The duty of seeing that guests [at a ball] are looked after, that shy youths are presented to partners, that shyer girls are not left on the far wallflower outposts, that dowagers are taken in to supper, and that elderly gentlemen are provided with good cigars in the smoking room, falls to the "perfect host."
Or
 To refuse to dance with one man and then immediately dance with another is an open affront to the first one--excusable only if he was intoxicated or otherwise actually offensive so that the affront was justifiable. But under ordinary circumstances, if she is "dancing," she must dance with everyone who asks her; if she is "not dancing," she must not make exceptions.
Or
For one person to look directly at another and not acknowledge the other's bow is a breach of civility that only gravest cause can warrant.... A "cut direct" is very different. It is a direct stare of blank refusal, and is not only insulting to its victim but embarrassing to every witness. Happily it is practically unknown in polite society.
Or
The position of companion, which is always one of social equality with her employer, rarely exists unless the lady of the house is an invalid, very elderly, a widow, or a young girl. (In the last case, the "companion" acts as a "chaperone.")
Or
A first-class lady's maid is required to be a hairdresser, a good packer, and an expert needlewoman.
Or
It should be unnecessary to mention that none but vulgarians would employ a butler who wears a mustache!
Or
Ladies do not sit with crossed knees. Properly, a lady doesn't lean back in her chair at all.
Or
 It would be hard to think of anything more at variance with charm than a woman who is continually looking at herself in her vanity mirror, making moues, and fussing with her hair, and dabbing at her face. It is not only bad form, but evidence of ignorance of the meaning of charm.
Or
The head of the table is wherever the hostess sits. In other words, the wife is head of the table, though the man is head of the house.
Or
It is usually a mistake to invite great talkers together. Brilliant men and women who love to talk want hearers, not rivals. Very silent people [at a dinner party] should be sandwiched between good talkers, or at least voluble talkers. Silly people should never be put anywhere near learned ones, nor the dull near the clever, unless the dull one is a young and pretty woman with a talent for listening and the clever is a man with an admiration for beauty and a love of talking.
Or
Not to attract attention to oneself in public is one of the fundamental rules of good breeding.
Or
It has always been the rule of the well bred not to wear too many jewels in public places.
Or
 It is not possible to overemphasize the inexcuseable rudeness of the bride who sends a printed or engraved card of thanks for wedding presents sent her.
Or
Never under any circumstances sign a letter with "Mr., "Mrs.," or "Miss" as an unseparated part of one's signature unless one is willing to be considered both ignorant and rude.
Don't you just love her? Can't you just see her shuddering at the mere thought of an engraved thank-you note or a butler with a mustache? The entire book, all 654 pages, is basically about how NOT to be rude or vulgar. One has to wonder what Mrs. Post would think of us today. As often as I was struck by similarities with the Regency, I was just as often struck by how many "rules" are no longer in play in today's world. For example:
In speaking about other people, one always says "Mrs.," "Miss," or "Mr." as the case may be. It is very bad form to go about saying "Edith Wordly" to those who do not call her Edith, and to speak thus familiarly of one whom one perhaps does not even know is done only by social climbers and snobs who speak with familiarity of persons of prominence in order to impress their hearers with their own importance. (With quite the opposite effect upon all but the ignorant.)
Poor Mrs. Post must be spinning in her grave whenever she hears our President refer, for example, to the Prime Minister of Great Britain as Gordon, or his predecessor as Tony. And am I the only one who hates it when the two remaining Democratic candidates for President are referred to as "Hillary" and "Barack"? *shudder* Anyone, especially journalists, who use their first names instead of "Senator Clinton" and "Senator Obama" should be whacked over the head with Mrs. Post's heavy tome.
All this has made me wonder if there are any people left out there who care about etiquette. Is it a lost element of our culture? Apparently not. I found an Emily Post Institute website at which her descendents provide all sorts of etiquette advice for the 21st century. In fact, that rule above about not sending engraved thank-you notes is still listed, in more contemporary language: "No fill-in-the-blank cards, no pre-printed cards, no phone calls, no emails and no generic post on your website!" Good manners are still good manners, regardless of the available technology! Hooray!
 And, or course, we still have Miss Manners, whose etiquete column is syndicated by hundreds of newspapers. (She is really Judith Martin, shown on the left.) She now tackles subjects such as cell-phone and email etiquette. It does my old-fashioned heart good to know that some people still care about good manners.
Read more from the blog archives.
Visit Candice's Regency World .
Visit Candice's Discussion Board.
Subscribe to Candice's newsletter. |
