Twitter RTs Are Not A Matter Of Etiquette

Posted on by

0

I can’t believe I’m actually writing this.

Last Wednesday, Vulture published an essay asking “Does Retweeting Praise Make You A Monster?” It outlines certain rules that have gone unspoken on the social media platform Twitter, but that everyone seems to get very opinionated about, from “don’t steal jokes” to “if someone follows you, you must follow them back.” But one idea that a number of people seem to think is a massive “breach of etiquette” is retweeting praise about yourself.

Author Adam Sternbergh thankfully concludes that it’s a bit of a silly idea, but not before spending a couple thousand words asking various writers and Twitter personalities about the subject. The statement that caught me was by novelist Gabriel Roth, who said:

“I think of Twitter as a cocktail party, and a certain amount of subtle bragging and self-advancement is acceptable at a cocktail party but if you show up and just stand there holding a big poster advertising your book, who’s going to invite you back? Imagine meeting someone at a party who opened a conversation with, ‘This fellow Larry Smidgen from Minneapolis says my book is laugh-out-loud funny — but also surprisingly moving!’”

What struck me is that I’ve heard this comparison of Twitter to a cocktail party before. People have expressed joy at it being a place to mingle, to make jokes, to meet new people and talk about new ideas–that sounds like a great cocktail party to me. But I don’t quite think all the rules of a cocktail party work. After all, in a cocktail party it’s harder to enter or exit a conversation. There’s body language to pay attention to. There are things, for better or worse, that you would say on the Internet, at arms-length from any immediate reaction, that you may not say to someone’s face. It may feel like a party sometimes, but it’s also an entirely different way of having a conversation.

For instance, you can’t retweet anything in a face to face conversation.

Despite having social media platforms like this for well over a decade, many people still operate under the impression that people are always their true selves online. That you are speaking to a person, and not that person’s crafted, representative self. How distant that crafted self is from their true self is different depending on the topic and on the person, but the performative aspect requires at least a second of thought and craft to whatever message one writes, whether it’s about your baby’s first tooth or your new book. People also forget that this is fluid. Twitter may be your personal confession booth one day, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be your publicity platform the next.

Editor Kurt Andersen said in the piece that “it’s a matter of not overdoing it.” I admit having been annoyed when my feed is filled with 50 retweets from the same person, whatever the subject, just as I would be if someone dominated the conversation at a cocktail party. The difference is that online, I can close the tab.

What Do I Do With This Non-Invitation?

Posted on by

3

Is it okay to do this before it happens?

Is it okay to do this before it happens? [Via]

Dear Uncommon Courtesy,

I have a friend who is getting married. I don’t see her very often, so I found out about the relationship and the engagement via Facebook (which is fine, that is what Facebook is for). Via social media I also know that her wedding will be small and intimate, and that they can’t afford to invite everyone they would like, which I totally understand, and I did not expect to be invited, as we  don’t see each other very often. Today I got what I guess is an announcement card.  It’s not a save-the-date, it basically says “we’re getting married on X date but you’re not invited, we’ll send pictures”.  I was resigned to not being invited, but when I saw the envelope for a minute I thought maybe I had made the cut, so seeing that I hadn’t was a wee bit of a let-down.  But I have also never encountered a formal “you’re not invited to our wedding, but here’s when it is” card before, and I wondered what you guys thought of them and what the etiquette is as the recipient of one.

Sincerely,
Not Invited

OFFICIAL ETIQUETTE

According to the Emily Post Institute: “Printed or handwritten announcements are sent to those left off of the guest list, or to acquaintances or business associates who might wish to hear the news. Announcements carry no obligation to return a gift, and they are never sent to anyone who has received an invitation. Ideally, they should be mailed the day after the wedding but may be sent up to several months later.” The bolding is theirs, so you know they mean business.

OUR TAKE

Jaya: So this is wrong, yes? So very wrong.

Victoria: Traditionally you CAN send an announcement after the wedding, to anyone who was interested but perhaps not invited, for whatever reason. But it’s really fallen out of favor. And you definitely don’t send it before, because thats like na-na we are having a wedding and you aren’t invited. I guess after it seems better because it’s already done, but it still seems like a weird concept to do a formal, printed announcement. Everyone now will know from Facebook pictures anyway.

Jaya: Yeah, it definitely seems like a tradition that used to be very practical but isn’t really necessary because of modern changes. Before, it’d be really good to let people know about new addresses or name changes, but the point was the information, not the way the information came. I wonder if they somehow think this is akin to an announcement in the paper, but just for people they know.

Victoria: I also wonder how common the wedding announcements really were to begin with, honestly. Just because there are official etiquette rules doesn’t mean people did it.

Jaya: That’s true! It may have worked backwards–a rule is written just in case you do it, and then everyone reads an etiquette book and thinks “Oh shit, I have to do this.”

Victoria: Also, people get really confused about announcements, even if they’re sent after! A lot of people think it means you have to send a gift, which you most certainly do not. I mean, you can if you want, but they should NEVER have registry information on them.

Jaya: I wonder if their sending this out has to do with guilt over having a small wedding. Like, this idea that you must explain yourself if you’re not inviting every person you’ve ever met. And I hope we can get over that idea.

Victoria: That’s a good point. Besides, if you really do feel guilty about say, not inviting the close group of friends you hang out with- it would be better to explain the situation on the phone or in person or something anyway.

Jaya: And yeah, the writer explains she had no presumptions of being invited anyway. Most people have a handle on who they’re really close to and who they’re not, and don’t get all butthurt about it.

Victoria: I would probably get this and be like “Well, I wasn’t expecting to go to your stinky wedding anyway :-P”

Thank Goodness Prohibition Happened And Gave Us These Modern Drinking Habits

Posted on by

0

As much as the idea of prohibition seems ridiculous to me now, over the years I’ve come to appreciate the fact that it was enforced in America from 1919-1933. In the 1820s, Americans drank about four gallons of 200 proof alcohol per capita.That is far too much alcohol, you guys! Yes, banning it and sending unregulated production underground was not a good idea, but it basically halved our alcohol consumption once it was legal again. Plus it paved the way for all sorts of innovation in cocktails since the bootleg liquor was so gross. It wasn’t for nothing.

In Perfect Behavior (a parody etiquette guide published 1922) by Donald Ogden Stewart, the chapter “The Etiquette of Dinners and Balls” suggests some opening lines to get conversation going. For instance, when cocktails are served, you may remark on how terrible the gin is, and then offer the tidbit “Senator Volstead [of the Volstead Act, aka The National Prohibition Act] was born Sept. 4 1869.” Stewart also jokes about alcohol consumption in “Etiquette for Dry Agents”:

In spite of the great pride and joy which we Americans feel over the success of National Prohibition; in spite of the universal popularity of the act and the method of its enforcement; in spite of the fact that it is now almost impossible to obtain in any of our ex saloons anything in the least resembling whiskey or gin,– there still remains the distressing suspicion that quite possibly, at some of the dinner parties and dances of our more socially prominent people, liquor–or its equivalent–is openly being served. . . .The main difficulty has been, I believe, that the average dry agent is too little versed in customs and manners of polite society. It is lamentably true that too often has a carefully planned society dry raid been spoiled because the host noticed that one of his guests was wearing white socks with a black tie, or that the intruder was using his dessert spoon on the hors d’oeuvres.

That’s just some beautiful backhanded insulting right there. He goes on to suggest that we need to attract a higher class of dry agent, which may be difficult, given that most preparatory schools teach young men to frown upon “pussyfooting and sneaking.”

Some etiquette books of the time suggested hosts obey the law and serve nonalcoholic drinks at parties, but according to Spirits of Defiance: National Prohibition and Jazz Age Literature, 1920-1933, most people treated hosts who didn’t serve alcohol as “uncouth, emasculating, or even cowardly.” Perfect Behavior suggests that alcohol consumption was a bit of an open secret. When I worked at the New-York Historical Society we presented an exhibition on beer and brewing in New York. During prohibition, many breweries were forced to close or make non-alcoholic malt tonics. One brewing company found a way to help get alcohol into the hands of consumers with a sneaky advisory on the label: “Caution: Do not ferment, do not add yeast, or you will create beer.”

If our depictions of the Roaring 20s are to be believed, Prohibition just made alcohol cool, along with creating a culture of concealment and necessity. If there was alcohol around, you better drink as much as you can, because you don’t know when you’ll be drinking again. According to No Nice Girl Swears by Alice-Leone Moats (published in 1933), this actually meant that learning how to deal with drunk people became part of common culture. “When our mothers came out, learning to handle a drunk was not an essential part of a debutante’s education,” she wrote. “Now every girl has to be capable not only of shifting for herself, but, more often than not, of looking out for her escort as well.” This was doubly true because most speakeasies were co-ed, whereas before prohibition bars and saloons had been strictly for men. According to the Encyclopedia of Chicago, “Enforcement of the Volstead Act diminished the prominence of all-male saloons and unintentionally encouraged the development of more expensive speakeasies patronized by men and women. After repeal, heterosocial drinking patterns persisted.”

Prohibition may have also created one of my favorite types of get togethers–the cocktail party. Now merely having alcohol was cause for celebration, and guests may be so excited by it that a sit-down dinner is not required. “Cocktail parties have become the line of least resistance in entertaining. They are convenient for the person who must get 50 or 60 people off the list of obligations and prefers to do it at one fell swoop, saving money at the same time. It certainly isn’t much trouble; all you need is a case of synthetic gin and a tin of anchovy paste. The greater the number of the guests, the smaller and more airless the room, the stronger the gin, the more successful the party. But if you give one, you must be prepared to have your friends on your hands until two in the morning, as they will invariably forget their dinner engagements and stay on until the last shakerful is emptied.”

Nowadays if you drink alcohol, things like cocktail parties, women in bars, and heterosocial drinking are all taken for granted. So is the idea that, even if you get completely shitfaced, you should probably be a little discreet about it. And for that we have Prohibition to thank! Just please, never again.

Best Lines in Emily Post’s Etiquette

Posted on by

3

BAD FORM! Captain Hook has literally nothing to do with Emily Post, but I think they would agree.

Emily Post published her book, Etiquette in 1922 and it was an immediate best seller, partially because it contained excellent advice and partially because it was wittily written. Some of Emily’s witticisms remain so today while some are humorously outdated. I’ve combed through the first half of the book and pulled out some of my favorites (there may be a follow up with the second half of the book…let me know in the comments if you want more!)

  • “Saccharine chirpings should be classed with crooked little fingers, high hand-shaking and other affectations. All affectations are bad form.”
  • “Who does not dislike a “boneless” hand extended as though it were a spray of sea-weed, or a miniature boiled pudding? It is equally annoying to have one’s hand clutched aloft in grotesque affectation and shaken violently sideways, as though it were being used to clean a spot out of the atmosphere. What woman does not wince at the viselike grasp that cuts her rings into her flesh and temporarily paralyzes every finger?”
  • “Nothing is so easy for any woman to acquire as a charming bow. It is such a short and fleeting duty. Not a bit of trouble really; just to incline your head and spontaneously smile as though you thought “Why, there is Mrs. Smith! How glad I am to see her!””
  • “Whether in a private carriage, a car or a taxi, a lady must never sit on a gentleman’s left; because according to European etiquette, a lady “on the left” is not a “lady.” Although this etiquette is not strictly observed in America, no gentleman should risk allowing even a single foreigner to misinterpret a lady’s position.” [Ed: Heaven forbid!!]
  • “Why a man, because he has millions, should assume that they confer omniscience in all branches of knowledge, is something which may be left to the psychologist to answer, but most of those thrown much in contact with millionaires will agree that an attitude of infallibility is typical of a fair majority.” [Ed: Eat the rich!]
  • “Not so many years ago, a lady or gentleman, young girl or youth, who failed to pay her or his “party call” after having been invited to Mrs. Social-Leader’s ball was left out of her list when she gave her next one. For the old-fashioned hostess kept her visiting list with the precision of a bookkeeper in a bank; everyone’s credit was entered or cancelled according to the presence of her or his cards in the card receiver. Young people who liked to be asked to her house were apt to leave an extra one at the door, on occasion, so that theirs should not be among the missing when the new list for the season was made up—especially as the more important old ladies were very quick to strike a name off, but seldom if ever known to put one back.”
  • “In a ball dress a lady of distinction never leans back in a chair; one can not picture a beautiful and high-bred woman, wearing a tiara and other ballroom jewels, leaning against anything. This is, however, not so much a rule of etiquette as a question of beauty and fitness.”
  • “Acceptances or regrets are always written. An engraved form to be filled in is vulgar—nothing could be in worse taste than to flaunt your popularity by announcing that it is impossible to answer your numerous invitations without the time-saving device of a printed blank.” [Ed: Oh man, aren’t you glad we can just text now?]
  • “But the “mansion” of bastard architecture and crude paint, with its brass indifferently clean, with coarse lace behind the plate glass of its golden-oak door, and the bell answered at eleven in the morning by a butler in an ill fitting dress suit and wearing a mustache, might as well be placarded: “Here lives a vulgarian who has never had an opportunity to acquire cultivation.”” [Ed: I am absolutely bringing back the term “vulgarian.”]
  • “Be very careful though. Do not mistake modern eccentricities for “art.” There are frightful things in vogue to-day—flamboyant colors, grotesque, triangular and oblique designs that can not possibly be other than bad, because aside from striking novelty, there is nothing good about them.”
  • “The fact that you live in a house with two servants, or in an apartment with only one, need not imply that your house lacks charm or even distinction, or that it is not completely the home of a lady or gentleman.” [Ed: But Emily, can my home be the home of a lady if I have NO servants? Asking for a friend.]
  • “The garden party is merely an afternoon tea out of doors. It may be as elaborate as a sit-down wedding breakfast or as simple as a miniature strawberry festival.” [Ed: Nothing about a miniature strawberry festival sounds simple.]
  • “If your house has a great Georgian dining-room, the table should be set with Georgian or an earlier period English silver” [Ed: Obviously.]
  • “As soon as the guests are seated and the first course put in front of them, the butler goes from guest to guest on the right hand side of each, and asks “Apollinaris or plain water!” and fills the goblet accordingly. In the same way he asks later before pouring wine: “Cider, sir?” “Grape fruit cup, madam?” Or in a house which has the remains of a cellar, “Champagne?” or “Do you care for whiskey and soda, sir?”” [Ed: This is funny because the book was written during Prohibition, and you don’t really think, when thinking about Prohibition, about the consequences for etiquette- what do you do with all your different wine glasses and what do you serve with a fancy dinner?]
  • “A guest helps himself with his fingers and lays the roll or bread on the tablecloth, always. No bread plates are ever on a table where there is no butter, and no butter is ever served at a dinner.” [Ed: A dinner with no butter sounds really sad to me. Not even butter in fancy shapes? Or are fancy shapes nouveau riche?]
  • “Pie, however, is not a “company” dessert. Ice cream on the other hand is the inevitable conclusion of a formal dinner.” [Ed: Ice cream had literally JUST been invented, so I will give them a break here.]
  • “No matter where it is used, the finger bowl is less than half filled with cold water; and at dinner parties, a few violets, sweet peas, or occasionally a gardenia, is put in it. (A slice of lemon is never seen outside of a chop-house where eating with the fingers may necessitate the lemon in removing grease. Pretty thought!)”

Do I Have to Reciprocate All Christmas Gifts?

Posted on by

0

Dear Uncommon Courtesy,

So a friend of mine asked me for my address the other day so she could mail me a Christmas gift, and now I’m wondering if I’m obligated to reciprocate. We met online about five years ago but we’ve never actually spent time together in person. I know her interests very well and had some cute ideas right away, but I had no intent to get her something before she asked for my address. HOW HELP?

Sincerely,

Giftless and Feeling Guilty

Official Etiquette:

Miss Manners wrote a lovely essay about choosing which holiday traditions to celebrate while remaining thankful and polite about all overtures made to you. You can read it here.

Our Take:

Victoria: So basically the answer is yes, it’s totally fine not to give a gift in return if you weren’t going to in the first place.

Jaya: Totally. You know, thank her and everything, but it’s really out of the blue.

Victoria: Yeah, actually! This JUST happened to me.

Jaya: What!

Victoria: [Redacted] texted me and was like, “I broke the rules and got you a Christmas present because I happened to see the perfect thing and you aren’t allowed to get me something in return.”

But then again, there are some years that I do a small homemade Christmas present for all my friends and some years that I don’t and its all fine either way.

Jaya: Yeah, I think it depends on your friends and traditions, but I do think at some point we all end up agreeing that holiday presents are for family and like, really really close friends or a Secret Santa group or something.

Victoria: Yeah, although some people go totally nuts with gift giving. Like- there’s a part in Love Actually where Emma Thompson is wrapping gifts for her kids friends and I’ve always been so confused about why you would give Christmas gifts to random children.

Jaya: I think after a certain age, if you’re one of those people, you have to accept that as your thing and not everyone’s thing.

Victoria: Haha yeah, totally.

Jaya: Like, do it because you found something great for your friends, not because you’re trying to backhand pressure some gift-giving exchange onto people who don’t have the capacity or energy.

Victoria: Yessssss

Jaya: And you know, a million times, a gift is a gift. So Matt was on the phone with his mom the other day and asked if she wanted anything for Hanukkah, and she was like “of course not, Hanukkah is for children.” Which is sorta great, like it’s totally a kids holiday pumped up to compete with Christmas so Jewish kids don’t feel left out, but the adults know it’s for them. I sorta wish we could have a bit more of that sensibility all around. I mean I love gifts and holiday spirit and stuff but it does cause a lot of anxiety.

Victoria: Eh, I mean it depends. That whole “love languages thing.” One of my favorite parts of Christmas is exchanging gifts with my family and my family does tend to be very gifty. But yeah, not like, with the neighbors.

Jaya: Love languages is a good way to put it, as much as that concept isn’t perfect. I think here it totally works.

Victoria: Like, the rest of the “gift giving” times of the year are very one sided- one person gives and one person receives, whereas “Christmas” is more about the exchange. Haha which I just realized totally contradicts our advice that you don’t HAVE to give a gift in return.

Jaya: Hahahaha it does! I mean, the exchange is great if you’re predisposed to like the exchange or see it coming.

Victoria: Yeah, exactly. It’s very lovely with your family is what I’m saying.

Jaya: That’s the thing that throws me. Like, I’ve bought gifts for my parents and siblings and husband, because I spent Christmas morning with them. And we did the Secret Santa thing with friends, which was fun, but also totally voluntary, like, you didn’t have to sign up.

Victoria: Yeah! It was fun!

Jaya: Which I like more than just getting a gift out of nowhere from someone I’ve never met. I mean I understand internet friendships are 100% real friendships, I have many, but still.

Victoria: Oh right, this person is an internet friend. Does she say specifically that she is sending a gift. Because maybe its just a Christmas card? Oh yeah she does. Lol. Read the question, Victoria.

Jaya: Hahaha

Victoria: Well, I would say, just comfort yourself knowing that its probably something small. And maybe it is Anthrax! This is a person from the internet after all.

Jaya: Hahahahaha! So right like, holiday cards are another thing. Some people love sending out holiday cards, and some don’t, but it’s not like if you get one you have to make one to send back. I always think I’m gonna do them and then I remember it’s extra money for me to send something most people are gonna throw out.

Victoria: Lol yeah, I want to do Christmas cards, but whoops, I did not. If it comforts you, my mom always displays all the cards they get for the whole month. And my sister and I go through and make fun of the Christmas letters, so its not such a waste.

Jaya: Hahaha that’s good. Yeah I think I always forget until I get one, and then obvs it’s too late.

Victoria: Haha yeah. My sister and I did them last year, but she did all the work sooooo…Okay, this year I will buy cards on clearance in January and then I will do them. This is my resolution.