A Chinese Etiquette Revolution

 The Marquis Tseng was one of China’s earliest government ministers to London, Paris and Saint Petersburg. His was an important diplomatic role which preceded and accompanied the Sino-French War (August 1884–April 1885). – Beijing was often referred to as “Peking” in English and “Pekin” in Japanese. Beijing has been known by other names throughout its history including Youzhou, Zhongdu, Dadu, Shuntian, Peiping, and Yanjing.

Social Revolution in China

A social revolution in Peking is, according to The Chinese Times, being effected by the Marquis and Marchioness Tseng, both of whom visit freely at all the foreign legations, and receive the visits of foreigners at their private house. Persons new to China see nothing remarkable in these social courtesies, but those who know the Pekin etiquette appreciate the boldness of the Marquis in thus challenging the very citadel of petrified conservatism. As he is too shrewd a man to run his head deliberately against a stone wall, it may be inferred from his actions, that he has the secret countenance of high personages.— Boston Transcript, 1887

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

Wealthy Americans Need Not Apply

The Prince of Wales is notoriously against the rich American who comes over to England with the idea of buying himself or herself into society. To his aunt, Princess Christian, he remarked not long ago, with reference to the latest comer: “Mrs. Potter Palmer? Mrs. Potter Palmer? Who is she?” –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
On Mrs. Potter Palmer, author Aline B. Saarinen wrote, “so fabulous were her jewels that a newspaper declared that when she appeared on the S.S. Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse with a tiara of diamonds as large as lima beans, a corsage panned with diamonds, a sunburst as big as a baseball, a stomacher of diamonds and all the pearls around her neck, Alois Burgskeller of the Metropolitan Opera, who was singing at the ship’s concert, was stopped right in the middle of a high note.” – Above, Mrs. Potter Palmer, wealthy American socialite, businesswoman and philanthropist
– image source, Wikipedia 

Rich Americans to be Tabooed? 

Edward opposed to foreign inundation 

 Pushy bid for royal favor fails 

Anglo-American Residents Antagonistic to Increasing Stream That Tries to Break Down Barriers of Exclusiveness

Special Cable to The Herald — There is such a decided feeling in England against the constant influx of visitors that it is quite a question what will happen in following seasons. King Edward himself has openly expressed his opinion that too many Americans come to London with the intention of pushing into society, and for the last two or three years he has persistently refused to be introduced to any newcomers. It is notable that many of his best friends are Americans, among them, of course, being Consuelo, Duchess of Manchester; Mrs. Arthur Paget, Mrs. Townsend, the countess of Essex, as well as Mrs. Hall Walker, who is partly American, and in the old days he was very friendly with Mrs. Mackay and Mrs. Ronalds. Although he said to Mrs. Potter Palmer at Marblehead, “Why do you not come and settle down in England?” what was taken as a pressing invitation was not followed by any other attention except one to lunch with the royal party at Ascot. She was never invited to any great function and, although she took Egypt and the “White Ladye” with the express object of attracting to herself a royal visit and gave very pressing invitations to Consuelo, Duchess of Manchester, Mrs. Hall Walker, the Countess of Essex and other favorites, this last patent bid for royal favor was without any result.

The Prince of Wales is notoriously against the rich American who comes over to England with the idea of buying himself or herself into society. To his aunt, Princess Christian, he remarked not long ago, with reference to the latest comer: “Mrs. Potter Palmer? Mrs. Potter Palmer? Who is she?”Anglo-American residents are also much against these casual visitors who sometimes do them discredit. The young Duchess of Marlborough and Roxburghe, Lady Curzon, Mrs. George West and others much resent being classified with some other Americans who come over and try to push themselves into the inner circle. It is felt that the influence of Mr. and Mrs. Whitelaw Reid will make a great change. Mr. Reid is a man of great social experience and man of the world and a diplomat with a natural talent for Judging men and matters at their value. There is no doubt that presentations at court will not be so easily managed in the future as they have been in the past.

The most important American presentation at the court this year was that of Lady Bagot, whose debut was watched with the greatest interest by all the smart American set. Consuelo, Duchess of Manchester lent her all her jewels, so that she really made a gorgeous effect, and in the royal circle several inquiries were made as to who the new beautiful American peeress could be. Everyone is agreed that the sensational Americans in London this season have been Mrs. Crackenthorpe, Mrs. Townsend, Mrs. John Jacob Astor, Mrs. Shaw and Mrs. Nat Goodwin. Of the pronounced success of these five women there is no question. That Mrs. Astor should succeed was in the natural order of things. She has charmed every one by her beauty and smartness. She dresses beautifully, too. Mrs. Shaw was perhaps her most immediate rival, and when she stayed at her house in Portland place she was considered by many to outshine her handsome hostess. 

Mrs. Townsend made her success with the King a year or two ago, and she has in no wise lost her position, but they say that the only woman of whom Mrs. George Keppel is jealous is Mrs. Crackenthorpe, the handsome daughter of Gen. Daniel Sickles, who dances in the most fascinating manner the old Spanish dance in costume. Since she performed before the King and Queen. she has become so popular that she declares she will return again next year. It is ordered that both Mrs. Crackenthorpe and Mrs. Townsend should be the wives of Belgian diplomats. The success of Mrs. Nat Goodwin was partly due to Mrs. Newhouse, who championed her from the beginning, when people were inclined to look coldy at the beautiful actress. – Los Angeles Herald, 1905

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

Princess Enjoys Kittens and Cash

“When royalty descends openly to business of this sort for what can be made out of it, aristocratic folk of the humbler variety surely need not feel that they lose caste by engaging in trade of any kind. Yet when a woman of title gets hard up and goes in for millinery, dressmaking, or any form of shopkeeping, she thereby loses her right to presentation at court... Some day, quite likely, we shall have a radical parliament proposing to dock the allowance made to Princes and Princesses who engage in money making schemes in which their rank gives them such a tremendous advantage.” – Princess Victoria was the fourth child and second daughter of King Edward VII and Alexandra of Denmark, and the younger sister of King George V. – photo source, Pinterest  

Princess Finds Profit in Cats!

Victoria breeds pets for income, advertises them for sale 

Special Cable to The Herald. LONDON, Sept. 16.— Every one knows by this time that Queen Alexandra is a cat lover, but it has come as a surprise to a number of English women that her daughter, Princess Victoria, is not only a lover of cats, but an energetic and enthusiastic breeder as well. The Princess does not breed cats, it appears, merely to increase the number of her feline pets. Her “catteries” are worked on a solid commercial basis, and apparently with considerable profit to her private pocketbook. That her enterprise is conducted on thorough business lines may be seen from the following announcement which appears in a weekly paper whose space is mainly devoted to sales and exchanges of miscellaneous articles:

“Her royal highness, Princess Victoria, has for sale several handsome chinchilla kittens. Sire, Puck 111., ex-Chela, also Chela, splendid mother, lovely green eyes; blue Persian female; cheap to good homes; must sell. Mrs. Amor, Cumberland Lodge, Windsor Great Park.”

Picture of Princess Victoria ("Toria"), daughter of Edward VII & Queen Alexandra (1868-1935) holding a cat on the royal yacht. The picture was taken in about 1914 –Pinterest

A hint for plebeians: Mrs. Amor, I am told, occupies an important position in the household staff at Cumberland Lodge. “Cheap” is always a relative term, but in this instance it stands for anything between $25 and $100. When royalty descends openly to business of this sort for what can be made out of it, aristocratic folk of the humbler variety surely need not feel that they lose caste by engaging in trade of any kind. Yet when a woman of title gets hard up and goes in for millinery, dressmaking, or any form of shopkeeping, she thereby loses her right to presentation at court. In view of the fact that his Majesty does not even draw the line at making money out of cats in his own exalted family circle, it would seem that he ought, in justice, to rescind this rule. 

Of course there are lot of folks here— and not a few, I imagine, in the land of triumphant democracy— who would consider a cat bred by royalty worth many times more than a cat from a plebeian home. Such competition seems hardly fair to those who are compelled to sell cats solely on their merits. Some day, quite likely, we shall have a radical parliament proposing to dock the allowance made to Princes and Princesses who engage in money making schemes in which their rank gives them such a tremendous advantage. – Los Angeles Herald, 1905

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

Etiquette and Tipping Servants

There are a few of the old nobility of England who set a laudable etiquette example by prohibiting their servants accepting gratuities from visitors or guests. –Victor Cavendish, the 9th Duke of Devonshire -photo public domain

Duke of Devonshire Prohibits Tipping of Servants, but Americans Find a Way to Get Around His Rule

There are a few of the old nobility of England who set a laudable example by prohibiting their servants accepting gratuities from visitors or guests. The Duke of Devonshire, for instance, makes it an inflexible rule that no servant of his shall take a “tip.” When, however, a party of Americans visited Chatsworth, the Duke’s Derbyshire seat, a few days ago and were entertained at luncheon and shown over the beautiful grounds by the Duke’s steward, the leaders of the party thought the usual “shell out” must be the climax of the day’s enjoyment.

The party consisted of four men and three women and among them $35 was subscribed. With commendable discretion, the money was not offered to the steward, who, of course, is above accepting recognition of the kind, but to an underfootman, who saw the party to and from the railway station. But the footman pointed out that it was against the rules of the Duke’s establishment to accept gratuities “in money.” That seemed to suggest a way of getting around the rule. 

The next day various articles of jewelry reached the steward from London with the request that they be distributed among the staff at his discretion. The leaders of the party were Edmund H. Abbot of New York and Alexander Cattanach of Salem, Massachusetts, and both had introductions from Sir Thomas Lipton. The Duke and Duchess were not in residence at Chatsworth at the time of the visit, but the latter sent one of her maids specially up from London to look after the ladies. The beauties of Matlock, Buxton and Bakewell were fully explored before they returned to town. – Los Angeles Herald, 1905

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

Kissing the Royal Hand That Rules

“If her Majesty be pleased to extend her hand, the fortunate one so honored, never shakes the hand. It rests on the back of the hand of the one to whom it is given, who, if highly honored, may kiss the royal fingers.”– Above, Queen Victoria receiving news of her accession from Lord Conyngham, kneeling to kiss her hand, and William Howley, Archbishop of Canterbury. –1895 photomechanical print from the BritishMuseum.org

Royal Etiquette

The etiquette accorded to royalty always interests me. I have had unusual journalistic facilities for observing all phases of this. It is as ceremonious as between the Prince and Princess of Wales and their guests. Even the daughters of the Prince address him as “Sire” and their mother as “Madame.” They never turn their backs on him, and their greeting courtesy is profound. Well, if this be ceremonious, the etiquette to the Queen is ultra-ceremonious. 

The courtesy to her is well nigh a prostration. The hands are crossed primly on the breast. If her Majesty be pleased to extend her hand, the fortunate one so honored, never shakes the hand. It rests on the back of the hand of the one to whom it is given, who, if highly honored, may kiss the royal fingers. “Thou shall have no others gods but me.” Pshaw! Why docs that sacred line linger in my memory? Anyway, one seems to rather like the courtesies extended to the Queen Empress. – London Letter in the Coronado Mercury, 1887

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

Who is Served Dinner First? Why?

There is a very practical reason why we sometimes show greater courtesy by serving the hostess first. In a complicated dinner service, there may be some dishes unfamiliar to the guest of honor. Perhaps there are to be French artichokes and she has never happened to eat them before. Perhaps, too, there are many forks laid at each place and the guest of honor does not know with which one to eat her first course. It is to obviate such embarrassment that very many persons –and I claim myself among them – advocate the less old-fashioned service. 

“I have contended that the hostess should be served first,” writes a reader who asks for information on the correct serving of dinner. “But I am in doubt as to who next.” I agree with this reader that the hostess should be served first, but there is good authority for the other usage – that of first serving the woman at the host’s right – always the woman guest of honor, of course. The underlying reason for this older fashioned custom is the idea of unselfishness that is at the base of most courtesy. Even savages and barbarians honor their guests by serving them first; so it would seem that there was no question about the etiquette of following that rule in serving dinner. 

There is a very practical reason, however, why we sometimes show greater courtesy nowadays by serving the hostess first. In a complicated dinner service, there may be some dishes unfamiliar to the guest of honor. Perhaps there are to be French artichokes and she has never happened to eat them before. Perhaps, too, there are many forks laid at each place and the guest of honor does not know with which one to eat her first course. It is to obviate such embarrassment that very many persons –and I claim myself among them – advocate the less old-fashioned service. 

At a small family dinner, it is usual to serve the woman guest of honor immediately after the hostess. Many persons then serve the other women present, and this is a good enough plan. It is sometimes more convenient and just as courteous to serve straight down one side of the table. When a servant is passing anything, this, of course, is the only way to proceed. At a large dinner, where more than one servant is waiting, it is usual for the first course to serve the hostess and the woman at the host's right simultaneously, and from thence down the sides of the table, the two servants going in opposite directions. In serving the second course, the hostess and the woman at the host’s left are served at the same time, and from thence again down the sides of the table.

Then there is another reason why the custom of serving the hostess or host first has grown up, though as an actual motive it would surely have no part in the service of a present day dinner party. Sometimes, among the Kings and nobles of old, the guest might have reason to hesitate to eat the food or drink the wine his host has set before him. To tempt a guest to partake of a specially prepared dish, was one of the gentlest ways known of terminating the career of a political opponent. When a subject first tasted the viand he had prepared for the King, or first sipped the wine, that Monarch might feel reasonable security in following suit.  

In a small family dinner, it is usual to serve the woman guest of honor immediately after the hostess, and the woman at the host’s right, simultaneously. Many then serve the rest of the women present, and from thence down opposite sides of the table, serving men and women as they come. In a simple home dinner where no servant assists, the most convenient way of proceeding is to pass the dishes from the one who serves to the end of the table. That is, if the host carves, he passes the first plate down one side of the table to the hostess. The next plate is passed down the other side to the person at the hostess’ right, the next plate to the person at the hostess’ left, and so on, until the persons at the host’s right and left hand are served. – Mrs. Elizabeth Thompson, 1918

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

America’s Youth Lack Manners Abroad

Why does this 1930’s American ad depict a mother looking on delightedly, as her children make a mess with tools and toys, just inches from her feet? All while she attempts to prepare dinner? Was this depicting the American norm of the era? Either this mom, or the advertisement’s artist, could have used some help in the child-rearing department! – “Observation of the current code in one’s surroundings ought to be a part of a child’s preparation for living. Our children, must live with other people. They will invariably get farther in life and be happier if they know the rules of etiquette that will provide the least friction and give the greatest pleasure to their associates.”

Tuning in with Our Children

By James Samuel Lacy

Are American children the most discourteous in the world? I don’t think so. But I had dinner recently with a European hotel proprietor who challenged our teaching of courtesy with the statement that “We dread to see Americans with children come to our hotel. The children do as they please, consider no one’s right but their own. They behave so badly that we consider them nuisances.” I am inclined to think that, in part, this idea was prompted by national differences in the concept of what constitutes freedom for youth. It takes very little foreign travel to convince one that what is courteous in one country may be quite the opposite in another. 

Sorry for Timid Children 

What we style “self-reliance in free play,” may be mistaken for impudence or lack of obedience in countries permitting less freedom of choice to children. However, if a few of our children have gone abroad running up and down flights of stairs, playing hide-and-seek when other guests were trying to sleep, we can still say that generally children are as courteous as they are trained to be. I have often felt as sorry for their timid, thumb-screwed children who were afraid to make any decisions for themselves as they could possibly have felt shocked at our unrestrained youth. 

Need Training in Country

But all argument aside, there is no asset in life so highly productive of social dividends as excellent training in courtesy. And observation of the current code in one’s surroundings ought to be a part of a child’s preparation for living. Our children, must live with other people. They will invariably get farther in life and be happier if they know the rules of etiquette that will provide the least friction and give the greatest pleasure to their associates. A charming, gracious manner is an irresistible asset that we can afford to cultivate, but to do so successfully, we must begin by being courteous with our children and insisting upon their practice of courtesy and consideration in their association with each other. –From the Journal of the National Education Association, 1932

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

The Etiquette Law for Turkish Girls

By 1939, etiquette classes were compulsory in all Turkish schools. Above, the Marmara Mansion in Ankara, Turkey, circa 1931 – photo source, Pinterest

“Go Western, Young Women!” 

is Turkish Urge Under New Law

ANKARA, Turkey, May 9. – A new law entitled “the Readjustment of Gestures” apparently amended by the Ministry of Education, makes courses in etiquette obligatory in all Turkish schools for girls. The Ministry points out that Turkish girls have Westernized their costumes, but still need to be taught how to converse, walk and smile in the Western way. – Associated Press, May 1931

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

Marie Antoinette and Mme. Etiquette

Nicknamed “Madame Etiquette” by Marie Antoinette, for her continual insistence that no minutia of Versailles court etiquette could ever be ignored or disregarded, French noblewoman and Versailles court official, Anne d’Arpajon, the Comtesse de Noailles, served as the “dame d’honneur” for two Queens of France – Marie Leszczyńska and Marie Antoinette. –Above– Judy Davis played Madame Etiquette in 2006’s “Marie Antoinette” Photo source, Pinterest

 A Delicate Point?

“When fourteen year old Marie-Antoinette arrived in France the lady singled out to be her guide was not a warm, motherly person but the one who was next in line for such an exalted office. It was Anne Claude Louise d'Arpajon, Vicomtesse de Noailles, who had been the first lady-in-waiting to the late Queen Marie Lesczynska and was therefore a stickler for etiquette. – The Tea at Trianon Blogspot

The Comtesse de Noailles, nicknamed “Madame Etiquette,” bored Marie Antoinette very much by her particularity on minor points of conduct. One day, Marie Antoinette’s mocking spirit had its chance. She fell from her donkey and lay on the grass for a while, laughing. “Run as fast as you can,” she said to the nearest attendant as soon as she could speak, “and ask Madame Etiquette how the Queen of France ought to behave when she tumbles off her donkey.” – Santa Cruz Sentinel, 1910

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

Royal Stamp of Approval

The new Queen received a royal stamp of approval. It was the first time that a Queen of England, not reigning in her own right, had appeared on British stamps. 

The Coronation stamp of Great Britain, bearing quarter-length portraits of the new King and Queen side by side, is approximately the size of the Silver Jubilee adhesives issued in 1935 to honor George V. Between the rulers is an Imperial Crown under which are the initials G and E entwined with R. In the lower border is the date, “12 May 1937,” with “Postage Revenue” in the upper part of the frame, and “11/2 d” in each lower corner. It is the first time that a Queen of England, not reigning in her own right, has appeared on British stamps. 

The only other Queen illustrated was Victoria, who always was shown, even on issues coming out soon before her death, as she appeared in her younger days, due to the prevailing etiquette concerning such matters. Almost simultaneously with the Coronation stamp – there will be only one value for Great Britain – the King George V issue to replace the Edward VIII stamps being put on sale. These stamps carry the profile of the new King facing left, with the Crown above. In the corners are a rose, shamrock, thistle and daffodil. – The Sun, 1937

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

Scandinavian Etiquette Formalities

At the end of the Danish dinner party, the hostess will stand in the doorway and shake hands with every guest while he murmurs, “Thank you for the food”... Royal Copenhagen dinnerware– Photo source, Pinterest

Some feel that etiquette in Scandinavia is a thing to be dreaded, especially in Sweden. Even the former should address a person by his full diplomatic, political, professional or commercial title. Thus, one meets Mr. the Assistant to the Bank Manager Wirseen or Mr. the Former Manufacturer of Blood Sausage Olson. 

Denmark is far less formal, both in speech and attire, but at the end of the dinner party, the hostess will stand in the doorway and shake hands with every guest while he murmurs, “Thank you for the food,” to which she answers, “I hope it will become you well.” – Lompoc Review, 1930

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

A Royal Gaffe and King’s Displeasure

Danish King Christian IX – Christian IX was the King of Denmark from 1862 until his death in 1906. Wed to his second cousin, Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel, he was nicknamed “the father-in-law of Europe” after their six children married into other royal families across the continent. His reign was marred by political disputes early on, making him tremendously unpopular with his subjects. However, toward the end of his 44 year reign he was viewed in a much more popular light, giving him an iconic status by the time of his death.

From ‘The Gossip’ the following story is told of a visit by Captain Alexander Murray, of the American Navy, to the King of Denmark: The King remarked to his guests that this was a residence he had owned while a private gentleman, and he was sure they would appreciate his receiving them there as a higher compliment and a greater sense of his friendship for their country than if he had treated them with more ceremony. This country house was built of white marble, with French windows opening upon a verdant lawn, and in size and appointment not much superior to the country residence of some of our merchant princes. 

After the preliminary course had been dispatched, his Majesty filled an immense goblet and, with a grand sweep of his arm, designed as a signal to the band stationed on the lawn in full view of the windows, he proposed, “The United States of America!” Crash went the instruments, but to the horror of all present, instead of pouring forth, as had been intended, one of Columbia’snational airs, they struck up a ponderous melody of “Scandinavia.” The King said “never a word,” but putting down his glass he strode through the open window on to the lawn, and seised the bandmaster by the collar, kicked him around the inclosure several times, and dismissing him at last with a rigorous shake, walked quietly back to his seat. 

As may be supposed, a sudden silence toll upon the assembled company, the code of etiquette furnishing no rule or precedent whereby guests might guide themselves when royal hosts kicked their band-masters. Our worthy representatives relied upon a state of masterly inactivity, and fortunately the delinquent leader soon scrambled to his place and gave them a full blast of Democratic harmony. – Sacramento Daily Union, 1871

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

Bath’s Master of Ceremonies

In 18th c. Britain, Beau Nash was a celebrated dandy, arbiter of Georgian etiquette and leader of fashion. He is best remembered at the spa town of Bath, the most fashionable resort in 18th-century England. – In 1704, after stints in the army and as a barrister, Nash became known as the “Master of Ceremonies” at a rising spa town - Bath. His was a leading, though unofficial, role in making Bath the Georgian era social center it became, and Nash’s became a job for life. Indispensable in Bath, he not only matched ladies with appropriate dancing partners at each ball, but he’d pay the musicians at many events. Nash would meet the newest arriving visitors to Bath and judge whether they were suitable to join the select “Company” of 500 to 600 people who had pre-booked tables there. He would broker marriages, escort unaccompanied wives when needed, and even regulated what gambling he could, by restraining compulsive gamblers or warning players against cardsharps and risky games. The Corporation of the city funded an elaborate funeral for Nash upon his death in 1761, and he was buried in the nave of Bath Abbey, not far from a monument memorializing him.

Bath, England and Its Celebrated 

Arbiter of Manners

“Beau Nash of Bath was intellectually, and in the matter of actual power, a King indeed, in comparison with all the buffoon imitators who have followed him.”– Wakeman, 1882

  

The city got its name because of the hot mineral water that bubbles out of the ooze, something like 250,000 gallons every day at about 120 degrees. But the story only begins with the water. The city of Bath is steeped in history and tradition. Its secrets are told in art and literature. Its 18th century streets weren't made for automobiles, and the pedestrian is the kingpin. 

Daniel Defoe (of Robinson Crusoe fame) summed it all up in the early 1700s: “We may say now it is ... a place that helps the indolent and the gay to commit that worst of murders to kill time.” Defoe was a little grumpy, but his words describe well the kind of goings-on in Bath at that time. The reigning Monarch at the time, Queen Anne, was enamored of the waters, and then as now, it became fashionable to do what the Monarchy does. The social whirl in Bath got kicked into gear by one Beau Nash, your basic good-timer, who became arbiter of taste, etiquette and parties. 

Nash’s title was Master of Ceremonies, and he went about his job with all the aggressiveness of a public relations man. He led a crackdown on hoodlums so as to make the streets safe to walk, and he led a similar crackdown on those who didn’t dress or act right. Ostracism by Beau Nash was more than most people could stand, and soon the town’s social life was made over, according to Nash’s taste. Nash is noted for encouraging a new informality in manners, breaking down the rigid barriers which had previously divided the nobility from not only the middle-class patrons, but the gentry of Bath. Under Nash, Bath became one fashionable and fun place. It remained so for many years after Nash’s death in 1761.

Jane Austen spent time there and wrote Bath’s shops, amusements and entertainments into her novels. Thomas Gainsborough painted portraits for 20 pounds apiece. William Pitt governed from a simple flat. Bath held great appeal to the Georgians of the late 1700s and early 1800s, but fashionable and fun places in general faded in post-Regency era England. When the Victorian Era came to be after 1837, Bath's influence in British life faded along with the rest of them. – from an article in Santa Cruz Sentinel, 1987

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

Affectation vs Tact and True Politeness

“It’s not the correct fork which exhibits good manners, but the person eating from the fork.”  

– Maura J. Graber

“Consideration of others is the foundation of all good manners, and the man or woman who lacks that, has mere affectation in the place of tact and true politeness.” –Above- A gilded age, ice cream fork.

The Occult Law of Trifles in Etiquette

One of the want breaches of etiquette of which you may be guilty is to attempt to teach your acquaintances etiquette. If you invite a friend to luncheon at a restaurant for instance, or accept her invitation, you thereby confess that a degree of social equality exists between you and her. And if she eats her oysters with an ordinary fork instead of with the trident that has been specially provided for that purpose it is not within your province to correct her; unless she has previously recognized you as the guardian of her manners. 

If she chooses to convey ice cream to her mouth by means of a spoon instead of a fork, let her do it unmolested. The matter is not of the slightest consequence, and to be in constant fear of transgressing some occult law of etiquette one’s self, or of associating with persons who do so, is to prove one's self not to the manner born and by nature a snob. Even if your country guest eats with her knife in public, you will prove yourself a provincial by paying any attention to it. If it happens to be her custom, to which she has been reared, and if you have a cosmopolitan mind, it will be too insignificant a thing to worry you. However technically perfect your own manners may be, they will exhibit a glaring deficiency if you correct those of other grown persons. 

Besides you are not sure of infallibility, and it is not impossible that you may occasionally rebuke a person who knows even more on the subject than you do and is behaving quite properly in the eyes of the cultivated world. When she eats her cheese with her knife, she is merely following the English habit, and it is quite permissible to take olives, corn, undressed lettuce and lump sugar in the fingers. Again, many of the actions that you consider faulty may be due to the absence of mind engendered by lively conversation, white others are accidents to which anybody is liable. 

Most persons whom one meets socially, have a sufficient knowledge of etiquette to be at home among the people with whom they associate, and that is all that is necessary. A really well bred person never rests her faith on such minute trifles as the angle at which the knife is left or the number of crumbs to be permitted to fall from the piece of bread. Consideration of others is the foundation of all good manners, and the man or woman who lacks that, has mere affectation in the place of tact and true politeness. – Judie Chollet, Wilmington Morning Star, 1894

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

A Chicago Alderman’s Etiquette Class

The Chicago Tribune has had a long history of highlighting etiquette in Chicago. Thankfully, the etiquette enthusiast  highlighted in the article below, gets the etiquette right. Sadly, opposed to this 1930’s pamphlet by Helen Bartlett, the newspaper’s Etiquette Editor, 50 years earlier. The place setting has the forks on the wrong side of the plate!

Kids’ Etiquette Class Finds Courtesy is the Main Course 

Alderman William Henry (24th) would like to see his young constituents in the West Side Lawndale neighborhood escape poverty. He would therefore want them to learn which is the salad fork and the proper way to eat soup. The two matters, he says, are closely related. “We are trying to get our young folks not to feel they have a ghetto mentality,” he said. “We are trying to give them exposure to the best things in life.”And so he has created a 10-week class in etiquette for children in his ward. The 33 young people in the class lunched in the Berghoff Restaurant Monday to test their new skills.

Under the watchful eye of etiquette consultant Carolyn Shelton, they daintily held their forks and knives and cut bite-sized pieces of meat. Girls wore skirts. Boys wore jackets. Henry wore a double-breasted gray suit, a cream-on-cream shirt and a blue tie and matching handkerchief in his jacket. He circulated among the young diners, some of whom had not fully grasped the principles of fine dining. “Alderman,” one young lady asked, “where do I wipe this damn knife at?” Henry was dismayed. She was contrite. '”I’m sorry,'” she said, correcting her language, if not her table manners. '”Where do I wipe this knife at?”

Henry acknowledged that etiquette is not a high priority in the City Council. He said he is disappointed in the lack of courtesy on the council floor. “The proper language of respect is, ‘Mr. President, I rise to support, or to oppose, my distinguished colleague from the 44th Ward, or the 1st Ward,’” he said. It is rare that an Alderman is referred to as “distinguished colleague,” he said. On the contrary, Alderman Bernard Stone (50th) once called Alderman Luis Gutierrez (26th) “you little pipsqueak.” Henry said his distinguished colleagues “probably need some classes.”

The classes have taught Laquita Crockett, 12, a new way to walk. Before, “if you walked down the street, you walk all crazy, try to walk all cool,” she said. Shelton “told us to walk like young women.” Shelton has taught them good posture, proper dress and personal hygiene. For some, it is reinforcement of lessons from home. Shelton told the girls that young ladies do not chew gum outside their homes. Laquita no longer does so. Under Shelton’s tutelage, she has also been practicing eating chicken with a knife and fork. Shelton said that nice young people do not wear plastic curl caps in public. Danielle Hill, 12, has given up her curly hairstyle.

She has insisted on respect for elders, a lesson Sabrina Johnson, 11, paraphrased as, “You’re not supposed to stomp your feet and curse back at them.” It is a matter of self-respect, said Shelton, a Chicagoan and eldest of nine children reared in public housing in Houston. “I’m teaching them how to like themselves, how to clean their bodies, how to say ‘please’ and ‘thank you,’” she said. Young people with self-respect will be less likely to become teenage parents. “I tell them, ‘You can’t wear shorts with everything hanging out. You can’t wear a blouse with everything hanging out.’” The boys have learned such expressions of outward respect as holding a chair out for a girl. The girls approve. “They treat us,” said Patricia Thompson, 15, “like a gentleman is supposed to treat a lady.” 

The program is free to young people and will cost the Alderman’s office about $2,500. Monday’s lunch was co-sponsored by the Berghoff and the Illinois Restaurant Association. Henry will award cash prizes to five participants at the end. He is hoping that the program can be expanded next year with corporate support. His enthusiasm stems from his own youth, when he attended a church-sponsored program he describes as “kind of a finishing school.” “I had to learn to play the ‘Star-Spangled Banner’ on the piano at the age of 12,” he said. He was also taught military marching and that essential inner city skill, golf. He still hates golf. But he believes that the courtesy he learned there and from a strict mother served him well, and will do the same for another generation.

The young people say they are delighted to learn etiquette, but some have found that old friends have not greeted their new ways with courtesy. “They say I was stupid to go to class to learn to walk when I already know how to walk,” said Danielle, who used her own sense of etiquette to respond. “I told them they were being stupid to say I was stupid because I want to learn.” – Barbara Brotman, Chicago Tribune, 1987

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

Profiles in Etiquette – Carolyn Shelton

Miss Shelton said she had been criticized by people who believed she was teaching black children to be “white.” But manners and the self-confidence they bring are universal, she said. “I decided to start with young kids... to prepare them in terms of what to expect in White corporate America, and that while saying ‘Excuse me,’ ‘Thank you,’ ‘Please’ is proper, it does not make you white,” she said. “Everybody should be taught manners.” –Carolyn Shelton, pictured above, surrounded by a group of children from the Cabrini Green public housing project in Chicago in 1984. She demonstrated the proper technique in spoon usage. “Manners and etiquette should have nothing to do with your economic background, and that is the key,” said Ms. Shelton at the time. – Image, AP Laserphoto

Read about the woman who taught manners to kids in Chicago projects...

CHICAGO (AP) It is lunchtime at a community center in the heart of one of America’s poorest urban neighborhoods, and Carolyn Shelton is teaching 50 youngsters how to tell a soup spoon from a teaspoon and how to cut a steak properly. Although the spoons are plastic and the “steak’’ is luncheon meat, the manners are pure Emily Post. But there is more than etiquette to the message. “I came out of a housing development just like this in Houston, Texas,” Miss Shelton, 36, a self-improvement consultant, tells the youngsters from the Cabrini Green public housing project. “Miss Shelton cares. I’m like your big sister.” Hands wave wildly when she asks for volunteers to demonstrate the proper way to eat soup. The girl chosen for the task plops her elbow on the table. “Is she doing it right?” Miss Shelton asks. “No!” the youngsters respond in unison. “The only weapon you young people have is your education and your mind,” Miss Shelton tells them. “You will not get a job break dancing. You have to know how to walk, talk, feel good about yourself .” 

Every week, Miss Shelton takes time out from her consulting jobs to bring guidance to underprivileged children and teens she says desperately need role models. “Manners and etiquette should have nothing to do with your economic background, and that is the key,” she said in an interview. “You don’t have to be raised in a white house to know how to say ‘Excuse me,’ ‘Thank you,’ ‘Please ’ Your parents don't have to be Ph.D.’s to teach young kids the basics in manners.” Miss Shelton, who in 1969 became one of the first black flight attendants hired by a major airline, started nearly a decade ago teaching social skills without pay to a few girls in the Houston housing project where she grew up. Since then, she has been hired to instruct groups ranging from black professionals to McDonald’s restaurant employees and the Texas A&M University football team. Her consulting business. To The Best Of You Inc., was a part-time effort until February, when she left her Continental Airlines job. 

She teaches youngsters to speak clearly when saying their names during introductions, to sit properly and, if they are girls, not to wear curlers in public. For professionals, her advice includes tips on choosing a wine, dressing for interviews and traveling abroad. Miss Shelton said she has been criticized by people who believe she is teaching black children to be “white.” But manners and the self-confidence they bring are universal, she said. “I decided to start with young kids... to prepare them in terms of what to expect in White corporate America, and that while saying ‘Excuse me,’ ‘Thank you,’ ‘Please’ is proper, it does not make you white,” she said. “Everybody should be taught manners. “I want to have these kids walk out of Cabrini or walk out of any housing project in the country, and not be identified as a project child, just as a young person trying to get a job.” she said. – By Melissa Johnson, Associated Press Writer, 1984

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

Bridal Etiquette and Thanks

In 1957, Amy Vanderbilt wrote that no one may write notes of thanks for the bride. Wrote Vanderbilt, “It is a social responsibility she alone must fulfill.” But a more modern etiquette has evolved since then, and it is refreshingly common for new spouses to assist one another in writing notes of thanks for wedding gifts they receive. We believe Amy would approve!

Q. “What is the most frequent error that brides make?”

A. People can smile tolerantly and forgive any little mistakes that can easily happen at a wedding or a reception. But the thing they are most often deeply hurt by is the bride’s failure to acknowledge their wedding gifts promptly and properly. It is never correct to send printed cards of thanks for wedding gifts.

Wedding gifts should always be acknowledged with handwritten notes as soon after their receipt as possible, within 3 months at the very outside. They may be short, but they should be sincere, appreciative, and should mention the gift itself, even where literally hundreds of gifts have been received. And no one may write them for the bride. It is a social responsibility she alone must fulfill. –Amy Vanderbilt, 1957 

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

An Etiquette Warning

“For all its non-negotiable requirements, etiquette has never required anyone to be a patsy. Etiquette has always known how to fight back. The polite duel has been outlawed, but all kinds of weapons denunciations, snubs, rejections can be clothed in propriety and used, in a restrained and proper fashion, under legitimate provocation.” – Judith Martin

Etiquette practitioners: Beware the power of the dark side...

Perhaps there should be a warning: In rare cases, etiquette can be used against you. Miss Manners is about as pleased to issue warnings with her product as a tobacco company. In her case, the obligation is self-inflicted, and she is prompted to do so not only by her relentlessly impeccable standards (which can be a terrible nuisance) but by her satisfaction in being able to deliver the cure right after disclosing the complaint. Etiquette danger occurs when one person knowingly depends on the good manners of another to allow the natural consequences of a rudeness to pass unpunished. Or rather, it occurs when the second person allows himself to be imposed upon rather than challenging the deliberate bad manners of the first, because that in itself would be rude. Mind you, Miss Manners said that such cases are rare. She has never subscribed to the notion that etiquette requires one always to make others feel good even when they are up to no good. This popular belief accounts for much of the unpopularity of the practice of etiquette. 

But for all its non-negotiable requirements, etiquette has never required anyone to be a patsy. Etiquette has always known how to fight back. The polite duel has been outlawed, but all kinds of weapons denunciations, snubs, rejections can be clothed in propriety and used, in a restrained and proper fashion, under legitimate provocation. No polite person would fail to disturb the complacency of someone making a bigoted remark, for example, or omit to lodge a complaint when seeing the helpless bullied. Etiquette also recognizes the legitimacy of self-defense against ill-treatment, provided the defense is not itself rude. “How dare you?” is a proper retort to an insult. When the polite person wavers and allows himself to be taken advantage of, it is because the offender, far from being rude, seems to be engaged in an act of friendship. Geared toward being no less kind in return, the mannerly victim reacts to acceptable surface behavior, rather than the outrageous assumption underlying it. 

Examples: A house guest not only seems settled in indefinitely, but begins to feel at home enough to attempt to participate in family decisions and to offer suggestions as to how the household ought to be run. The borrower of a book, garden tool or chunk of money fails to return it; when the lender discreetly hints at the matter, the borrower acts hurt and insulted. An acquaintance makes unwanted social demands that are declined so often that the recipient begins to feel that he or she “owes” that person an acceptance. Professional advice is sought or professional opportunities are offered under social circumstances, where they appear as favors, which it would be ungracious to refuse. A perfect stranger uses compliments and other chatter to create an atmosphere in which allowing him or her the privileges of friendship demands on time and privacy seems appropriate. 

In each of these cases, the burden of politeness seems to be on the innocent person. The solution requires recognizing the facts under that aura of politeness. One is under no obligation to share one's home, possessions, friendship, professional expertise or time for the asking. Little explanation is even required when stating one's rights: “I'm afraid I must have that money back,” “Call me at my office if you really want my advice” – even a nose-in-the-air snub when one is familiarly addressed by a stranger. Miss Manners promises not only that this will not be a violation of etiquette, but that it is a service to etiquette to defend it from evil usage. –By Miss Manners, aka Judith Martin, 1988

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

1920s Etiquette: Trend? Fad?

One of the better known writers on manners, with her first book of etiquette published in 1922, is Emily Post. Though she died in 1960, her extended family (most notably her late-granddaughter in-law, Elizabeth Post) has successfully continued on with her legacy of  nearly a century of etiquette books, news columns and social media contributions. – Above, “Emily Post” by Miguel Covarrubias for Vanity Fair, December 1933
– Image source, Pinterest 

Has Etiquette’s Popularity Waned?

One columnist thought etiquette’s popularity had waned by 1925, however, the 1920’s - 1930’s “Etiquette Era” was just taking a brief break, and would continue for over 10 more years.

Four years ago a clever publisher began to spend large sums of money advertising a book of etiquette. His campaign was tremendously successful and the American public “went in” for good manners so vehemently, that several books on the subject immediately leaped into the ranks of the best sellers and caused waiting lists at public libraries. It is now admitted that this four year old fad has waned. Did its departure leave us a nation of Chesterfields, distinguished for our elegant manners? Alas, no, many of the laws were useful, if not so important as the etiquette teachers lead us to think. But they are not the whole story of good manners. The latter can hardly be learned from books of etiquette. Culture is not to be found in anyone book or in anyone library of books. Culture is personal and temperamental and the form is of small value if the instinct is absent. The little usages of refined people are worthy of constant practice, but no matter how delicately correct one’s deportment may be, they fail if they do not dispel rudeness and discourtesy.– Eagle Rock Courier, 1925

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

A Tale of Etiquette and Diplomacy

A pink granite bench honors J. J. Jusserand in Washington, D.C. The semicircular bench, dedicated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1936, holds the distinction of being the first memorial erected on U.S. federal property to a foreign diplomat. Jean Jules Jusserand served as French Ambassador to the United States from 1902-1925. Soon after he arrived in D.C., Jusserand earned the confidence of President Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt and Jusserand shared a love for the outdoors and spent many long hours hiking in Rock Creek Park. Besides significant contributions to diplomacy between France and the U.S. (serving under 5 presidential administrations and all of WWI), Jusserand’s writings earned worldwide recognition. He won the first Pulitzer Prize in History for “With Americans of Past and Present Days,” a book recounting key contributions of Frenchmen to U.S. history. For his efforts in Franco-American relations, Jusserand also received the “Grand Croix” of the French Legion of Honor, the highest French distinction. Promoting friendship between the two countries led him to create the American Society of the Legion of Honor, recognizing Americans who make significant contributions to France.– photo source, Wikipedia 

Ever the Gentleman, He Could Not Dispense With Hat or Gloves

Roosevelt’s fondness for long walks in Rock Creek Park during his Presidency is well known. Nothing pleased him so much as to drop companions along the road unable to keep up with him. If he thought anyone was too well dressed for an outing, he would swim across a deep pool and everybody was compelled to follow. He was a great sport. Walking one day with a party among whom was J.J. Jusserand, French ambassador, President Roosevelt proposed that they all go bathing in Rock Creek, without bathing suits, out far off the public highway (says General Scott). Jusserand waded in without any clothes, except a pair of white kid gloves and a high silk hat. Roosevelt looked at him with astonishment for some time, but finally curiosity became too great and he had to ask the reason for the ambassador’s costume. “Oh, Mr. President...” Jusserand replied, “suppose some ladies should go by!” – Kansas City Times, 1929

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