Modern Manners

In a casual café, where a cup of tea is served with the tea bag in the cup (sometimes with the hot water in a side teapot!), how/where does one dispose of the tea bag after it is used? The saucer is a bit messy, but there is often nowhere else. I suppose the answer would be to patronise only those establishments which offer real tea in teapots, but it’s not always possible to know this in advance. Mary Body, Newcastle, Australia



Scorching Saint Martha, Patron Saint of tea-makers. If no receptacle for the tea-bag is provided, i dunk the dead package on my saucer and grumble. I cannot drink the tea with the bag still in, because it tickles my nose and makes me dribble. We could drop the tea-bag in an ashtray, which is about to become an obsolete object in our smoke-free caffs. We could ask the harassed waitress for a spare saucer for dead tea-bags. If we could summon up the cash, we could patronise a classier tea joint, where a slop-dish comes automatically with the cucumber sandwiches and scones and cream. But such a place would scorn the humble but useful tea-bag.

What is a suitable present for my godchild at christening? Anne-Marie Blacklock, Ealing

The traditional Victorian christening present is a prayer book or a bible. The more wordldly present is a silver mug, hairbrush or napkin ring. The fiscally prudent christening present is premium bonds or some other long-maturing dosh. The bibulous present is a pipe of port or case of clarent, to mature over the next 21 years. I tend to give godchildren a collected works of Shakespeare or Horace, costly its habit as my purse can buy.

What is the polite response (a) if somebody else belches or breaks wind in front of you; (b) If you do so yourself? Colin Anderson, Glasgow

Your reaction depends on your relationship with the belcher or farter. Small boys shriek with laughter, and imitate these taboo acts/accidents. The traditional English response is to carry on as if nothing had happened, without batting an eyelid. The sly response is to blame the dog. Lapdogs were invented by Restoration ladies at court for this purpose. Feisty used to mean farting. A feisty lapdog excused many an accidental taboo act. Good friends may apologise sheepishly to each other, and move on.

I find going into and leaving a hotel, or classroom, etc. and getting on and off a bus or train is a frequent problem for those schooled in “correct etiket”. The Chinese here just seem to barge in, push and shove, and show no respect for others. I often say, in both English and Chinese: “those getting off/coming out go first”. The Chinese consider this nothing more than a “foreigner exerting himself” and it is met by highly derisory statements or even raucous laughter. Your comments, please. Robert L Hunt, Shenzhen, China

The British pride themselves on being orderly and disciplined queuers. This opinion arises, I think, from a passion for fairness in queueing for rations during the Second World War. It is unhistorical. Carlyle, 1837: “That talent of spontaneously standing in queue distinguishes the French People.” This is the first recorded citation of the word “queue”. When in Shenzhen, do as Shenzhen does. Except in counterproductive herd behaviour such as barging into a bus before others have got off. I doubt whether it is wise, prudent or effective to lecture other races in their own country about their social mores. They might suspect that we are superior and patronising Westerners. For which, Absit Omen, Confucius Forbid.

With reference to your dictum on the pronunciation of “kilometre” (Modern Manners, February 6) why is it “linguistic snobbery” to stress the first syllable? Surely it is logical and consistent with the normal pronunciation of other metric units? Of course language changes, but in this case the majority’s preference is wrong. Any analogy with words such as “thermometer” is false. Which syllable is stressed in “millimetre”, “centimetre”and “kilogram”? Michael Burling, London

Well, I agree with all that. But language is not logical or consistent. Of course the analogy with thermometer is false. But that has not stopped the majority following the false analogy. There comes a stage when it is pretentious and snobbish to persist in the “correct” pronunciation, while the rest of the nation ignorantly mispronounces. Other examples of “correct” but dead pronuniciations are ‘Otel and Garaaage. False analogy tends to win the tug-of-war with etymologically correct elocution. To persist in the “correct” pronunciation enunciates: “I am a very superior person, who knows my keelos from my killers.” This is not a message that is sensible (or even polite?) to emit.

With regards to the removal of shoes, when entering a home (Modern Manners, February 6): In Norway it is customary to remove one’s shoes when entering a home. The reason for this is entirely practical: much of the year, you wear heavy winter boots or shoes which are uncomfortable indoors. Also, they are often muddy and/or wet and you don’t want to ruin your host’s rug. Exceptions to this are a) festive shoes (of the dry, clean variety) and b) shoes worn on dry summer days. In the latter case it is polite to ask first if it is OK to keep your shoes on. It is also considered very bad manners for ladies to wear heels of the metal kind, which will ruin anyone’s wooden parquet floor (we tend not to have carpeted floors). E Nicolaysen, Oslo, Norway

Of course you are right. In muddy Suffolk, Darkest Ayrshire, and even tidy Highgate, I remove muddy shoes before entering somebody’s house. I will do the same when I visit Norway in the snow and mud. So I try to wear cheerful striped socks that are clean and without holes. We must play this shoe business by ear, taking into account the climate, the customs of the house, and the state of our shoes. It is still unconventional in British cities to remove one’s shoes before coming in. Note the obsolete English custom of wearing galoshes, spats and other outdoor footwear to protect one’s shoes from the mud. It is unkind to except elegant ladies to remove their Manolo Blahnik high heels, which are meant to make a swanky statement.

Not so much a question, more an observation in response to the question regarding removing of footwear (Modern Manners, February 6). In Japan and many countries around the Pacific Rim, it is customary to remove one’s shoes immediately upon entering the house. There is a special area of the hall set aside (the -genkan-) to do this, and it is considered offensive to one’s hosts not to remove one’s shoes upon entering a house. It may be that the idea of “shoes off on entering” is spreading from the Far East as people return from working there. To be quite honest I’ve taken my shoes off as soon as I’ve returned home for a long time, and, although I’m not rabid about guests doing the same, I do prefer them to remove their shoes. I don’t really want mud and dirt tramped through my house. Simon Ellis, Hindley



I agree. When in Tokyo, do as Tokyo does. In London I take off my shoes when entering the house of a Japanese or Indian friend. And when coming home at the end of a hard day at the work laboratory. But I probably won’t at Buckingham Palace, when I am invited there. I am waiting for the invitation. Though I am sure that the Queen would not flicker an eyelid if I took my shoes off. She might even take her own off in order to make me feel comfortable. We should do what makes our guests feel at home with us. We should not impose our prejudices and fetishes on other people.