Personal space became a much talked-about issue during the Covid pandemic as we all struggled to obey instructions to ‘keep your distance’ and attempted to surround ourselves with a much larger than average ‘exclusion zone’. Life has returned to a semblance of post-pandemic normality, but for many of us personal space is still an issue. These concerns may also have become more pressing as we enter a ‘cyberspace’ era; many of our social interactions are online, where the subtleties of body language are irrelevant, and our notions of personal space in the real world may have become impaired through lack of practice.
Scientists argue that our concept of personal space is the foundation on which we build all our social interactions. It emerges from an atavistic urge to protect ourselves from threats or predators, overlain by social expectations and by our own attitudes to other people, which may have been formed by our upbringing, our experiences or social conditioning. Different cultures also have quite clearly defined attitudes towards physical space.
To some extent our sense of our own physical comfort zone and our reactions to threat are hard-wired, although we are clearly attuned to social expectations and need to make countless micro-adjustments as we move through the world. Most of the time, we react to the people around us, accommodating and, to a certain extent mirroring, their use of physical space, without any conscious thought. Our own sense of space is contextual: we are likely to be much more comfortable, and therefore happy being physically close, with friends and family, than in our encounters with strangers or work colleagues, where our spatial boundaries are naturally magnified. It is an important social skill to be able to make these judgments and adjustments; this ensures that we are never accused of inappropriate or intrusive behaviour.
Most of us are broadly average when it comes to our physical comfort zone; we maintain a distance of 3–4 feet (unless we are with people we know intimately), we are happy to shake hands, kiss in greeting, and we don’t react violently to being touched.
But some people require a much larger exclusion zone: they create more physical distance, are reluctant to touch strangers when being introduced, and flinch if their space bubble is invaded, for example if somebody reaches out to touch them or places a hand on their back.
By contrast, we’ve all encountered ‘close talkers’, people who are physically overbearing, who are often tactile and invasive. Frequently, these people are tall or substantial, with dominant personalities – they are clearly demonstrating that they are not intimidated by their fellow human beings and have very limited exclusion zones. Or they may simply be oblivious extroverts, who are blissfully unaware that they are treading on toes, barging into other people and overwhelming them, because their exuberant bonhomie propels them towards close encounters with their fellow human beings.
It is common courtesy to respect other people’s space bubbles and to resist being invasive and overbearing. But it should also be acknowledged that if you are a person who requires a large amount of space, you may well be broadcasting subliminal messages that are chilly and stand-offish. If you recognise this about yourself, try and make a conscious effort to stand a little closer to other people and, even if you do not initiate physical greetings, at least try to reciprocate without flinching.
• Stand back
If you feel someone is looming over you or touching you more than you like, just take a step back. You may find that they react by taking a step forwards and re-closing the gap you have created, in which case further action is required.
• Use furniture defensively
Standing behind a well-placed table is an excellent way of heading off a space invader. Alternatively, if chairs are available, you can always say “shall we sit down?” – chairs are bulky and awkward objects and it’s much harder to enter someone’s space bubble when you’re sitting in a chair.
• Deploy non-verbal signals
There are other ways in which you can demonstrate discomfort and deter someone from violating your space. You can fold your arms or put your hands on your hips, which are closed, defensive gestures. If you are seated, cross your legs and sit at a slightly oblique angle from the target and lean back. Minimise eye contact, or fix your gaze on another object, avoiding eye contact altogether.
• Speak up
If you’ve worked your way through your entire armoury of non-verbal signals unsuccessfully, you might have to say something. While it is tempting to say, “Back off!”, it is undeniably rude, so try saying something more subtle like “Sorry, would you mind stepping back a bit? I’m feeling a bit claustrophobic!” or “Oh dear, it’s very crowded here – shall we go somewhere where there’s more space?” It should be possible to convey the message without being offensive.
Wedding season is fast approaching so we thought it was time to take another look at our enquiries inbox, and put some of your wedding-related questions to our etiquette experts:
1. “We haven’t got the largest sum of cash for our wedding in August and have accepted help from both sets of parents with the finances. As my parents are taking care of most of the costs of the reception and have requested to be named hosts of the wedding (I've agreed, but my husband is not so thrilled), they believe it gives them the right to choose who can come to OUR wedding. We have 20 friends who we wouldn’t want to get married without, which our parents kicked up a fuss about for six months before letting it go. My husband has a big family so there are more guests on his side, which has made my parents want to invite their friends to equal the numbers. Are numbers that important? And don’t we get a say in it?”
Firstly, this is your big day, and it is imperative that all your closest friends are invited. Unfortunately, if parents are shelling out large sums for a wedding, they can feel that this entitles them to fill the wedding party with guests of their own choosing. This is where money can complicate issues. There is no absolute obligation for each family to invite equal numbers of guests, and if one side has a big family, it may be inevitable that this distorts the guest lists. But really, your parents should remember that they are doing this for you, not themselves, and should be able to live with it. The basic rule is to compile a guest list in this order: family (from both sides of course); closest friends of the couple who are marrying; others. You should compile the guest list yourselves, and then present it to your parents for negotiation.
The fact is that, if you are accepting parental help with the finances, you may find yourselves forced to make compromises. If too much ill-feeling is being caused by this arrangement, you may want to consider downsizing your plans, and meeting the majority of the costs yourselves. You would have a smaller, less elaborate wedding, but everything – from the guests to the venue – would be chosen by you and you would remove any sense of obligation towards your parents.
2. “We’ve just got engaged and are planning our wedding next year. We’d like it to be a really special day and know we can be much more ambitious in our plans if our parents help out, but so far they haven’t offered. How do we raise the money question?”
Traditionally, the bride’s family bears the cost of the wedding, but this is by no means expected today. Often the groom’s parents will pay for a certain element of the day - eg the dress, the wine. Alternatively, they may just write a cheque towards the total cost of the wedding.
If you want to raise the awkward question of cost with parents, it is best to be direct, but also to show you have an alternative that does not require subsidy. So, sit down with your parents and say you’ve been thinking about the wedding, and present two options with a breakdown of costs: option 1 (lots of guests, big marquee, evening reception) will cost £xx, which is beyond your budget. Option 2 (limited guest list, afternoon reception only) will cost £xx which, as a couple, you can just about afford. What do they think? This way, they can jump in and offer to help subsidise option 1. If they can’t afford to help, they have a non-embarrassing exit-strategy – they could even suggest a compromise, with their help, between the two options, or could choose to take care of one aspect of the day, eg wine.
3. “Numbers are very tight for our long-planned wedding this July and – like lots of couples – we’ve been poring over our guest lists and RSVPs, juggling numbers and being forced to make sacrifices. So, I was completely thrown when one of my best friends, who has been single for ages, dropped me a note asking if I’d mind if she brought her new boyfriend. What should I do?”
You really have no obligation to accommodate friends’ new partners at your wedding. These events are planned months in advance, and numbers are set in stone well before the date. If a new boyfriend can’t be squeezed in (perhaps because of a cancellation) you should feel no guilt about saying no. Just be perfectly honest; say you’d have loved to invite the new boyfriend, but unfortunately planning took place months ago, numbers are fixed, and there really isn’t any way he can be included. You could soften the blow by suggesting that you and your fiancé meet up with your friend and new partner for dinner before the wedding for a ‘private celebration’.
4. “I love my mum, but clothes are really not a big priority for her, and she tends to make rather bizarre choices when she’s required to dress up! How do I tactfully avoid a potential fashion embarrassment?”
Of course, you’ll want everyone to look their best on the big day. For close family members, such as your mother, it’s a really good idea to pre-empt the problem by suggesting a pre-wedding shopping trip. You could combine it with buying something for yourself (eg wedding shoes), so she won’t feel over-managed, and you could build the trip around a special mother-daughter lunch so she’ll feel more attracted by the prospect of clothes shopping. If you’re too late, and you find her modelling a hideous outfit, the most tactful way out is to suggest that your mother-in-law is thinking of wearing a similar colour and it might be wise to find something that will really stand out. Alternatively, you could use flattery – and say, what a shame, you’ve spotted an outfit/colour that would look absolutely stunning with her eye/hair colour/figure etc.
5. “One of my closest friends is a talented dressmaker, who makes all her own clothes, and I know she’s going to offer to make the wedding and bridesmaids’ dresses. But I’ve got my heart set on a specific dress designer, and I don’t know how to turn down her offer politely. Can you help?”
If friends are offering to bake the cake/make the dress/do the flower arrangements and you don’t want to use them, the best way out is to say very firmly, at the outset, that arrangements are already under way. If necessary, you can soften the blow by hinting that the decision is out of your hands, and that your mother/mother-in-law/fiancé have insisted on taking control of all these aspects of the wedding. The important thing is to nip these suggestions in the bud at the outset. Don’t prevaricate and say “yes, I suppose that would be helpful, I’ll have to check…” Any ambiguity may lead to confusion and embarrassment.
6) “We’re having a 4pm wedding and thinking food will be around 6pm, then hoping for evening guests to arrive at 8pm and food again at 9pm? Do you think this is ok? I don’t think the daytime guests will eat again but presumably evening guests will expect food?”
Pacing the day and managing guest expectations is a very important part of wedding planning. It is vital to ensure that guests are not left for long intervals, drinking and not eating, or the proceedings may get out of hand. The best option is to have a sit-down meal for day guests, and then provide a simple buffet for evening guests. That way you can stick to your timings and ask evening guests for 8pm. If the sit-down meal is no later than 6pm, you will be confident that formal proceedings will be over by the time the evening guests arrive. Daytime guests probably won’t want to eat again in the evening, but you should certainly provide enough food to ensure that late night ‘snacking’ is still a possibility, and a buffet is an ideal solution. Make sure that tea and coffee is available throughout the evening, as you may find some of your day guests are beginning to wilt.
We live in a noisy world: jets fly overhead; juggernauts accelerate outside our window; engine noise is a constant background hum; sirens wail. Even when we retreat into interior public spaces, anxious to escape the cacophony of street noise, we must deal with “background” music played at top volume, broadcast announcements, loud conversations.
It’s true that, outside our own homes, we have little control over most of these causes of noise pollution, but we can take responsibility for our own noise levels; that means modulating the volume of the voice and being very circumspect about the volume and noise leakage of our various devices. Of course, you do not have to slip silently through the shadows, never emitting any sound louder than a barely audible whisper. As with all good manners, adjusting your own volume is about being self-aware and observant, judging the situation in which you find yourself, and ensuring that your noise output is not going to cause inconvenience or distress for the people around you.
Many venues play music at an unfeasibly loud level of amplification, which is compounded by hard echoing surfaces such as wooden floors. Inevitably, voices are raised to counteract background noise and you are soon shouting to make yourself heard. In many places this is inevitable, and you have to accept the hubbub with good grace. But if you are in a tranquil restaurant or a pub where locals are enjoying quiet conversation at the bar, you should be very aware of the volume of your voice.
We all tend to shout as we become more animated and excited, or to emit loud, shrill laughter. Look around you, assess the situation and try to dial down the noise level – lower your voice and test whether your companions can hear you. If they’re constantly cupping their ears, asking you to repeat yourself, or looking confused and disengaged, then you’ve overdone it, and you will have to adjust accordingly. If one member of your party is very loud, it’s quite acceptable to politely point this out. Don’t assign blame, just say, “I think we should keep our voices down – it’s very quiet in here and we’re probably disturbing other people.”
Most people on buses and trains tend to close themselves off in their own world, lost in their phones, laptops or books and quite possibly also wearing headphones or earbuds. If you are travelling with somebody, then you may well want to talk but remember to keep your voice down and don’t distract an entire train carriage with your conversation. The same rules apply if you are having a conversation on your phone; lower your voice and, if reception is poor on the bus or train, don’t respond by shouting ever louder, just explain where you are and suggest that you’ll talk later.
Remember, commuter journeys are much more likely to be hushed and silent, especially on trains. People are preparing for, or recovering from, a day’s work and want to retreat into silent contemplation, and this should be respected. You may find journeys in the middle of the day, when trains and buses are packed with families, kids and gangs of friends, are much noisier and you will simply have to accept that this is the case and arm yourself with headphones. At any time of day, it goes without saying that you should respect “quiet zones”, mute your devices and take a vow of silence.
Finally, if you’re one of the self-contained passengers who is communing with their device, always use effective headphones that will block any sound from escaping. It is the height of anti-social behaviour to listen to music or watch a video without headphones, or to hold a phone away from your ear when conversing, inflicting both sides of your conversation on neighbours. This may seem self-evident, but it is happening with increasing frequency.
There are certain public spaces where, by mutual consent, noise should be kept to a minimum. If you are visiting art galleries or museums, it is perfectly acceptable to chat with your companion, but the expectation is that you will do so in a low, discreet murmur, so that you do not distract other visitors. Chatting on mobile phones should also be avoided.
It is fine to chat quietly while you are waiting for a film, performance or play to begin, but there is a strong presumption that you will be silent during the performance or screening and, if for some reason, you feel that you have to say something to your companion, you will do so in a barely audible whisper. We’ve all been to cinemas, for example, where some members of the audience behave as if they were in their own sitting room, chatting audibly throughout the film. This is the height of bad manners, as it takes no account of the situation or the comfort of other audience members.
Open plan offices are increasingly common, and while they can be great spaces in which to communicate and work as a team, they can also be very noisy and distracting. It is sensible when planning an open plan layout to take noise into consideration: locate the kitchen, which is always a focal point for conviviality, away from the main space; provide meeting rooms or ‘break-out’ rooms for occasions when conversation is imperative; create a layout where people are encouraged to get up and move around – don’t block in desks so that people feel obliged to shout across the room.
Don’t be the office loudmouth. Restrict yourself to quiet conversations with your immediate neighbours and take yourself into the kitchen (or any other designated area) if you’re having an animated chat. Never shout across the room to get a colleague’s attention: it’s always better to walk over to their desk or even send them a quick text. If you’ve got a video call booked, use your headphones and warn your neighbours, and try to keep the volume of your voice down. You really shouldn’t need to shout if you’re using sophisticated modern phones and computers.
You might feel that music while you work is an excellent way of enhancing energy or signalling that the weekend is approaching, but you should never inflict it on your colleagues. There will always be someone desperately trying to concentrate, or who has entirely different musical tastes and is being slowly driven mad by your playlist. Remember, if in doubt, always use headphones.
Our means of communication are multiplying, offering us a growing range of choices – texting, emails, messaging apps, video calls, chatbots – but increasingly we’re steering clear of the humble phone.
In a work context many of us argue that communicating by digital means offers us a range of advantages: it enables us to multitask, to work when and where we please, to pause for thought and consideration, without having to come up with an instantaneous response. Above all, communicating in these ways gives us a feeling of control: we are setting the agenda, choosing when to respond and giving ourselves a sense of psychological distance, which may help to relieve the stress we feel when we are bombarded by information and requests all day long.
In a social context, phone calls are also in decline. Many people find their phones intrusive, preferring to switch them to silent, and to communicate by text or message. It is increasingly common to use text messages to arrange phone calls at a set time, thereby asserting control over the phone, rather than letting its insistent ringing rule our lives. We are beginning to feel hesitant about spontaneously picking up the phone and making a call – we project our own desire to control input on to others and choose more circuitous routes of communication.
Many of us also find ourselves reluctant to use the phone when we are administering our own lives. If we have a query about our bills, our broadband contract, our bank account, or if we have a customer complaint, we tend to hide behind the anonymity of the online complaint form or the chatbot, opting to avoid direct connection with another human being. This tendency is greatly magnified by many companies’ phone systems, which seem to be designed to deter all contact by putting up barriers such as multiple menus, automated answering, and protracted waiting times (with or without musical accompaniment). The more we avoid using the phone, the less appealing phone calls become; we find ourselves turning phone phobic, always attempting to find other routes to access information and help.
Yet, despite the benefits and effectiveness of digital forms of communication, using the phone can be the most practical way of getting things done. It is a well-tested and universally available tool, which does not require computer equipment, programs, or a reliable WiFi connection. A phone call will circumvent unnecessary bureaucracy and obfuscation – anyone who has had to wade through an epic email thread will know how very easily the nub of the matter can be buried or obscured. Providing you get through to the right person, a phone call is also gratifyingly direct; questions can be asked and answered, clarification can be sought, a course of action can be agreed – all in the space of a few minutes and without an intervening and protracted layer of written circumlocution.
Above all, a phone call is person-to-person. It gives you a chance to experience a moment of human connection, to exchange pleasantries, or comment on the weather. You will be able to respond to the tones and nuances of the human voice, convey subtle feelings of friendliness, gratitude, frustration or irritation that would be completely lost in a text exchange. Phone calls are an excellent way of communicating humorously, deploying irony and self-deprecation, which is much more open to misinterpretation in writing. This will allow you to build up a constructive rapport, which will inevitably expedite the business in hand.
Phone calls are also an ideal way to make discreet enquiries or circumvent official channels, bearing in mind that we do not always want all our communications to be recorded for posterity, or forwarded to other people. They allow us to be diplomatic and strategic.
We are lucky enough to be able to choose from many different types of communication; it would be a great pity if the phone is overlooked. If you feel you’re suffering from incipient phone phobia, try the following:
• Take calls more frequently – don’t let every incoming call go straight through to voicemail; if you recognise the number pick up the call. This will prevent you becoming rusty and may help you to avoid phone shyness.
• Make everyday phone calls – if you want to order a takeaway, book an appointment or find out if your dry cleaning is ready, consider using the phone rather than going online. You may find it much more efficient and pleasant.
• Don’t overthink making a phone call. If you’re worried that you’re bothering someone by making a call, preface your conversation with a polite query “is this a good time to talk, or would you prefer me to call you back?”
• Don’t forget the pleasantries. Phone calls are undoubtedly a good way of cutting through obfuscation and misinformation, but they will always be more successful if you establish human contact first. This can be as simple as asking “how are you?” – it’s only polite.
• Smile. It helps if you smile in a friendly manner when you speak on the phone. You can’t be seen, but the tone of your voice changes when you smile, and the caller will “hear” the smile. Even if you are making a difficult phone call, perhaps about a complaint, remember that a smile will aways be disarming.
Our home-grown ‘Mother’s Day’ originated in the 17th century as a religious feast, called Mothering Sunday. It was a feast day held to celebrate the Virgin Mary and the idea was that people would return to their ‘mother church’, to make it a family celebration. It took place on the fourth Sunday of Lent and allowed for some easing of the Lenten fast – it was sometimes called ‘Simnel Sunday’ because it was traditional to bake simnel cake, a delicious concoction of dried fruits, spices and marzipan, which is also eaten at Easter. Inevitably, it became a family reunion, with mothers taking pride of place.
Like so many high days and holidays, Mother’s Day has become highly commercialised in recent years. Few of us can have failed to notice the banks of bouquets in supermarket entrances or the serried ranks of mass-produced cards. Like Christmas or Valentine’s Day, we are being sold a simple message about our obligations and encouraged to behave in socially homogenous way. But every mother is unique and there are myriad ways of celebrating this day that can be a more nuanced reflection of how you feel about this relationship.
Remember the main function of Mother’s Day is to acknowledge your mother’s role in your life and find a way of showing your appreciation. In these straitened times you do not need to squander large sums of money on expensive gifts – the emphasis should be on thought, planning, and taking trouble, rather than on extravagant ostentation.
Here are some suggestions:
• Most mothers will be delighted with a spring bouquet. Daffodils or narcissi are an inexpensive option – hand-wrap and tie them to make them look special. Lilies are a historical symbol of motherhood, or you can capitalise on the plenitude of beautiful tulips that are available at this time of year. Roses are a perennial favourite; opt for pink, yellow or white. Whatever your choice, buy flowers that are well-wrapped, preferably by a florist, and do not signal last-minute panic at the supermarket checkout or garage forecourt.
• If your mother loves to garden, why not buy her a special plant – a traditional English rose is always a good choice, and you might even be able to find one with a name that has some special meaning in your family lore.
• Create your own spring planter for your mother’s patio or window box. If you have children, they will enjoy helping. At this time of year inexpensive violas, hyacinths, primulas can be found in abundance, and once the display is past its best, they can all be planted out in the garden.
• For mothers who enjoy a drink, a bottle of champagne is always a good option. Alternatively, you could opt a special English sparkling wine.
• Give your mother an experience as a gift, and if possible, accompany her so it becomes a special excursion. The possibilities are legion: a wine-tasting and lunch in an English vineyard; an exclusive tour of a stately home or garden; a cooking class; an evening at the theatre or opera; a luxurious day at a hotel spa. Alternatively, you can suggest a simple outing that you know she will enjoy – a long country walk and pub lunch, a day at the seaside with fish and chips, a trip to an art gallery or exhibition.
• Take your mother out for a celebratory meal. You might want to eschew the crowded restaurants, with their ‘Special Menus’ on Mother’s Day – if you’re unlucky, it can feel too much like a celebration production line. But a date in the weeks ahead will be something she can look forward to.
• Encourage young children to contribute something special: they can hand-draw cards, create their own bouquets, or help to bake a cake. By giving them a role, you will be reinforcing the message that mothers play a fundamental role in family life, and showing your gratitude to them is of paramount importance.
• Make sure she enjoys a lazy indulgent day. Think about bringing her breakfast in bed or enlisting the help of the whole family to cook a delicious Sunday lunch (and wash up afterwards). Young children will enjoy helping.
While it is useful to have a ‘special day’ to remind you of everything you owe your mother, don’t make the mistake of guiltily piling on the treats, gifts and celebrations and then ignoring her for most of the year. Most mothers would be much more appreciative of regular contact and acknowledgment than an annual cornucopia.
If you are fortunate enough to have a close and bonded family, devoted children, a doting mother, then no doubt you will be looking forward to Mother’s Day and you are right to celebrate this good fortune. But spare a thought for the large numbers of people who dread the day and find it intensely depressing – they may be divorced, estranged or bereaved. Think about friends that are in this situation, take the trouble to ask them how they are going to spend the day, and enquire if you can help or participate in any way.
Think carefully before you post about your delightful Mother’s Day celebrations and try your best to avoid gloating and self-satisfaction. Remember, universal celebrations are delightful if you are happy and prospering, but they can also be painful and alienating reminders of everything you have lost.
The phrase 'virtue signalling' is ubiquitously deployed to describe people who express opinions (predominantly on social media) that demonstrate their moral rectitude and garner approval. Whether they are expressing compassion for disaster victims, denouncing a racist comment, or demonstrating their support for a good cause, they are clearly asserting their high moral standing. There is really nothing new about this phenomenon – unfortunately, there have always been people who promote their virtues rather than acting upon them – but social media provides a perfect platform for this kind of behaviour.
Virtue signalling is not just about individuals’ behaviour. This is clearly demonstrated in the world of corporate promotion, when large companies trumpet their compassionate employment policies, their ethical sourcing practices, or their prioritisation of environmental concerns (greenwashing) simply as a way of honing their image and making themselves more acceptable to a concerned public.
Virtue signalling is used as a term of disapproval because it is seen as a performative gesture, designed to make the perpetrator feel better about themselves while making minimal effort. Volunteering at a food bank or helping with your elderly neighbour’s weekly shop involves expending energy and demonstrating commitment in the real world. Supporting a political cause or movement on our online profile is the work of a moment. Without real-life engagement, it begins to look self-serving, a lazy short-cut to the moral high ground. An obvious motivation for virtue signalling is to seek an endorsement from our wider social circle for our demonstrable sense of responsibility and compassion. These self-centred agendas imply that perpetrators may not actually believe in what they are professing and are acting out of bad faith, opening them up to the charge of hypocrisy.
Doing the right thing when nobody is watching or applauding your actions, is a virtue, because you are acting for others’ benefit, not for your own gratification. The tendency to burnish your social reputation by broadcasting your moral attributes is a form of boastfulness, and not ‘practising what you preach’ makes it an empty gesture.
Is virtue signalling always bad? It could be argued that at least virtue signallers are highlighting causes and concerns and bringing them to wider attention. They are contributing to public discourse, reminding us of current issues and – even if their own motivation may be dubious – they may play their own part in bringing about positive change. They may, of course, feel genuinely passionate about the causes they espouse and accusations of hypocrisy are therefore ill-founded
While many of us may be outraged by other people’s tendency to jump on various bandwagons, then have the temerity to sanctimoniously lecture us about their moral superiority, we should be careful about over-using the term virtue signalling. It is all too often wielded as a lazy term of abuse by people who hold opposing political views, who are ever ready to condemn anyone who posits an argument that puts them in a good light, even if they are making that argument from a passionately held and committed viewpoint that has very little to do with advertising their moral credentials. Dismissing other people’s arguments as ‘virtue signalling’ or ‘self-serving’ is an excellent way of casting doubts and aspersions without troubling to engage with their point of view or properly rebut it.
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.
