Even good form may be made too burdensome to be endured, and it is the privilege of conscientious Christian society to strike the happy medium between this oppressive formalism and the true kindly life which can cause even the violation of all form to be almost unnoticed.
It is better to have the good life without the good form than to have the good form without the good life; but it is our privilege, and duty as well, to have both.
In treating upon this subject it must not be forgotten that there are forms and forms. Each city aims to be a center of social good form for itself and its suburbs. Each has its own little peculiarities, as, for instance, its own manner of using visiting cards,—the size, shape, turning of the corners this way and that as signals; all of which differ according to the decree of the social leaders 98 of a great center of social influence; and yet the manners of one city would never be considered blunders in any other, however much they might differ, provided they were sincere, easy, adjustable, and dainty. It is not, however, considered elegant to ignore the customs of the people among whom you may visit. That which your hostess considers good form should be good to you while you are her guest, unless some principle is violated. Good form requires concessions to even ignorance without any of the “I-am-more-cultured-than-you” air.
Because of this diversity of forms it will be manifestly impossible for any one to know just what would be considered good form in every detail the world over. As in everything else which involves principles and their application, it is true in this, that if you know and appreciate the opportunities, and keep your eyes open, you will be able to avoid serious mistakes.
99
In reply to many questions of a miscellaneous character I bind a little sheaf of gleanings with which to conclude this subject of good form.
“When a gentleman friend of the family calls, is it proper for the wife to go on with her work, and not go to the parlor at all to welcome him, but to leave him to be entirely entertained by the husband? Or is it necessary that she go to the parlor, and remain during his visit? Would it be proper for her to leave the room during his visit without asking to be excused?”
First of all I wish to drop the remark that the word “gentleman” is not good form, as commonly used. It has been so perverted and misused that it does not in these days even mean that for which it was first intended,—a man of especially good manners. There are “gentlemen of the cloth,” “gentlemen of the turf,” “the gentleman of the road,” “the gentleman about town;”—all slang phrases, which have brought the word 100 into disrepute. The compound word “gentleman” was an effort upon the part of human society to make distinctions which the Creator had refused to recognize. He called man “MAN.” One can not be more than a man. Furthermore, the appropriation of the word “gentleman” by the “aristocracy,” the fact that in the social world there is a “gentleman class,” has made the expression inappropriate for universal application. Instead of speaking of your gentleman friend, speak of your man friend.
Therefore I will say in reply to my questioner that when a man friend calls upon the husband and family it is proper for the wife to occupy herself with some work kept at hand for such occasions; or, if necessary, after she has greeted him, and passed a few minutes pleasantly in conversation, she may excuse herself, and go to her household duties; but if she can do so, it is very cordial, and in every respect good form, for 101 her to take her work, and with some graceful word of apology, such as any man would appreciate, go on keeping her hands busy, while she assists in entertaining her husband’s friend. In leaving the room she should ask to be excused, unless the men are so occupied as to make it an interruption to do so. If she does not expect to return, however, she should make her adieus, and invite him to call again, before leaving the parlor.
“Is it admissible for a lady to keep on with her sewing or mending while she is entertaining a caller? Can she take some kind of fancy work with her while she is visiting a friend or neighbor?”
It is perfectly admissible for a woman to keep on with her sewing and mending while she is entertaining a caller, provided she speaks of it in some simple, graceful fashion. This is a much better means of manifesting your appreciation of a caller than to lay 102 aside necessary work and take some fancy article. You can even take your mending with you while visiting a friend and neighbor, and it will be appreciated more than fancy work. In many localities fancy work, especially for married women, has fallen into disfavor among even society people. There is a social cult which makes much of everything practical. It is a fad;—here to-day, gone to-morrow; but it has prepared the way for even a stocking-bag in the boudoir of some social queen: the stockings, of course, are supposed to be of the very finest texture and quality, and the darning in itself to be a piece of finest lace work; and yet under the cover of this supposition one can take a real serviceable hose and do good, practical work upon it.
“Should the hostess offer to take the hat of a gentleman caller? and where should she place it?”
103
If he does not at once make his hat at home, she should indicate where he can leave it. It is better form for her to suggest that he can hang it upon the hat rack or peg in the hall, or lay it on the table, if he does not seem to know that he can do so, than it would be to take it from him. If he has been properly instructed, as every boy should be at home, he will, without any effort upon her part, relieve her of the necessity of looking after his hat. But if he appears embarrassed by it, take it at once with some pleasant remark calculated to set him at ease, and place it where it ought to be. The proper place is in the hall, if there be a hall. Lacking this, any convenient place is in order.
“If a man friend happens to call when the husband is absent and the wife alone, should she invite him into the parlor and visit with him?”
104
Such a friend should so time his visits as to make reasonably sure that the man of the house would be at home, but if he fails to do so, it is the better way to inform him when the husband will return, and invite him to call again, provided this would be agreeable to both husband and wife. It is, however, bad form to say, “Come again,” when you mean, “Stay away;” very bad form for the wife to invite any one to call who would necessarily be disagreeable to the man of the house. In these days of moral contamination and prevalent gossip, good form is a conservator of good morals. Even as regards the wife’s relation to her pastor, if the husband is not a Christian, and, as often happens, dislikes ministers as a class, and makes a call anything but pleasant, common politeness requires that all pastoral visits shall include the husband.
105
“Where several are invited to a dinner, is it necessary for the men to escort the ladies to the table? or is it better for each to walk out independently?”
In relation to dinner manners, the hostess is expected to decide all forms for her company. If she wishes to make it very formal, she arranges just what man shall take out a certain woman. The couples will be so seated that a man and a woman will occupy alternate places. Every woman is expected to entertain first her own escort, and then to assist in entertaining the one who sits next her on the other side, and also occasionally to exchange a word with the one who sits opposite. It is not, however, expected that one will talk all over the table, nor that any one voice will command general attention until the table is cleared, and the after-dinner program is called.
“If two gentlemen with their wives should 106 be riding in one carriage, would it be proper for the husband and wife to be separated, and each gentleman sit with the other man’s wife?”
If married couples are riding together the most graceful thing is for the host and hostess to take a guest to entertain; either for the two men and the two women to sit together, or for the couples to exchange companions. It would be an exceedingly ungracious act for the host and hostess to sit together during the ride, thus leaving their guests to each other alone. In any country good form requires that husbands and wives should appreciate each other enough to consider that they are conferring a favor by giving others an opportunity to enjoy their society; and that they should at least seem to trust each other to be friendly to other men and women, even if they quarrel about it when they are alone. The appearance of suspicion is the most foul 107 of all bad forms; it is, in fact, the very stench from the body of moral death.
“Is it proper for a woman to call in company with her husband upon a man who lives alone?
“Is it proper for a lady to visit a sick man who is not a relative?”
It is suitable for a woman to accompany her husband anywhere. If the husband intends calling on a man who lives alone, it is a very neighborly act for his wife to accompany him. A feminine presence might brighten the home of a social hermit, and would surely be as a benediction to him if he were an invalid, or in trouble.
In visiting a sick man it would be better for two ladies to go together, provided no interested man friend or nurse could accompany them. Yet there might be cases where it would be necessary, and the only Christian thing, for a woman to call alone, if she 108 must, and render any necessary care. This should, however, be only in case of necessity. The general rule should be observed as far as possible, that men should care for men, and women for women.
“When leaving a reception, dinner, or any private entertainment, should one bid the hostess good night first before addressing the others? Or, if there are several ladies belonging to the house, would it be best to address the eldest lady first? I suppose it would be the same when entering the house. I would like to know what the rules are in regard to this, if there are any.”
The hostess takes precedence of all other members of the household for the time being. If a person is required by circumstances to take an early leave, and the hostess, as is sometimes the case, be occupied, it is admissible to address others first. Faultless manners require that if possible your personal arrangements should be such 109 that you can accommodate yourself to whatever exigencies may arise, so that without any stress or pressure of any sort, you can have time to wait for an opportunity to speak first to the hostess, and announce that you are taking your leave. Then the way is open for any informal leave-taking and preparations which you may have to make, reserving the last word for the host, at the door, unless indeed, as sometimes happens, he stands beside his wife at the leave-taking as well as the reception.
“Should the host offer to entertain the company himself with music, or should the visitors invite him to entertain them?”
This depends upon the kind of entertainment, the character of his visitors, and the proficiency of the host as a musician. If he is really a musician, and has something which he knows would give pleasure to the company, it would be expected that he 110 would favor them. A few words of introduction, not of himself, but of the music, would be appropriate; but it should be done in the most informal and unobtrusive manner possible.
“Should one recognize and bow to an acquaintance when upon the opposite side of the street? If one meets a person with whom she is but slightly acquainted and bows, then meets him again after an hour or so, is it necessary to recognize him and bow again? How should a lady do at the second meeting?”
In chancing to look up and recognize a familiar friend upon the opposite side of the street, a slight inclination of the head on the part of a woman is correct; on the part of a man or boy, touching or lifting the hat; but a vocal greeting at that distance would be bad form. It is not necessary to bow every time you meet in passing and repassing often during the day, although some sign of recognition 111 is always good; but when upon the first meeting during the day proper greetings have been duly exchanged, a slight inclination of the head, a touch of the hat, a cordial glance is sufficient. More could be made very tiresome if you were to meet often while about the day’s business.
“Is it good form to use a toothpick at the table?”
It is bad form to use a toothpick in any but the most private manner. Its public appearance is always repulsive. It should never be used as an article of table decoration. It is one of those necessary articles that can never be suggestive of anything appetizing or graceful; in fact, its suggestions are wholly of things concerning which one should be as reticent and retired as possible.
“Which is the better form,—to use the 112 fork in the right hand, leaving the knife lying upon the plate, or to take the fork in the left hand, and use the knife to push the food upon it? In short, in which hand should the fork properly be held, and what is the office of the knife at the table?”
The fork should always be used in the right hand, for cutting, taking up, and conveying food to the mouth, unless one is left-handed. In that case it should be used in the left hand. The knife should only be used for cutting what can not be cut with the fork, and when not in use, should lie on the plate. It has a very limited service at the table. It would be very awkward to use the knife to push food on to the fork, because it is entirely unnecessary.
“Should brothers and sisters call upon each other in their sleeping-rooms in connection with boarding-schools?”
Those who are old enough to go away to boarding-school should come under the same 113 regulations in such matters as any other men and women must observe. The bedroom is not designed as a reception-room. It has properly only one use. If it must for any reason be used as a study-room, yet the fact that it is a bedroom makes it unfit for a visiting place. It is furthermore the usual rule for two persons to occupy the same room in the school home, and manifestly immodest for sister or brother to intrude upon the privacy of these roommates. Besides these considerations the association of brothers and sisters should be upon the same plane of modest deportment as between any other man and woman. This should be taught the children in the home, and practised everywhere, for the purpose of education and training preparatory to meeting the conditions which exist in the world at large.
“Under what circumstances is it proper for young men and women to correspond 114 with each other? Where not allowable, give reasons.”
When a thorough acquaintance between a young man and woman has developed into that association which points to marriage, and when they must necessarily be separated, correspondence is right. Such correspondence should not, however, be considered too sacred to share with father and mother. Anything that can not be shared with a good parent is dangerous.
If there is good reason for confidence between the young people who are drawn toward each other, and yet who have had no good opportunity to become thoroughly acquainted, a correspondence for the purpose of acquaintance is admissible, although not wholly safe. To correspond with more than one at a time has every appearance of evil, and is too often just as evil as it can appear to be. Correspondence, excepting as it leads up to marriage, should be for business 115 only, as brief and formal as possible, and should stop short when its purpose has been served. A religious correspondence between young men and women is one of Satan’s most fruitful and profane devices.
“Should young ladies at school be permitted to receive calls from young men? If so, under what circumstances?”
There should be connected with the young women’s home of every school a parlor, open and public to all at all times. In such an apartment young ladies in school should be able to receive calls, under proper chaperonage and advice from those who have them in charge. Promiscuous calling would be bad form, and dangerous to reputation.
“Is it best for young men and young women to do missionary work for each other?”
The only way in which they can do missionary 116 work for each other is in each one making of him and herself the very best representative of everything that is best and truest in good manners, according to the divine model, and then leave the detail work for young men to men, and for young women to women. Any man who must be led to Christ by some woman, instead of some good, brotherly man, can never be saved. Any woman who can not be helped by some sister woman, or mother in Israel, can never be helped.
“Is it proper for a company of young people to go out on a camping expedition for several days, even with a chaperon?”
This would depend on the character of the company. One chaperon would not be sufficient for a company of young men and young women. There should be chaperons,—a man for the young men, and a woman for the young women; and if 117 the company is large, there should be a sufficient number of elderly companions to give them all necessary protection and support in the enjoyment of the occasion. There could be no reason why a select party of young people, properly accompanied, should not enjoy an outing of this description. But in such a case it would be not only bad form, but criminal, for any young man or woman to take advantage of the occasion to break over any of the protective regulations upon which all should agree before starting out. Common politeness and good sense would lead each to co-operate with all to secure the most perfect good order in the camp from beginning to end, by daylight and dark.
“Is it proper for young people to take moonlight rides together?”
A moonlight ride for a company of young people, accompanied by fathers and mothers, 118 or teachers, or suitable friends of mature age, would certainly be proper and enjoyable. Under no other circumstances.
“What would you say to a young man who would stand around and talk with a young woman while she is at work?”
That he was indulging in a very rustic and childish procedure, impolite in the highest degree, necessarily hindering and prolonging the work of the young woman, and perhaps complicating all the affairs of the day. What would I say to him?—That he had better go and finish his work while I finish mine, and then if he has really anything to say, come to the family sitting-room, at some suitable time, and we will talk it over.
“What is the best way for a woman to meet indecent remarks or actions from a man? Should she ‘scorch’ him, or slap him in the face?”
119
Neither. To take the slightest notice of him or of his remarks is to give the man the advantage. At such a time as this rudeness would not be good form. The only safe course would be to ignore him as you would the buzz of the locust in the tree, or the sound of the cable along the track of the car line. You are obliged to be conscious of its presence, but you go on your way, just the same, and let ............