Restaurant Etiquette Quiz from 1967

9. When soup is served in a consommé cup with two handles (a) it must be eaten with the soup spoon. (b) the cup may be picked up to drink the soup.

RESTAURANT DINING

The following questions on dining out are from letters I have received recently. Dining out is one of the greatest pleasures we have, but there seems to be appearance of taste and many small problems which worry people and detract from their pleasure. Possibly some of those below have bothered you, and the answers may help you. The more certain you are that you are doing the right thing, the pleasanter your evening will be.

1. When you sit down and order a cocktail in a restaurant, you put your napkin in your lap (a) as soon as you sit down. (b) when the dinner is served.

2. When bacon and scrambled eggs are passed on a platter you (a) use the serving utensils for the bacon. (b) pick the bacon up with your fingers.

3. When eating baked potatoes in a restaurant, (a) you scoop out and eat only the inside. (b) you may eat the skin separately like bread and butter.

4. When taking a child who is a small eater to a restaurant, you should (a) order a small meal for him. (b) ask for a separate plate and give him some of your meal.

5. When there are three or four couples at a table, the first one served should wait to start eating until (a) everyone at the table is served. (b) two or three others have been served

6. When a waiter asks a woman a question, such as “What kind of salad dressing do you want?” she (a) tells her escort who in turn tells the waiter. (b) answers the waiter herself.

7. Before being eaten in the fingers, sandwiches made from whole slices of bread should be (a) cut in half. (b) cut into bite-size pieces.

8. A small doily is found under the finger bowl when it is brought in on the dessert plate. This doily is (a) removed to the table with the finger bowl. (b) left on the dessert plate when the fingerbowl is removed.

9. When soup is served in a consommé cup with two handles (a) it must be eaten with the soup spoon. (b) the cup may be picked up to drink the soup.

10. When jumbo shrimp cocktail is served in a stemmed bowl you should (a) use a knife to cut the shrimp. (b) use the edge of your fork, holding the stem of the glass with the other hand. 

The correct answers are: 

1. (a)  

2. (a) 

3. (b) 

4. (a) 

5. (b) 

6. (b) 

7. (a) 

8. (a) 

9. (b) 

10. (b)

— Elizabeth L Post, 1967

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Wedding Invite Etiquette

You should find out first whether the ceremony will be held in a very small chapel where every seat might be filled, or if it is to be limited to family only. If either is the case, you must not “invite yourself.”

Uninvited appearance not in best of taste

Dear Mrs. Post: I don't care about attending wedding receptions or receiving formal invitations. When I see a boy or a girl I know grow up, and make ready for marriage, I always come out and tell the parents that I would like to attend the ceremony and not the reception, just to see the two united in holy matrimony. In a church or temple one can just walk in as a spectator. My question is, can one "invite oneself to ceremonies? Sylvia M.

Dear Sylvia: Although it is not in the best of taste to invite oneself to an affair for which invitations are being issued, your sincere desire to see the young people married could be considered sufficient reason to do so. But you should find out first whether the ceremony will be held in a very small chapel where every seat might be filled, or if it is to be limited to family only. If either Is the case, you must not "invite yourself." — By Elizabeth L. Post, 1967

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Gilded Age Hat Tipping Fashion

Gilded Age Fashionistas claimed bragging rights! – What the girls are now doing … A San Francisco invention that has caught on in New York and Chicago…

TIP THEIR HATS

It is the fashion in the East now for girls to tip their hats by way of salutation.

The New York damsels were the first who had the courage to expose their pre- cious bangs to the elements whenever they met a friend. Then the Chicago girls followed their example, and now the fashion has reached San Francisco.

Etiquette has not yet asked ladies to tip those dainty little creations, all lace and feathers, nor yet the towering flower-gardens that are the bane of our theaters. The hat that girls tip is a special headgear, warranted to be put on and taken off easily, and to stand hard wear and tear. It was patented by a San Francisco firm, so that for once we can claim the glory of having dictated fashion to the East.

Untrimmed the hat looks a sort of cross between a cook's cap dyed black and a man-of-war’s man's hat. It is only when examined conscientiously that its entire originality is discovered. Upon a circular band of straw, an inch and a half in depth, is posed a plate of fine chip straw about ten inches in diameter. The front of the band is pleasingly ornamented with a strong peak of glazed leather, which can be firmly grasped and used to raise the hat, without any injury to the entire construction.

The hat has quite a rakish appearance when trimmed. This is usually done by encircling the band of straw with ribbon and velvet and gracefully tilting up one side of the brim, with flowers or a plume of feathers. –San Francisco all, 1893

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Hands Off Chicken, Not Lobster

People are less lenient than they used to be… The only thing that could soil the fingers and is not tabued by the meticulous are lobster claws. And when such lobster is served, finger bowls of hot soapy water should be provided at once.– Aside from the erroneous fictional accounts of Henry VIII, Emily was correct. Unless finger bowls are in use, keep your hands off the chicken at a dinner party.

Hands Off Chicken, Modern Code Insists

DEAR Mrs. Post: Is it incorrect, according to eliquette, to eat even the slightest bit of chicken in the fingers? I don't mean whether it is correct to take up what can be cut off the bone easily enough, but I am referring to the very small bones from which it is impossible to cut meat loose with knife and fork. Aren't good table manners to-day more lenient about these foods, especially if finger bowls are provided?

Answer: No, people are less lenient than they used to be. That is, if we go back to the descriptions given us by the writers of long ago, and as copied for instance in the moving picture of Henry the Eighth, who picked up a whole chicken in his hands and tore it apart, our table manners have become positively finicking. The only thing that could soil the fingers and is not tabued by the meticulous are lobster claws. And when such lobster is served, finger bowls of hot soapy water should be provided at once. Perhaps, if this practice were followed when serving chicken, there would be no objection to taking the wings in the fingers. — Emily Post, 1937

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Etiquette: As the Table Turns

The hostess does at all times keep an ear open for the conversation at the table. She tries to divide her attention equally between the gentleman on her left and the one on her right, while noting where at the table there are lulls in conversation. She then tries, when she can, to direct the conversation in a general way. Perhaps she will pose a question to someone who seems very silent in order to get him or her talking.

DEAR MISS VANDERBILT: In an old etiquette book I read elaborate, and to me silly, directions for "turning the table" when you have a dinner party. In this the hostess decides at what point she wants the conversation to change so that everyone talking will talk to someone else. So she breaks off the conversation with the man on her left and turns to the man on her right and starts another conversation, no matter what he has been talking about to the person on his right. This seems artificial, to say the least, and certainly not of this century. What do you think of it? Is it really still done? — Mrs. G. R., St. Paul, Minn.

Dear Mrs. G. R., St. Paul, Minn. —Not in this sense, according to a rigid formula. The hostess does at all times keep an ear open for the conversation at the table. She tries to divide her attention equally between the gentleman on her left and the one on her right, while noting where at the table there are lulls in conversation. She then tries, when she can, to direct the conversation in a general way. Perhaps she will pose a question to someone who seems very silent in order to get him or her talking.

Even though she is the conversation-steerer, the hostess should be careful not to interrupt a conversation which seems to be going very well just for the sake of "turning the table.” And it is annoying when someone in deep conversation with someone else is interrupted by the hostess to be asked, “Some more coffee?” She should wait for a pause in the conversation.

Over-assiduous hostesses can be point-killers and some in their anxiety to be good hostesses never seem to let their guests conclude a sentence. Sometimes it is the clear duty of the hostess not only to interrupt a conversation that is becoming unpleasant or acrimonious, but to be very firm about changing the subject. Her duty is to all of her guests. 

She might say, “I hate to interrupt, but perhaps we had better leave the politics until after we leave the table. I want you all to have a pleasant meal.” Traditionally, subjects to be avoided at the dinner table are: accidents, illness, religion, scandal and politics. — Amy Vanderbilt, 1968

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Lobster Eating Etiquette

“It's perfectly all right to be a slob when eating lobster,” said Letitia Baldrige, author of “Letitia Baldrige’s Complete Guide to Executive Manners” (Rawson Associates, 1985). In fact, being a slob is part of the point. Highly refined restaurants save diners from a messy sparring bout by serving lobster out of the shell. Yet the convenience is rarely more than a palliative to the primordial lobster-eating urge.

Eating lobster turns civilized 

The problem with lobster is rarely its flavor. Except for its spawning months (in the early summer), when its shell is soft and its flesh is weary, a properly cooked lobster is sweet and tender, rich and delicate, the apex of seafood, the apogee of elegance. The problem with lobster is eating it. It brings out the neanderthal in us all. Many have described the civilized approach to eating a lobster without making a mess. 

In “The New Etiquette” (St. Martin’s Press, 1987), Marjabelle Young Stewart provides five steps to the conquering and consuming of life’s sweetest meat: 

1. Twist off the claws. Crack each with a nutcracker. Use a pick or oyster fork to remove and eat the meat. 

2. Break the tail off the body. If the tail is split, break back the flaps with your hands and push in with a fork. 

3. Twist off the legs. Suck the meat out gently. 

4. Use a fork to get small, accessible pieces of meat in the body. 5. Use a fork to eat the tomalley (green matter) and roe (coral). 

Yet Stewart’s system leaves much to chance and therefore fails to civilize the confrontation between soft fingers and hard red shells. What do you do, for instance, if the lobster tail has not been split? The precise tug it takes to extract the meat from the shell is almost an instinct. It begins with separating the tail from the rest of the body. From fishing to cooking to eating, never face a lobster head on. Place the lobster tail toward you, grasp the back of the declawed body with one hand and the center of the tail with the other and administer a quick, selfassured twist-pull. The motion combines the wringing of wet wash with the sliding of a cork from a wine bottle. A grunt is optional. 

Next, use one hand to flatten the tail, red side up, thick end toward you. Use your other hand to insert a dinner fork, pointed down, between the top of the meat and the shell. Maintain a 60-degree fork angle and gently tug to loosen the meat. When the meat achieves the play of a loose tooth, the holding hand can lighten the pressure on the top of the shell and apply a slight squeeze to its sides. Close your eyes. Yank. The claws are another problem, one that cannot be addressed solely by a nutcracker. This tool is reliable against the lobster’s smaller “ripping claw.” But nutcrackers frequently give way before the lobster's larger “crusher claw” cracks. There are sturdier (and more expensive) lobster crackers available. 

There is also the advice of “The New Emily Post's Etiquette” (Funk & Wagnall’s 1975): “Lobster claws should be cracked in the kitchen before being served.” When following this dictum in the kitchen, wear an apron, invert a chef’s knife and use the back side of the blade to whack with abandon. Back at the table, to remove the claw meat, use an inverted cocktail or salad fork, held again at 60 degrees, and tug carefully with a table-ward motion. In dinner, as in life, the lobster's claws are its main weapon. Pull slowly to avoid a big squirt. 

Brave eaters move below the claws to face the challenge of the lobster knuckles. A downward angle of a lobster pick or fork is helpful. But the best advice is that lobster knuckles make a mean salad. Take them home and pick them in private. The body is another territory for the bold. Use a small fork to pick, pick, pick. The lobster's green tomalley is the traditional trophy here. But lobstermen increasingly advise against eating this liver. In rare moments, they talk about pollution, saying, "Lobsters are bottom feeders." In the end, there are all those little legs and only one way to eat them. Twist-pull them loose. 

“It's perfectly all right to be a slob when eating lobster,” said Letitia Baldrige, author of “Letitia Baldrige’s Complete Guide to Executive Manners” (Rawson Associates, 1985). In fact, being a slob is part of the point. Highly refined restaurants save diners from a messy sparring bout by serving lobster out of the shell. Yet the convenience is rarely more than a palliative to the primordial lobster-eating urge. Have you ever seen a four-star lobster diner look as satisfied as someone pushing away from a roadside table along the Maine coast? We want the sloppy crack-slush-mush of full lobster battle. That is the problem. We have tried to civilize it with table tools and table rules, but we cannot wait to put on our bibs. 

The battle is part of the pleasure. “Scary, scary,” whined a 5-year-old diner when viewing a 20 pound dinosaur of the deep that her family selected for dinner recently at the Old Homestead Restaurant in Manhattan. After wielding picks and crackers, a mallet and a fork, she was a convert. “Good, good,” she said. And all the better for the battle. — By Molly O'Neill, N.Y. Times News Service

🍽Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Etiquette for Eating Shrimp

“A jumbo is about four or five inches long and one could never be put whole into the mouth. Are these eaten in the fingers? The cocktail fork seems so tiny for such a big shrimp.”

A Question for Amy Vanderbilt 

Dear Miss Vanderbilt: In a library recently I read in your excellent etiquette book, “Unshelled shrimp should be conveyed whole to the mouth.” Are you speaking of a dish of shrimp for the person to shell themselves? I have never seen this and was wondering about the “sand vein.” You didn't mention it since cocktail shrimp are deveined in the kitchen, does one do this with the fingernail before eating the shrimp? One would need to wash one’s hands afterward! I saw literally tons of jumbo shrimp being deveined (not in a factory). A jumbo is about four or five inches long and one could never be put whole into the mouth. Are these eaten in the fingers? The cocktail fork seems so tiny for such a big shrimp. – Mrs. Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Dear Mrs. Fort Lauderdale –For aesthetic purposes the sand vein in shrimp should be removed. If the shrimp are eaten cooked, the vein is not removed. If you encounter it in a shrimp cocktail, you should realize that it is harmless. Don't attempt to remove it, certainly not with the fingernail. Cocktail shrimp are served in a variety of ways. They are offered with toothpicks; in which case you spear them. If they are very large, you bite off a manageable mouthful after having dipped me shrimp in the sauce. Then eat the rest of the shrimp. If you dip it again, you should be careful to turn it around so that the part you have bitten is not dipped into a communal sauce bowl. 

When shrimp cocktail is served with a cocktail fork, you use the fork even though it is tiny. You may either put the whole shrimp in your mouth, or take manageable bites. Sometimes shrimp cocktails or shrimps prepared in the Oriental fashion have the tail left on to be used as a handle. If you have an Oriental dish, you may use chopsticks if you are able to do so; in Louisiana and in various Italian dishes, shrimp is often served with the shell on. In this case, you remove the shell with your fingers but you don't bother to remove the vein. When a shrimp dish is served this way, of course, a finger bowl or folded wet towels (Oriental fashion) or scented paper towelettes are essential. –Amy Vanderbilt, 1963

🍽Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

More Faux Dining Signals

Playing with one’s utensils? That was never allowed and one presumably doing so at the Victorian or Gilded Age table would be reprimanded or shown their way to the door. Doing so now? Please don’t! —I’ve read and seen videos online with people whimsically suggesting it would be fun to bring back some of the 18th or 19th century “secret signals” used by people in love. Those signals for someone one fancied are sadly all fake, however. — “The fan language — and other, similar codes like the language of the handkerchief and the language of the parasol— were largely the result of advertising campaigns meant to popularize and sell accessories. There is little evidence that the fan language was ever in widespread use, though the concept was satirized by several writers in the 18th and 19th centuries. Besides being rather impractical, fan codes were a bit dangerous; an unconscious fidget or desire to actually fan herself could embroil a lady in a totally unintentional feud— or marriage. Not to mention the consequences if the matron acting as chaperone to a courting couple had, a few years earlier, employed the fan language to win her own husband!” -Esti Brennan, Clements Library Chronicles

Supposed Victorian Dining Table Signaling

Below: Each faux signal and what it supposedly meant.

• Drawing a napkin or handkerchief through the hand — I desire to converse by signal with you. 

• Holding napkin by the corners — Is it agreeable to you? 

• Playing with fork — I have something to tell you. 

• Holding up the knife and fork in each hand — When can I see you? 

• Laying both together left of the plate — After the meal. 

• Clenching right hand on table — To-night. 

• Napkin held with three fingers — Yes. 

• Napkin held with two fingers — No. 

• Holding napkin to chin with forefinger to mouth — Cease signaling. 

• Standing knife and fork thus leaning them in an inverted V  — Can I meet you?  

• Balancing fork on edge of cup — Are you engaged to-night?  

• Striking fork with knife — I shall go out. 

• Balancing fork on knife — Meet me. 

• Placing knife over the glass — Will you be alone? 

• Stirring spoon in cup slowly — Will you be late? 

• Slapping the ear, as if brushing away a fly — I don't understand.

More recent faux table signals above. — Only the “paused” and “finished” positions are proper signals, however they are for the wait staff, not someone you fancy. Those crossed out are not only made up, they are against good manners and should never be used. They make it difficult to remove the plate and utensils efficiently and without a lot of noise. Even the “excellent” signal shouldn’t be used, because one should personally give that message to the chef or cook and not supposedly leave it on a plate which will shortly be cleaned off in the kitchen. — By Site Editor, Maura J. Graber

 

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor of the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia