Hugh Grant’s low-key interview on the red carpet at this year’s Oscars ceremony once again highlights a quintessentially British characteristic, which stands out all the more when offset against the upbeat, enthusiastic and endlessly positive hype that surrounds the awards.
The British are increasingly exposed to other cultural influences, through all forms of media, and are gradually becoming more demonstrative and effusive. But only up to a point. Understatement is still a cultural norm in Britain and is seen as an attractive characteristic, synonymous with good manners. It has emerged from centuries of exacting training in drawing room etiquette. British gentlemen were encouraged to be modest about their achievements and were taught that boastfulness and arrogance were deeply unattractive traits. Instead, they were taught to deflect the conversation from themselves, and to show an unwavering interest in other people. Ladies were also taught that the most attractive characteristic they could possess was a becoming modesty – assertiveness, frivolity, loquaciousness were all deplored.
Understatement, which resolutely refuses to succumb to drama, excitement, or high emotion, goes hand in hand with another very British characteristic, the stiff upper lip, an imperturbable refusal to react histrionically to tragedy and disaster.
The most common manifestation of understatement is a determination to downplay achievements or feelings in a very self-deprecating way. This is often accompanied by a stubborn refusal to be swept along by hyperbole or overwrought emotions. Often this leads – as in the Oscar example – to a strange dance of misunderstanding. Faced with a resolutely deprecating master of understatement, a desperate interlocutor may respond with increasingly frantic assertions of approbation and affirmation. These in turn are met with yet more dogged downplaying. Onlookers may well conclude that the master of understatement is being rude, but this is not the case. The truth is that self-deprecation is a deeply ingrained part of his/her character which simply cannot be erased or concealed.
Sometimes British understatement is undeniably humorous: a famous example is the Monty Python sketch where the Grim Reaper turns up at a suburban dinner party and insists that all the guests accompany him. “Well”, one of the party guests remarks, “that’s cast rather a gloom over the evening hasn’t it?”
But understatement isn’t always deployed to raise a laugh; it permeates British speech. Conversation is littered with provisional qualifications, such as ‘quite’, ‘rather’, ‘a bit’, ‘I wonder’, ‘would you mind’, which are used all the time to downplay what are seen as over-dramatic or over-definitive statements. ‘Not bad’ is high praise, and ‘not bad at all’ is positively euphoric. You can be sure that if someone is ‘rather unpleasant’ they are verging on psychopathic. Commenting that someone is ‘quite talented’ is an acknowledgment of near genius. Extreme tentativeness characterizes direct requests: ‘I wonder, would you mind moving? I think that’s my seat’ means ‘Get out of my seat!’
Nowhere is this more apparent than in talk about the weather: ‘a bit nippy’ is considered an appropriate description of sub-zero temperatures, ‘rather damp’ describes a monsoonal downpour, ‘quite a stiff breeze’ denotes a gale-force wind.
Understatement inevitably leads to misunderstandings. Saying a piece of work is ‘not bad at all’, when you mean that it’s really very good, won’t always convey the requisite level of enthusiasm and affirmation. Similarly, telling a plumber that you’ve ‘got a bit of an issue with the pipes’ when you’re confronted with a rising flood and imminent ceiling collapse may not express sufficient urgency.
Above all, when you’re confronted by this British trait, don’t make the mistake of confusing understatement with under-reaction – remember to read between the lines and you’ll find the missing drama and emotion.
The British love affair with horses and horse-racing is well-established. The stately progression through the winter jump racing season and the summer flat racing season marks out the sporting and social calendar for many devotees and – whatever the time of year or nature of the event – is an intriguing mixture of many recognisable British traits: an enthusiasm for sporting competition; a passion for all things equestrian; a delight in opportunities to dress up and cut a dash; a pleasure in socialising and conviviality.
The three jewels in the crown of the National Hunt (or jump racing) season – which runs from mid-October to the end of April – are the King George VI chase at Kempton Park (26 December). The Cheltenham Festival (14–17 March) and the Grand National (15 April).
Jump races can be broadly divided into steeplechases and hurdle races. In steeplechases, run over distances from 2-4½ miles, horses must jump fixed fences, which are at least 4½ft high. In hurdle races, run over distances from 2-3½ miles, horses jump smaller, less rigid obstacles, at least 3½ft high, which often collapse when hit by a jumping horse.
The Cheltenham Festival is a feast of horseracing in March, featuring fourteen grade one races over four days and bringing the best horses, trainers and jockeys in the business together. The excitement is palpable, and the huge crowds are abuzz with anticipation as the festival launches – don’t miss the loud cheers from the crowd, known as the Cheltenham Roar, which ring out before the starter raises the tape for the first race of the festival.
The festival starts with Champions Day, which features the most important hurdles race of the season while Festival Wednesday features the Betway Queen Mother Champion Chase – an invigorating spectacle of a two-mile dash over Cheltenham’s famous fences. This is also Ladies’ Day, and there are awards for the Best Dressed Lady, Best Accessories and Best Hat.
On St Patrick’s Thursday Cheltenham takes on a distinctly Irish flavour, focusing on the Ryanair Steeple Chase. The day is a celebration of all things Irish and a chance for Cheltenham’s famous Irish contingent to celebrate. The Cheltenham Festival Prestbury Cup is the competition between the English and Irish to see who will have the most winners overall throughout the festival. It has seen a great rivalry between the home team of British-trained runners and those that have crossed the Irish Sea to compete.
Friday, Gold Cup Day, is the culmination of the festival, and the highlight of the jump racing season; the title is universally coveted by jockeys and trainers alike. It is open to horses aged five and over and is also the most valuable non-handicap chase in Britain, offering a total prize fund of £625,000 in 2023. It was first run in 1924, with a prize of £685 for the winner. Six other races, including two more Grade 1 events and three fiercely competitive handicaps, make this a truly exciting race day.
• Before the races visit the parade ring, you can see the and watch the jockeys, trainers and owners discussing tactics before the jockeys mount their horses and are led out onto the racecourse.
• Look out for a good muscle tone, shiny coat, bright eyes, a relaxed walk. Avoid horses who are agitated or sweating profusely.
• Once the horses have left the parade ring, you’ll have about five minutes to place your bets. Look at the bookies’ boards and find the best value bets. Winnings can be collected at any time after the race, there is no time limit.
• After the race visit the Winners Enclosure. The first four horses to finish will return there, with the winner arriving last and the atmosphere is highly charged with excitement and celebration. You’ll be able to watch the trophy presentation before the next race.
There is no strict dress code at Cheltenham. The weather is always unpredictable – balmy spring days frequently alternate with driving rain or freezing cold March winds, so the main priority is to ensure you are warm, dry and comfortably shod. Nevertheless, it is undoubtedly possible to prioritise comfort and still look smart or striking, so now is the time to forego your battered all-weather gear and opt for a more coordinated and elegant appearance.
Ladies: Choose a cosy tweed or woollen coat, with a hat and complementary accessories, such as a warm cashmere scarf or wrap and matching bag. Stylish fedoras, trilbies, berets or faux fur hats are all good choices, and some striking feathers in the headband will add a touch of interest and glamour. However, hats are not de rigueur.
You can team your coat with a tweed skirt and long boots, or even a smart pair of jeans. Merino or cashmere layers under your coat will ensure that you don’t get chilled to the bone. Remember that you run the risk of getting bogged down in waterlogged ground, so opt for low or chunky heels, or classic flats.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking that you will look more glamorous in scanty summery clothes – you will be freezing cold and shivering and goose bumps are never a good look. Save your summer dresses for the flat racing season and embrace winter chic.
Men: The key item is the coat – choose a well-tailored tweed coat or traditional covert coat, with a warm wool or cashmere scarf. Alternatively, you can opt for a tweed suit in rustic shades of brown, khaki or green, and layer up with a cosy fine knit or cashmere sweater. Choose smart boots or brogues and top off your outfit with a tweed flat cap or Baker Boy hat.
The wedding is over, the honeymoon a distant memory, and you’re ready to launch yourself into the world as a married couple. You will also need to make decisions about how you want to be addressed. Here are some simple recommendations to help you negotiate the post-marriage minefield:
• When introducing your partner to a group of friends (at a party for example), always indicate the marital relationship (“This is my wife Marian”, “This is my husband James”, or “This is my partner Eleanor”). This will avert any potential social embarrassment (unsolicited flirting, slighting remarks about the partner when they’ve left the social circle, and so on).
• Try to cut loose in social situation and don’t develop a clinging over-dependence on your spouse.
Traditionally, married couples were always seated apart at formal dinner parties, except for during their first year of marriage. This convention reflected the willingness of society to see married couples as two individuals, rather than a unit that is joined at the hip. These long-established formalities now no longer prevail, but you can still take the initiative and socialise freely,
• Keep your eyes open for people who are on their own, and make sure they don’t feel excluded by couples.
• Be careful that your body language isn’t sending the wrong message. Handholding, touching, or huddling together will broadcast that you’re an impregnable couple, with no interest in anyone else. Concentrate on looking outwards, not turning inwards.
• Don’t use pet names in public or litter your conversation with endearments. This kind of language is very exclusive; it is guaranteed to make the people around you feel like spare parts. While it is certainly important to ‘claim’ your marital relationship, this can be done very discreetly, with a passing reference to your ‘wife’, ‘husband’ or ‘partner’.
Both opposite and same-sex couples are now entitled to change their names on marriage. They can opt to retain their original surnames, or the couple can create their own double-barrelled surname by using both of their original surnames. Men have the same rights as women to take their partner’s surname.
The British marriage certificate states the surnames of the parties prior to their marriage and is the only supporting evidence required for either party, or both, to change their surname. The same applies to civil partnership certificates.
If the couple adopts a double-barrelled name that does not derive from their surnames, a change of name by deed poll is required.
Name changes are not an inevitable part of being married, and many couples will choose to retain their own surnames. Women may also decide that they do not want to be distinguished by a pronoun that denotes their married status and opt to use ‘Ms’ instead.
Traditionally, invitations to private functions were addressed solely to the wife. If an invitation was to a public function, it was conventionally addressed to the husband and sent to his official address. These old-fashioned customs reflect a long-vanished age, when wives were firmly in charge of the domestic sphere, and husbands went out into the professional world to work. Today, it is expected that social invitations will be sent to both the husband and wife for both private and public functions.
Conventionally, a husband and wife were addressed as Mr and Mrs John Debrett. However, many wives today find this form of address demeaning and do not like feeling subsumed into by the husband’s name, even if they have chosen to use it. They may, therefore, opt for the following forms, in descending order of formality:
Mr and Mrs Debrett
Mr John and Mrs Mary Debrett (conventionally the male partner appears first)
John and Mary Debrett (it is quite acceptable to reverse the order in which these forenames appear – Mary and John Debrett)
Same-sex couples can choose from the following forms:
Mr James and Mr Owen Sackville
Ms* Emma and Ms* Caroline Meadows
James and Owen Sackville
Emma and Caroline Meadows
*Women may choose to both use ‘Mrs’ to denote their married state
Couples with professional titles should use the following form:
The Reverend William and Mrs Sarah Parker
Mr William and The Reverend Sarah Parker
Dr Michael and Mrs Elizabeth Summers
Mr Michael and Dr Elizabeth Summers
If they are being invited to an event in an official capacity, then the invitee with the relevant professional status should be named first.
Image: Princess Elizabeth, as she was then, and Princess Margaret at a rehearsal for their father's coronation in 1937.
Since George V issued Letters Patent in December 1917, the rules, in the UK at least, as to who can be called Prince or Princess have been very clear. With an eye on an ever-expanding family and his German relatives, where the world and his wife were allowed the honour, King George decided instead to restrict the style and the use of HRH to immediate members of the Royal Family only.
The Letters Patent specifically states:
"…that the children of any Sovereign of the United Kingdom and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian name…"
With this ruling his great-grandchildren, and the children of his daughter, would no longer be allowed to use HRH nor would they be styled Prince or Princess. This was the first time a Letters Patent actively restricted the usage of royal titles in the male line. George V did not, at this time, have grandchildren.
A few months before this ruling, on 17 July 1917, George V had also changed the name of the Royal Family from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, to the House of Windsor. During the First World War, many felt uncomfortable with the Royal Family’s connection to Germany. The King’s change of the Royal family name, the relinquishment of German titles and styles, and the restriction of who could and could not be HRH and Prince/Princess was one way of distancing the Family from the aggressor. In compensation, British peerages were awarded to various cousins who complied with this order, such as Louis of Battenburg, who became Louis Mountbatten, 1st Marquess of Milford Haven.
There are two ways one can become a Princess in the UK: by marriage or by birth. The only way to become a Prince in this country is to be born one. Archie, the only son of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, was not styled a Prince at birth, as he was then a great-grandson of the monarch. Since the late Queen’s death in September, however, and with his grandfather’s accession to the throne, he now falls under the 1917 ruling and can be styled Prince Archie of Sussex, if he so chooses.
When Catherine Middleton married Prince William in 2011, she did not become Princess Catherine – she became Princess William of Cambridge, or more commonly, the Duchess of Cambridge. The Queen awarding the dukedom to Prince William on the occasion of his marriage meant Catherine was not referred to as Princess William until her husband became The Prince of Wales.
Similarly, when Meghan Markle married Prince Harry in 2018, she did not take on the style of Princess Henry because of the Queen’s gift of the dukedom of Sussex to her grandson. And Sophie did not take the style of Princess Edward because of the Earldom of Wessex.
However, this does not apply to daughters born into the Royal Family. When Charlotte was born in 2015 she was automatically styled Princess Charlotte because the late Queen had already issued Letters Patent extending the scope of the 1917 ruling to all the Cambridge children:
"The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 31 December 2012 to declare that all the children of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of Royal Highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour."
The Sussex children were not, while the late Queen was alive, entitled to use the style of Prince or Princess but once their grandfather became King, they as grandchildren of the monarch, were automatically afforded the style of HRH and Prince/Princess. They do not have to use these styles, and given that their parents no longer use HRH, it is likely that they will follow suit.
There are other examples of non-use of the style of Prince/Princess within the current Royal Family. The Wessex children, as children of the son of a monarch could have been style Prince James and Princess Louise. Instead, in consultation with the late Queen, their parents decided they should use the styles of children of a peer. In other words, James would use his father’s secondary title, Viscount Severn, and Louise, would be styled Lady Louise:
The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.
Press Release - Saturday 19th June, 1999
Currently, in the UK, only 24 people would use the title Prince or Princess. It is an exclusive club, surely what George V wanted when he signed the Letters Patent back in 1917.
The Prince of Wales
The Princess of Wales (Princess William of Wales)
Prince George of Wales
Princess Charlotte of Wales
Prince Louis of Wales
The Duke of Sussex (Prince Henry of Sussex)
The Duchess of Sussex (Princess Henry of Sussex)
Prince Archie of Sussex
Princess Lilibet of Sussex
The Duke of York
Princess Beatrice of York
Princess Eugenie of York
The Princess Royal
The Earl of Wessex (Prince Edward of Wessex)
The Countess of Wessex (Princess Edward of Wessex)
Viscount Severn
Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor
Duke of Kent
Duchess of Kent
Prince Michael of Kent
Princess Michael of Kent
Princess Alexandra
Duke of Gloucester
Duchess of Gloucester
Note: When Sarah Ferguson married Prince Andrew in 1986, she became a princess by marriage. Since her divorce in 1996, however, she lost the right to use HRH and has been known as The Duchess of York and should not be referred to by any other style.
As we celebrate International Women’s Day we have been leafing through an 18th-century guide to etiquette to gain some fresh insights into how the women who lived generations before us were expected to behave. The Lady’s Companion, an Infallible Guide to the Fair Sex, by ‘A Lady’, 1743, is typical of many of the etiquette books that catered for teenaged girls who were just about to be launched into society. It takes a high moral tone and is loaded with repressive admonitions. High standards of behaviour and compliance are demanded of young women, who above all are expected to be becomingly modest, meek and unassuming.
The anonymous writer of the Guide also seems to be alarmed by the ‘degenerate age’ in which she lives (a perennial concern) and is anxious above all to safeguard young women’s virtue, with dire warnings about the dangers of bold and flirtatious behaviour, vanity and – heaven forbid – drunkenness. She abhors any signs from women that they are behaving like men and insists that, above all, they should be obedient in all things to their parents and guardians.
The sheer volume and weight of the restrictive advice that is ladled out to young women must be shocking for their 21st-century descendants. It is a vivid reminder of how much society has changed and how deeply ingrained attitudes have been eradicated over the last two centuries allowing us to reassess and reinvent our notions of gender and all that it entails.
“Modesty [is] a Guider and Regulator of all decent and comely Carriage and Behaviour… and is the great Civilizer of Conversations… It appears in the Face in calm and meek Looks, where it so impresses itself, that it gives the greatest Lustre to a Feminine Beauty. Modesty… banishes all Indecency and Rudeness, all insolent Vauntings, and supercilious Disdains, and whatever else may render a Person troublesome, or ridiculous to Company… It restrains all excessive Talkativeness.”
Modesty is revered above all virtues because it is seen as a way of reining in any ‘dangerous’ impulses – self-assertiveness and talkativeness are seen as ‘troublesome’ and ‘ridiculous’ in a young woman. There is a general sense that any displays of strong character (firmly held opinions, confidently expressed) will be entirely injurious to the reputation, proving a fatal impediment to prospects of marriage, the ultimate goal.
“Such a degenerate Age do we live in, that every Thing seems inverted, even Sexes, whilst Men fall into the Effeminacy and Niceness of Women, and Women take up the Confidence, the Boldness of Men… Vices of Men are carefully copied by some Women, who think they have not made a sufficient Escape from their Sex, ‘till they can be as daringly wicked as the other… And when to this a Woman adds the Sin of Drunkenness, nothing that is human approaches so near a Beast. She who is first a Prostitute to Wine, will soon be to Lust also.”
It is scarcely surprising in these constricted circumstances that young women might aspire to the swagger and panache characteristic of young men, but the ‘Lady’ is thoroughly alarmed by the prospect of young women becoming more like men – boldness, spirit and self-assurance are repudiated, and there is an implication that taking on these characteristics will soon lead to ‘wickedness’ – succumbing to the temptations of alcohol and lust.
“The Female Sex ought to maintain a Behaviour toward Men, which may be secure to themselves without offending them. No ill-bred affected Shyness, nor a Roughness, unsuitable to their Sex, and unnecessary to their Virtue, but a Way of living that may prevent all Cause of Railleries or unmannerly Freedoms; Looks that forbid without Rudeness, and oblige without Invitation, or leaving room for the saucy Inferences Men’s Vanity suggests to them upon the least Encouragement.”
As if the above-mentioned remonstrances were not enough, young ladies are firmly instructed about their behaviour towards men and are told in no uncertain terms that the way in which they behave (boldness, flirtatiousness) may lead to ‘saucy inferences’ and ‘unmannerly freedoms’. In other words, men are, according to the ‘Lady’, vain enough to respond to the least encouragement, and are likely to misinterpret young ladies’ behaviour. This is dangerous territory, as it has the potential to lead to sexual scandal and a devastating loss of reputation. Yet young ladies are not seen as victims of predatory males; instead, they are told that it is their own demure behaviour that should control and repress lascivious intent.
“Youth is apt to be foolish in its Designs, and heady in the Pursuit of them; and there can be nothing more deplorable than to have it left to itself. Children are under the Guidance and Protections of their parents, ‘till, by the maturing of their Judgements, they are qualified to be their own Conductors.”
It would be a rare young woman in the 18th century who asserted her own will over that of her parents. Etiquette guides such as The Lady’s Companion reflect societal norms in the ways in which they condescend to young people, dismissing them as foolish, impulsive and misguided. There is an assumption that in all things they must be guided, directed and, in effect, controlled by their parents and guardians.
“Affability and Courtesy are, without doubt, amiable in all, but more especially in the Fair-Sex, and more necessary to them than to the other; for Men have often Charges and Employments which justify, nay, perhaps, require somewhat of Sternness and Austerity, but Women ordinarily have few or no Occasions of it.”
The “Lady” is under no illusions about the roles of the sexes in 18th-century society. She pragmatically points out that men go out into the world, take on great responsibilities and difficult challenges, and on these somewhat dubious grounds may be excused a certain “sternness”, but women do not have this excuse, living quietly as they do within the confines of the domestic sphere. They must therefore be ‘affable’ and courteous, countering any ‘austerity’ (bad temper) displayed by men.
“Women should let every seven Years make some Alteration in them towards the graver Side, and not be like the Girls of fifty, who resolve to be always young, whatever Time with his Iron Teeth determines to the contrary...the Liveliness of Youth in a riper Age, looks like a new Patch upon an old Gown.”
Most of the ‘Lady’s’ advice is for younger women but she does not spare the older representatives of her sex, roundly condemning them for their determination to be “always young” and resist the “iron teeth” of time. Her contempt is reserved for older women’s behaviour rather than their appearance, and she clearly feels that their attempts to ape the “liveliness of youth” are unseemly and inappropriate. Apparently, the implacable grip of convention was not reserved solely for the young, but continued to be applied as women aged, ensuring that they complied with generally accepted social expectations.
While we all aspire to socialise with ease and panache, the reality is that most of us have experienced moments of crass social ineptitude, awkward pauses, jokes that fall flat or mis-timed interjections.
This can lead to feelings of social awkwardness – shyness and nerves, an inability to pick up on social cues, a tendency to overthink or regret things you have said, and a feeling that people don’t really enjoy talking to you and do their best to avoid you.
Most people experience moments of self-doubt about socialising, but if you feel self-consciousness is blighting your encounters and impeding your ability to function socially, try the following:
Every day you will meet people who offer you a service (in shops, cafés, on public transport, delivering goods to your home etc). It is part of their job to be approachable and affable and they will therefore be receptive to your overtures and appreciative of your friendliness. Even if all you do is exchange a few pleasantries (observations about the weather – that great British standby – are an excellent default), you will gradually feel more at ease about chatting to strangers and less convinced that your attempts at small talk are going to end in disaster.
Concentrate on listening carefully when other people are talking. Focus on what they are saying and don’t spend all your time feeling distracted because you are trying to think of a witty or fascinating response.
Practise being an audible listener – that means making an occasional short and encouraging interjection like ‘really?’ or ‘how terrible!’ or ‘I can’t believe he said that!’, but don’t overdo it. If the person you are talking to seems to be running out of steam, re-start the conversation by asking a relevant and penetrating question.
All these techniques will ensure that people you converse with will feel truly heard and understood and will enjoy your engagement. All too often, people can leave a social encounter feeling that nobody has really attended to what they’ve been saying, so your obvious signs of interest will make you both memorable and appreciated.
Everyone responds positively to empathy, which is the cornerstone of satisfying human relationships. One simple way of coming across as empathetic is to monitor and mirror other people’s emotions – it will make them feel both closely observed and understood, but it will also ensure that you won’t make elementary social blunders such as laughing at an inappropriate time, or interjecting lugubriously when someone is trying to be light and amusing. Taking your lead from other people will compensate for any deficiencies in your social antennae.
Reinforce feelings of empathy by seeking similarities and pointing them out (‘That’s just how I felt when gave my first presentation!’ or ‘I’m just like you, I can’t stand shellfish!’). This technique may seem crude and obvious, but everyone is seeking ways of bonding socially and will welcome helpful pointers.
Everyone loves to be complimented and if you can manage to do so without sounding clunky or artificial it will certainly oil the wheels of social intercourse. Try and avoid bland generalities (“You look well!”) and concentrate on specifics (“I love the colour of your dress, it really suits you”). Try and be spontaneous and genuine when you offer compliments. Be careful about getting too personal when it comes to appearance and don’t stray into danger areas – “have you lost weight?” can be a counterproductive compliment as it tends to imply that the person needed to do so.
Compliments, while much appreciated, can sometimes lead to an awkward hiatus in the conversation, so it can be helpful if you move swiftly on, rather than waiting for the complimented person to react.
That said, if you receive a compliment, simply smile and say thank you. Don’t simper and don’t denigrate yourself. Never retaliate with a knee-jerk compliment back, which will sound false and self-serving.
Firstly, remind yourself that there will always be natural lulls in conversation, so don’t go immediately into panic mode. Resist the temptation to fire off a barrage of random questions in a hysterical attempt to re-boot the exchange. A more congenial way of dealing with conversational hiatuses is to acknowledge that they have happened. If, for example, someone has told a funny anecdote and a lull occurs after the laughter has died down, it might be helpful to acknowledge it by saying “well, there’s not much anyone can say after that!”. If you feel a particular subject is exhausted, recognise it by saying “There’s really not much more we can say about that is there?” or “I’m sorry, I’ve clearly been rendered speechless!” Commenting on the lacunae in your own conversation can create feelings of affinity and connection.
Self-control and thinking carefully before you speak will prevent you blurting out something inappropriate or out of context (eg mentioning a stomach upset in polite society, referring to a salacious bit of scandal in front of a person who is related to the perpetrator, or airing robust political views when you are with people who emphatically do not share them). You might be someone who has no boundaries and has a tendency to talk openly and revealingly to new acquaintances, who are disconcerted by your revelations.
Remember past gaffes and indiscretions, take a deep breath and wait a couple of seconds before you speak – that should give you enough time to filter out inappropriate remarks.
While conflict, provocation and indiscretion can all contribute to memorable conversations, as a rule it is best to play safe when you first meet people and test out their tolerances and sensitivities by avoiding these topics:
• Private matters like relationships, personal finance, mental health, or family issues
• Taboo and controversial issues like religion, politics, gossip, body parts, or sex
• Strong or overbearing opinions
• Negative comments about other people
• Excessively deep emotional sharing (especially in the early stages of a friendship or relationship)
If your filter isn’t functioning properly and you get into deep water, pull yourself up short and laugh at yourself (“sorry, I don’t know where I was going with that!”, “oh dear, please ignore me, I’m rambling!”).
Socialising is a delicate dance: when you first meet people you may find the conversation tends towards the bland and innocuous, but this is a safe and gentle way of establishing contact and getting to know them. If you make a connection, you can take it further and push the boundaries. If you don’t connect, you can simply move on.
Major rites of passage can pose an etiquette dilemma for divorced couples, their family and friends. While there are few social strictures nowadays relating to the rituals surrounding births, marriages and deaths, it is important to exercise discretion, and ensure that your behaviour does not cause offence.
These critical stages in our life’s journey can bring the breakdown of a marriage into sharp relief. For some couples they offer a chance to reposition, yet find a role for, divorced spouses. For others, these occasions simply reinforce the separation, and there is no desire to integrate divorced spouses into proceedings. There is no right or wrong way of dealing with major rites of passage; whatever the choice, however, divorced couples should do their best to communicate openly and to behave in ways that have been mutually agreed.
If you have managed to maintain civilised relations with your partner during the divorce proceedings, you might find yourself invited to the christening (or naming ceremony) of his/her baby with a new partner. Your ex-partner may be inviting the children from his/her first marriage and feel that it is appropriate to include you in this family celebration.
If you receive an invitation, clinically examine your own feelings about the new baby. If you are forced to admit to yourself that you see this new child is an interloper, liable to supplant your own children, then you are nursing feelings of animosity and bitterness that you may find yourself powerless to conceal on the big day. It might be best to politely refuse the invitation – simply write a short note, thanking the hosts for their kind invitation, and explaining that unfortunately you are unable to attend. You don’t need to explain your refusal. If you want to mitigate the impact of your non-attendance you can always send a small christening gift.
Even if you can’t face the prospect of the christening, accept that your children may be very excited about their new half-sibling, and do everything you can to ensure that they are able to participate.
If you decide to go, take a back seat and don’t upstage the parents. Wear a discreet outfit, don’t thrust yourself into the front row for group photographs, don’t make a performance of your good relations with your former in-laws. Behave impeccably, admire the baby extravagantly, and make sure you don’t get drunk and embittered.
Traditionally ex-partners weren’t invited to remarriages, but social customs have become more fluid, and you may find yourself on the guest list. If the whole notion of the remarriage makes you feel ill, politely refuse the invitation (no explanation needed).
If you do attend your ex-partner’s wedding it is imperative that you act impeccably. Don’t attempt to upstage the bride or groom. Don’t drink too much and turn maudlin or aggressive. You might be wise to tip off friends to look out for you and make it their job to escort you home as soon as they see your social façade begin to wobble.
It is understandable that the bride and groom will want children from previous relationships to be involved in the celebration of their new marriage. Children are often happy to play a special role, such as being a bridesmaid, pageboy, or even best man, but they should always be consulted in case they wish to stay in the background. The couple must discuss these issues at an early stage, both with the children and with ex-partners.
If you are embarking on a second marriage, it is advisable to acknowledge previous marriages if this prevents children, friends, and even ex-in-laws from feeling confused or rejected.
When children are in attendance it is quite appropriate to refer to them and therefore to a previous marriage in the speeches – keep any allusions wry, affectionate and light-hearted. Behave as if you are embracing the past, not obliterating it.
If you are hosting or attending the wedding of one of your children from a previous marriage, remember that it is your son’s or daughter’s big day. Whatever their wishes, you must accede. Behave in a civilised manner, without a hint of bitterness.
If there is abiding antagonism between you and your ex-partner, make some simple provisions. Plan the seating carefully to avoid conflict between the different ‘sides’, but close enough to appear unified.
Split wedding duties. For example, the natural father could walk the bride down the aisle and the stepfather could give a speech. At the reception you could opt for three ‘top’ tables. Each of the separated parents can host their own table, leaving the bride and groom to sit with bridesmaids, ushers and friends.
Divorces don’t necessarily terminate relationships with the ex’s family. Many people find that their quarrel is with their ex-partner only; they feel nothing but affection for their ex’s parents, siblings and so on and may well continue to see them regularly.
In cases like this, it is only natural for divorced partners to want to attend the funerals of former in-laws, and it is quite socially acceptable to do so. But beware, no matter how warmly you feel towards your former family, you are no longer officially part of it, and you should not make assumptions about your inclusion. You should not, therefore, head for the family pews at the front, or walk behind the coffin at the end of the service.
The possible exception to this rule is when you are accompanying your small child – perhaps to your ex-father-in-law’s funeral. In this case, your relationship to the deceased’s grandchild may entitle you to ‘family status’. If in doubt, discreetly ask a member of the family where you should sit.
Finally, never upstage the blood family when it comes to displays of grief. Your divorce has necessarily placed you at one remove, and you should maintain a tactful and dignified distance. People will understand that you have come to pay your respects and appreciate your discretion.
If your ex-partner has died and not remarried, you may find yourself and possibly your children unexpectedly playing a central role in the funeral. Put the travails of the past behind you and behave with dignity – your children will need all your support.
If your ex-partner has remarried and subsequently died, you may face another set of dilemmas. Even if you are invited to the funeral be prepared to find yourself and your relationship airbrushed out of the eulogies.
Alternatively, you may find yourself completely excluded by a new partner. Resist the temptation to turn up at the funeral as an uninvited guest; it will only increase everyone’s distress, especially if a scene ensues. If you feel absolutely compelled to pay your respects, do so discreetly – slip into a back pew just before the service starts and melt away once the main mourners have exited.
Unfortunately, it is the prerogative of the current partner to make the funeral arrangements, even if they are petty and vindictive. If you have children with your former partner, you could explore the option of holding a separate memorial service, with their full participation.
Regimented lines of cubicles, head-high partitions or rooms with firmly closed doors have been confined to office history. Nowadays, most offices are designed on open plan principles: colleagues are visible and accessible to each other, encouraging conversation, collaboration and creativity.
But the shared communal space throws up many challenges relating to privacy, territoriality and distractions, and these need to be negotiated with the help of consideration and good manners. Follow our open plan recommendations for a happier, more productive shared working space:
• Work the layout
It will be counter-productive if you cluster all the desks together in large blocs in the centre of the working space. It is better to create ‘pods’ of up to four desks (or shared tables seating up to four colleagues), with lots of passage space between them. This will ensure that workers get up and move around, and easy access will encourage them to walk over to their colleagues’ desks for conversation and consultation, rather than shouting across the office and distracting everyone.
• Create dedicated spaces
Think carefully about how people work together and create spaces away from their desks and the communal area that will accommodate them. You may need to have a formal meeting room with a whiteboard and closing door; alternatively, you may simply need to hive off an area of the office where colleagues can gather around a table to brainstorm, chat or exchange ideas. Maybe it is a good idea to have a ‘quiet space’, where colleagues who want to concentrate can sit with their laptops or notebooks away from background chatter. The important thing is to ensure that team collaborations take place in a dedicated space, which will encourage focus and concentration.
• Separate the Kitchen
Everyone enjoys taking a break, making a cup of coffee, heating up their lunch and enjoying a casual chat with colleagues. It’s time out from the working day, so it shouldn’t be allowed to intrude on working space. Don’t take the open plan aspiration too far; ensure that the kitchen stands apart.
• Respect Privacy
One of the disadvantages of open plan offices is that people’s screens are visible, and employees can feel scrutinised or spied upon. Think about sight lines when you’re positioning desks and computers and try to offset seating positions so that co-workers are not staring at each other or looking straight at a colleague’s screen.
Once you’ve got the open plan layout right, the success or failure of your office is very much down to the behaviour of your employees. For a communal working place to succeed, they will need to be conscious of other people and considerate about how they behave:
• Keep a Tidy Desk
Your workspace is on full view in an open plan office so it’s a good idea to eliminate teetering piles of files and papers, dirty coffee cups or overflowing in-trays. Try and ensure your desk is as empty as possible when you leave it each night – remember, people will read unsightly clutter as a telling sign of disorganisation and disarray.
• Don’t be a Noise Nuisance
You may love listening to music or podcasts as you work, but if you do so ensure that you are wearing efficient headphones or earbuds and that no sound is leaking out. Moderate the volume of your voice and don’t shout across the office. Don’t listen to voicemail messages by speakerphone. If you’ve got to make an important phone call or you’re having a video meeting, politely warn your colleagues, and reciprocate by respecting your colleagues’ pleas for silence.
• Don’t be the Office Chatterbox
It’s great to chat with colleagues, to be friendly and interested in their lives. But you must be very aware of the time and the place and ensure that you’re not keeping them from their work or distracting them when they’re trying to concentrate. Attempting to minimise distraction by having whispered conversations is never a good idea – no matter how innocuous the chat, onlookers will begin to feel paranoid and targeted.
• Don’t Eavesdrop
Inevitably, in an open plan office you will be able to hear your neighbours’ conversations. You may be able to switch off from them, but if you do hear something (when they’re talking on the phone or with another colleague) the convention is that you don’t give the game away by reacting to what is being said. Open plan offices can leave people feeling over-exposed, so it is vitally important that colleagues respect each other’s privacy.
• Avoid Smelly Foods
You’re in a shared space, so if you’re inclined to indulge in greasy burgers or last night’s heated-up curry, spare a thought for near neighbours. If your lunch smells pungent it will permeate the atmosphere and your colleagues may find your food odours invasive or repulsive.
• Take it Outside
Try to avoid forcing your near neighbours to witness unfolding personal soap operas. If you’re experiencing a personal drama or crisis, especially something that involves endless phone calls, try and remove yourself from the communal area – explain to your boss if need be.
• Stay Alert and Observant
Keep an eye on your neighbours and ensure that you are not invading their space or distracting them needlessly. Ideally, you shouldn’t have to wait for them to plead for silence – if you can see they’re making an important call, moderate your voice or take a tea-break to give them privacy.
A new model of school is offering a combination of home learning and time in the classroom. We look at the pros and cons and find out more about this new way of learning from hybrid school Portland Place.
Since the pandemic, much has been written about the move in the workplace to hybrid working, with employers and employees enjoying greater flexibility in terms of working from home and time in the office, so much so that Debrett’s, in conjunction with Poly, have created a Guide for Global Etiquette in the Workplace.
But it is not just the workplace that is changing. For most of us, not just here in the UK but around the world, the effects of Covid19 and the ensuing Lockdown has had and will have a significant impact. So many of the clients and schools that we speak to disclose increased levels of anxiety in their children/student body, and much of this anxiety is centred around social situations and the pressures of school life. There is also an ever increasing number of providers offering online education for children around the world.
In our role as education consultants, advising families who are looking for the very best education provision for their children, Debrett’s Education has discovered one school that has taken the idea a step further and is providing a hybrid model, where children learn online for part of the week but can then opt to attend school in person between one and two days.
Part of the AlphaPlus group of schools, Portland Place was founded in 1996 to be an alternative to the intense, large, examination-focused independent day schools. Headmaster David Bradbury recognises children need a safe space to thrive and explore their creativity, and he and his team work hard to ensure that Portland Place is just that.
Our founder, Sioban O’Connor has built a relationship with the school over the last five years and has seen at first hand the nurturing ethos of the school. She was excited by the possibilities that a hybrid model affords and wanted to find out more.
Portland Place’s model started in response to the pandemic as it had successfully navigated its way through online learning and found that many of its students had thoroughly enjoyed the virtual experience. It decided to extend the idea into a hybrid school offer from September 2020 and has found that it has gone from strength to strength.
There are now just under 40 students in the school, all of whom have chosen this route for a variety of reasons. Some found that full time schooling was just too much, but are now finding that the hybrid model allows them to build their confidence and ease back into full time. Others have other commitments – especially children who excel in sport and would struggle to balance their training and competition schedules with a more conventional school structure. Hybrid schools also give parents the opportunity to access independent school education at a fraction of the cost.
So how does it work? Every morning starts with a compulsory registration period, where the students meet as they would if they were in school, and have time with their tutor. This roots the students in the group and creates a pastoral structure for them. Then the lessons begin.
Students come into school either one or two days a week, depending on what they feel they can manage, not least in terms of the logistics of getting into school – one pupil lives in Manchester, but does come into school for Geography field trips and other key events. The lessons that students come in for are predominately those with a practical element: Science, Drama and DT for example. This is also a great way to connect them with other students and with the school community; they can also be part of the whole school activities and can join sports fixtures, school productions, choirs etc.
If you think that this might be a great solution for your child (and you as a family) and would like to find out more, have a look at their website and see what some of the existing parents have to say about it:
Hybrid School | Portland Place (portland-place.co.uk
Alternatively, if you would like free impartial advice about a range of school options for your child, please give one of our consultants a call on +44 (0) 203 848 9201, or fill out the enquiry form on our website: education.debretts.com
There have been many reports in recent weeks about a rise in rowdy behaviour in British theatres. Accounts range from intrusive use of mobile phones and loudly rustling sweet papers to drunkenness, singing along, abusive behaviour and outbreaks of fighting in the stalls.
There is a consensus that audience behaviour has deteriorated since the pandemic lockdowns, and undoubtedly the return to communal experiences has engendered a febrile sense of joy and excitement, which can get out of hand.
What should we expect from a theatre experience? In Shakespeare’s times audiences were loud and bawdy, uninhibited about vocally expressing disgust or appreciation. It was only in the mid-19th century that Britain’s notoriously riotous theatres began to be subject to regulation, and a wealthier and more demanding audience began to impose more recognisable standards of audience behaviour, with the emphasis on quiet attentiveness and decorum.
While audiences have never been completely controllable and from time to time there have been outbreaks of riotous and anti-social behaviour, the tendency has been to observe generally recognised theatre etiquette: sit quietly, no noisy eating or drinking, respect your neighbour’s space, reserve commentary on the play for the interval.
The first chink in this painstakingly constructed carapace of good behaviour was the arrival of the mobile phone. Ringtones interrupted performances, audience members texted or scrolled mid-play, creating distracting pools of light in the darkness of the auditorium, people used their phones to take photographs during the performance. Theatres reacted by broadcasting warnings and politely requesting the audience to switch off their phones – inevitably some diehards did not always comply.
But these transgressions seem comparatively minor when compared to some of the more egregious recent examples of bad behaviour. In some performances the whole notion of audiences gathering together to experience what the late director Peter Brook called the “good” kind of silence “when everyone is so keyed to the same point that there is this extraordinary life” seems to have evaporated. It would, however, be senselessly doctrinaire to expect the level of rapt and silent attention to a joyous jukebox musical that is demanded of a Shakespeare tragedy. As with all manners, context is crucial and behaving well is grounded in a willingness to take note of the prevailing ambience and to respect it.
Audiences may be understandably somewhat confused by the ways in which theatres choose to market their productions, in particular musicals. If they are told there will be “dancing in the aisles”, then it is not unreasonable to expect an uproarious party atmosphere. Reining in some of these more extravagant claims might go some way towards managing audiences’ expectations and behaviour, and printing warnings about behaviour (“No singing along, stay seated throughout the performance etc”) on ticket confirmations or in the programme might also be helpful.
Theatres are obviously reliant on sales of alcohol in their bars before the performance and during the interval, but allowing their customers to bring alcohol into the auditorium may be a step too far. It sends signals that the show is going to be the “best party in town” (another marketing claim) and inevitably can lead to disinhibition. Similarly, selling food in the theatre bar that is encased in noisy wrappers is inviting problems; when people in neighbouring seats are distracted by loud rustling at moments of high drama, they will be understandably irritated and disputes between audience members may break out.
The worst examples of recent bad behaviour concern the abuse of ushers and theatre staff. They may find themselves in situations where they are obliged to police audience behaviour and are subjected to unwarranted aggression. If you are called out by a fellow audience member or an usher because of your behaviour, then you must acknowledge that you have transgressed the communal codes of conduct, apologise graciously and move on. You may feel aggrieved or resentful, but you must accept that, in a society where people are generally tolerant and unwilling to complain, you have genuinely caused offence.
Theatre tickets are expensive, and it is understandable that all theatregoers feel that they have made an investment that entitles them to a great night out, whatever their definition of this may be. But the joy of theatre is all about the delight of shared experience, and while much of the time this is wholly positive, there will be occasions when compromises and concessions must be made.
