Back in high school, I used to read etiquette guides. In fact, I read them and took extensive notes, because I was going to be somebody, and somehow I got the idea in my head that impeccable etiquette was a crucial part of that. It was a simple error I’d made, mistaking a need for “good manners” as a need for “good etiquette”. I worked on this for probably two or three years, and now I can’t tell you a single rule I read out of an etiquette book. Why? Because there was absolutely no discernable method or pattern to the rules of etiquette. In search of a pattern, I even studied the history of etiquette guides in college, spending Saturday afternoons up on the third floor of the University Library pulling out books that hadn’t been borrowed since 1943, containing advice on the use of calling cards and what use good etiquette had in a world with horseless carriages. I certainly enjoyed it, but I’d be reluctant to say I really learned anything.
I was reminded of this period of my life when, at the used bookstore, I chanced upon a copy of Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. I opened up to a random page in the middle, and was happy to find out that it was about eating, something I happen to know a little bit about. Luckily, this portion of the book is available online, so you can follow along! The question posed to Miss Manners is a simple one:
“How do you eat spaghetti with a [fork and] spoon?”
To which Miss Manners icily replies that eating spaghetti with a fork and spoon was “outrageous”, because
“A fork is the only utensil that may be used to eat spaghetti while anyone is looking.”
Miss Manners delves slightly into the details of how to eat spaghetti using only the fork — plant the fork on the plate, twirl, present to mouth — and closes with a tart reprimand that allowing the ends of the spaghetti to fall back onto the plate after a bite would be unthinkable, and that the only acceptable solution is to slurp the remnants into your mouth. (Of course, she doesn’t use the proletarian term slurp, but rather dances around it by suggesting that the eater inhale.)
To this, an agitated reader responds:
“[Your proposed method is] Proper, perhaps, for a Roto-Rooter man. The correct way to eat spaghetti is with a fork and a soup spoon. […] One cannot eat spaghetti properly without a soup spoon. Shame on you.”
(Why, by the way, a soup spoon? Why is there no such restriction on the fork?) And, of course, Miss Manners replies with this convincing counter-argument:
“In the civilized world, which includes the United States and Italy, it is incorrect to eat spaghetti with a spoon. The definition of ‘civilized’ is a society that does not consider it correct to eat spaghetti with a spoon.”
So, to recap, the entire debate consists of three points: 1) Miss Manners asserts that using a spoon is unacceptable; 2) A reader asserts that not using a soup spoon is unacceptable; 3) Miss Manners counters that using a spoon (any sort) is uncivilized.
It is a fruitless argument where both sides insist that the boundary of acceptability is what they say it is — without a single piece of evidence in favor of their points — each implying that it is self-evidently obvious that their claim is true, heedless of the fact that their opponent considers it self-evidently false. No evidence is given, no argumentation advanced, nothing. And then, just in case you couldn’t pick up on the subtle connection I’m trying to make between etiquette mavens and language mavens, Miss Manners underscores the point by changing the very definition of a word (civilized) to pretend that it supports her claim. (Much as grammaticasters misuse educated as meaning “agreeing with me”.)
I think you can see why I stopped analyzing etiquette advice in my free time. But, why, again, did I replace it with analyzing arguments over grammar? The evidence presented here suggests it is because I am stupid.
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 26, 2010 at 9:36 am
Daniel
For years I’ve found the very concept of etiquette experts to be irritating for reasons I could never quite put my finger on, and I want to thank you for identifying those reasons for me: that as a general rule the etiquette expert is self-appointed, and that the rules seem to have no more support than “I’m an expert and I said so.”
This raises an interesting question: are there any etiquette descriptivists who base their pronouncements on what people actually do and/or actual evidence of what activities people regard as polite or impolite?
January 26, 2010 at 10:26 am
Regarding grammarians who “misuse educated as meaning agreeing with me” - 22 Words
[…] Doyle writes an excellent comparison of etiquette mavens and language mavens—both thrive on making definitive claims, supported by no […]
January 26, 2010 at 10:27 am
Jan Freeman
I’ve always enjoyed etiquette books as a window into what one class of people, in one time an place, (allegedly) holds up as polite behavior. Sometimes there are reasons: You don’t give a gf or fiancee anything so expensive you’re helping support her; it looks like pay-for-play. Of course they are all local, temporary rules, and many are essentially arbitrary — that’s precisely why the comparison with usage habits is so apposite. (Emily Post 1922 has a section on vocabulary and pronunciation, in which she explains that these are the secret handshakes of the Best Society.) Of course it’s hard for us to evaluate their “evidence,” but consider the reported reaction of Queen Elizabeth when Wills’s girlfriend’s mother greeted her with the non-U “Pleased to meet you” instead of “How d’ye do?” Is that any different from the professor who red-circles your singular “they” and says “not proper in our circles, young man”?
January 26, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Matches Malone
Civilized society actually calls it a pasta spoon, actually, as any Italian restaurateur will tell you. And this may also explain why Miss Manners never got married.
January 26, 2010 at 2:11 pm
Texas in Africa
The common thread in the rules of etiquette is (at least in theory) that each rule is designed to make the other party feel more comfortable in interacting with oneself. The idea is to have an agreed-upon set of rules in order to avoid awkward sitautions (eg, the gentleman will open a door for the lady so that she does not have to remove her gloves, he will walk on the street side of the sidewalk so as to protect her from splashes, and he will know which fork to use so that there is not an awkward pause at the beginning of a meal). You’re correct that the rules have no specific rationales in and of themselves, but they exist for a common reason: the belief that life is more pleasant when we know what to expect.
January 26, 2010 at 4:49 pm
Gary
Surely the point of “soup spoon” is: Not a tea spoon.
January 26, 2010 at 5:20 pm
Mongoose
“(Why, by the way, a soup spoon? Why is there no such restriction on the fork?)”
Probably because soup forks are so hard to come by these days.
I like Texas’s theory of the rules of etiquette. I’d even add that it’s a way to show respect conclusively. If there is a hard and fast rule of how to show respect, like say, proskynesis, there is no guessing who respects whom. Unlike in our proletarian world where people have to have big teary arguments at three in the morning in their thin-walled apartments about the lack of respect in their relationship.
January 26, 2010 at 7:20 pm
Why you shouldn’t be the grammar police, and how to get away with your mistakes » St. Eutychus
[…] an article that compares grammar experts with etiquette experts who make claims and then move the goal posts when someone […]
January 27, 2010 at 3:59 am
Craig Morris
Italians most certainly do eat spaghetti with a spoon. Greetings from Freiburg, Germany, a two-hour drive from Italy
January 27, 2010 at 7:03 am
Cecily
I think of manners as being concerned about other people’s comfort, so would include not eating with your mouth open or saying a new hat looks silly.
Etiquette on the other hand, is the set of arbitrary rules whose purpose is to help members of particular groups bond and, at least as importantly, identify outsiders, e.g. folding your napkin if you’re staying for another meal and scrunching it up if you will be departing.
January 27, 2010 at 11:19 am
TikiMexican
How did the Russians solve this problem?…. They used a pencil!
February 8, 2010 at 6:27 am
Tom S. Fox
“In the civilized world, which includes the United States and Italy, it is incorrect to eat spaghetti with a spoon. The definition of ‘civilized’ is a society that does not consider it correct to eat spaghetti with a spoon.”
Rarely have I seen such a blatant use of circular reasoning!