? But this is a sideline to the real issue you want addressed, which is the omission of your partner from the wedding invitation after you have so generously offered your love and service to make the wedding cake. Certainly your partner should have been invited! (And if you do not share living quarters, he should have been mailed his own invitation at his own address.)  Assuming that Your Cousin the Bride actually knows you've been in a relationship for over ten years and has actually met your partner -- and Etiquetteer has no reason to assume that she has actually met him or knows about him -- you have a pretty serious offense on your hands. Since you know your cousin well enough to bake her wedding cake, you know her well enough to call her on the phone and ask (calmly and coolly) why your partner was not invited. Please give her the opportunity to hem and haw and be Appropriately Embarrassed and of course to extend an invitation to your partner. This is your opportunity to forgive an innocent oversight, which Etiquetteer hopes you will do. On the other hand, if she indicates that your partner was intentionally omitted for whatever reason, you have an obligation not to enter rooms where he is unwelcome. Tell your cousin that you'll deliver the wedding cake, but won't be able to attend her wedding or reception. Then hang up to let her stew in her own juices. Really Etiquetteer expects the former situation to be the one that prevail, and wishes you all a happy time on a Happy Day.