We have so many digital ways of communicating – texts, emails, message boards, chats – that it can sometimes feel that face-to-face communications are coming a poor second. But it’s important that we take a step back and really determine when it is appropriate to say things face to face, and also acknowledge that on some occasions a handwritten note is the best option.
Digital communication is wonderfully convenient, but it is a blunt instrument. We sprinkle our texts with emojis in an attempt to add layers of complexity and meaning to our words, but – when the subtlety and nuance of in-person communication is lost – there is always a risk of misinterpretation.
The very ease of digital communication is also a danger, as it means that spur of the moment thoughts are immediately transmissible, and dangerous and provocative messages can be conveyed at a touch of the ‘send’ button. Late night drunkenness, maudlin emotions and 4am blues are all real hazards, and many messages that should never have been sent find their unerring way to unsuspecting recipients, detonating a storm of hurt and recrimination.
Some would argue that emails are a different matter. They can be treated as digital letters, long mulled over, and only sent after much deliberation. However, the moderating impact of pen and paper (not to mention finding envelopes, buying stamps and walking to the post box) is sorely missed, and many of us, who spend our working days churning out countless emails, are liable to revert to the ill-considered, impetuous send mode, precipitately dispatching our missives before we’ve had a chance to review them and assess their potential to do harm.
We all need to think carefully about the ways in which we choose to communicate. As a general rule, momentous life events, whether positive or negative, should be properly marked. Even in this digital age, a handwritten note to send condolences on a death, or congratulations on the birth of a child or a new job, will have much more impact and meaning than a short text or email. The effort that has been taken is commensurate with the importance of the occasion.
We should never hide behind written communications when circumstances demand a face-to-face discussion and explanation, which is simply cowardice. If you are ending a relationship or sacking an employee you need to concede that the emotional and practical reverberations of your decision must be acknowledged and, if at all possible, mitigated. You must express heartfelt regret and, if need be, compassion. You must have the bravery to stand by your decision, even when feeling overwrought. Sending this kind of bad news in writing will inevitably lead to terrible recriminations and heartache.
•Births, engagements: a well-chosen card with a short message (not just a signature) will convey an appropriate note of celebration.
•Deaths: a hand-written letter should be sent promptly, which should contain fond recollections of the deceased person, as well as offers of help and support.
• A new job: it’s always a kind gesture to send a card with a short message of good wishes, especially when it is a young person who is just starting on their career.
• Thanks: It’s fine to send a text or email when you’re thanking hosts for everyday hospitality, but on bigger occasions, such as weddings or overnight stays, it is a pleasing gesture to send a handwritten note of thanks.
• Thank yous for presents: a text message is too cursory an acknowledgment of the trouble that has been taken to purchase and wrap a gift. A short note of thanks will be much more appreciated
• News of redundancy. Mass redundancies, announced by email, have been much in the news lately. News of dismissal or redundancy should be never be conveyed en masse, which cruelly devalues the impact on each individual. The news should be communicated in person, and only by note or letter (never by email or phone) if it is absolutely impossible to find somebody to deliver the news. It’s bad manners to give someone notice of their imminent departure in this surreptitious way, and dismissing someone in person means that you can verify that they have fully understood what has happened and why.
• Telling your spouse that you are seeking a divorce. This is a life-changing decision and, while it might not come as news to your partner and may well be the culmination of much discussion and counselling, it may still be devastating or distressing. Announcing a divorce by email is both cruel and cowardly; it does not give the recipient of the news any forum for discussion, does not allow you to show compassion for the emotional impact, and makes no provision for discussing next steps and the way forward.
• Ending a relationship. While the ramifications and fallout might not rival the complexity of a divorce, it is still extremely lily-livered and shoddy to hide behind the protection of a text or letter. You should be able to look you soon-to-be-ex-partner in the eye and offer an honest explanation.
We all deploy a multiplicity of facial expressions, but they’re not always clear forms of communication. These non-verbal signals are open to interpretation, and we learn at an early age to contextualise a smile or a frown, and then judge whether it is indicating delight or derision, confusion or concentration.
But some signals defy easy interpretation, and a wink is a prime example. For a start, it is not a universally accessible signal – some people actually cannot wink (or arch an eyebrow). But for those of us who can, winking requires some careful forethought. It is a deeply ambiguous signal, and open to misinterpretation.
For many people, a wink is a flirtatious gesture, a form of eye contact that creates a sense of collusion and intimacy between two people. This is probably the most common interpretation of the wink, especially between consenting, mutually attracted adults. But beware, in a different context a wink can easily be misinterpreted as sleazy, especially if it is exchanged between strangers (for example on the tube) – it’s all about using it when flirtation is appropriate.
The sense of complicity that a wink brings can also be used to reinforce friendship. It could, for example, be used between two friends who are making fun of someone who doesn’t have a clue they’re being gently mocked, to signal that they are sharing the joke. But if this signal is intercepted, the wink can easily lead to a sense of rejection and exclusion.
A wink can also be used to underline that a remark is intended as a joke, or to underscore teasing. If there is a sense that this form of humour might be misinterpreted, a wink is a useful way of indicating that a remark should not be taken seriously.
A wink is also a commonly-used way of communicating thanks or conveying friendliness. It is reinforcing behaviour – a non-verbal signal that serves to emphasise the merely verbal.
On the other hand, and confusingly, the wink can be used to undermine verbal communication. If someone is speaking with apparent sincerity, but then winks, most people would interpret this as an ironic footnote to the remark, indicating that what is being said should not be taken literally or seriously. It could also be used to indicate that a lie is being told, or a double entendre is being signalled. In all of these cases a wink is intended to be unsettling, an invitation to venture into the uncertain territory beyond the merely verbal.
These multiple ambiguities are magnified when the wink is used digitally, as an emoji. A wink emoji will tend to inject a note of sarcasm into messages, especially when it is not entirely clear how to interpret them; “I thought Emma’s dress was extraordinary ;)”comes across as sarcastic. If a remark already comes laden with sarcasm, a wink can mitigate it; “You looked absolutely wrecked ;)”. However, the world of emojis is never that simple, and the winky face is often scattered throughout texts for all sorts of reasons beyond the merely sarcastic, often indicating a kind of desperate humour.
In conclusion, the wink is one of the most ambiguous of the non-verbal signals, and in some cultures, such as China and India, is seen as rude and vulgar and should not be used. You should be aware that if you do wink, you have very little control over how it will be interpreted. If you are interested in absolute clarity of communication, and you eschew any gestures that might be unsettling or provocative, you might be wise to forego winking, and to revert to clear verbal communication and universally recognised gestures and body language.
Group chats have become the new way of communicating about a myriad of topics and situations, and inevitably this tool has thrown up a number of new etiquette dilemmas. What are the protocols for joining and leaving the chat? Should you ask before you add to the chat? How promptly should you respond to messages? How do you distinguish between private and public? Is it a good forum for airing grievances?
Our etiquette experts have been pondering the complexities of this communication tool, and have been looking at the ways in which everyday good manners, courtesy and consideration can be brought to bear to make the whole experience more civilised:
• Only use group chats to talk about topics that are relevant to everyone in the group. If you have something particular to say to one individual, message that person directly – you don’t want to force a whole group of people to eavesdrop on one-to-one conversations.
• Ask permission of the rest of the group before adding someone – you wouldn’t indiscriminately bring gate crashers to a close friend’s party, so don’t heedlessly impose your own friends on everyone else.
• Group chats are often used for making arrangements, so it is really helpful to answer promptly and not keep everyone in suspense about your availability. Everyone will see that you’ve read the message, so a non-response just looks rude.
• Always acknowledge messages; unless they involve a pressing question it’s acceptable not to respond immediately, but try to do so reasonably promptly, it’s only polite.
• Post your message in a single chunk of text; you’ll drive people mad if every sentence arrives as a new message with all the attendant, and distracting, alerts.
• If your phone is beginning to distract you from what you really need to do (for example, work), then just mute WhatsApp (no buzzing or beeping alerts when messages come in) and address the backlog later.
• If you’re really feeling overwhelmed by the multitude of messages you’re receiving, it might be a good idea to take some time out and send a message alerting people to your intended absence or non-availability (this is useful when you’re going on holiday too). That way, you won’t be reproached for your non-responsiveness.
• Keep an eye on your WhatsApp commitments and simply leave the groups in which you’re no longer interested – many groups are set up for time-specific purposes anyway, for example to arrange a hen night or a school event.
• If you’re in a group thread, participate. Nobody likes a silent observer who lurks around on the edges of groups at parties, listening and contributing nothing. You will definitely need to respond to group messages, or you’ll begin to look like a stalker.
• Adhere to the original purpose of the group. If it’s been set up by a gang of school-gate mums to facilitate making arrangements for their kids, it would be inappropriate to berate them with your latest political rants, requests to sign petitions, and links to news websites.
• Be careful about deluging the group with memes, adverts, promotions or system-slowing attachments. Unless the group is actually set up for this purpose, people will feel like they’re being spammed.
• Don’t be offended when people leave the group; think of it as comparable to a social event, when some people leave early because they have other commitments or are not particularly sociable, while others stay on until the bitter end. As long as departures are polite they’re completely acceptable.
• Don’t add someone to the group without asking them first. You would never unilaterally RSVP to social invitations on your friends’ behalf, you would ask them if they want to attend first. It’s no different with a WhatsApp group.
• Know your boundaries – before your message, think if what you are saying is for public consumption. There are lots of areas of our lives – financial, health, partnership – over which it is wise to exercise a little discretion, and which might be more appropriately divulged in a private message to a trusted confidant.
• Don’t share criticisms of other people with the group. While WhatsApp groups may feel like places to gossip and exchange confidences, your remarks don’t evaporate into thin air. They lurk around on people’s screens, and in their chat histories, a permanent reminder of your negativity.
• If you have a problem with a member of the group, never air your grievances in the group chat, which will cause no end of discomfort and embarrassment. Address your problem one-to-one with the relevant person.
• Don’t become a nuisance texter, bombarding your group with endless stream of consciousness messages, demanding replies, soliciting opinions. You need to respect the dynamic of the group – if it is a laid-back, occasional arrangement, your compulsive messaging will become oppressive.
It’s wedding season, and all over the country men (and in some cases women) are nervously attempting to pen, and memorise, their best man’s speech, an excruciating ordeal for many nervous public speakers, who are torn between the honour of being asked and severe performance anxiety.
To pile up the pressure, the best man’s speech is generally expected to be the highlight of the post-wedding formalities. It is traditionally the culmination of the wedding speeches, following on from the father of the bride and the groom. The father of the bride (or whoever is chosen to act in this capacity) is expected to thank everyone who has been involved in the organisation of the wedding. He may then launch into some affectionate reminiscences about the bride, pay tribute to her achievements, welcome the groom into the family, and finishes with a toast to the “bride and groom”.
The groom’s duty is, firstly, to thank the father of the bride (or equivalent) on behalf of himself and his new wife for his speech – the first mention of “wife” is always a popular moment. He then thanks the guests, the bride’s parents (if they’re hosting the wedding), and his own parents and best man. He may say a few words about his beautiful new wife, and then – traditionally – finishes with a toast to the bridesmaids, although this is becoming less common and an alternative toast may be preferred.
Now it is the big moment. The preceding speeches have effectively dealt with the etiquette of the occasion; formal thanks have been given to all concerned with the organisation of the wedding, and an elegant tribute has been paid to the bride. The best man’s speech is intended to be a witty and entertaining account of the groom, and a sincere reflection on their friendship. It should be warm and affectionate – ultimately, it is intended as an endorsement of the groom’s character and therefore the marriage.
There is, however, great pressure on the best man to make the speech humorous, the idea being to regale the audience with amusing anecdotes about the groom’s various juvenile antics. This expectation is where many best man’s speeches break down – jokes backfire and stories of callow indiscretions stray into the “‘too much information” category. While it is traditional to cause the groom a flicker of embarrassment as he is forced to listen to accounts of his misspent youth, it is certainly not desirable to reduce him to a state of red-faced shame and humiliation.
Remember, the primary purpose of the speech is to demonstrate how the groom – despite earlier misadventures – found his way to his bride, and ultimately proved his worth. Anecdotes should all serve this purpose; rambling reminiscences that do not contribute to this central narrative are irrelevant.
It is, therefore, imperative to tread carefully. If you do not feel confident about your ability to hold the room spellbound with well-told and apposite anecdotes, it is probably safer to back-pedal a little and opt for a much more workmanlike speech – providing you keep it reasonably short it won’t be too boring and at least it won’t be embarrassing. Remember, as long as you come across as genuinely delighted with your friend’s good fortune, you will be forgiven for not leaving the guests helpless with laughter
• Prepare your speech carefully and practise delivering it, preferably in front of a friend or partner. This will show up any longueurs or lapses of taste, which can be excised. It will allow you to time the speech (aim for no more than five minutes), and will also help you to memorise it – you should avoid using notes if at all possible or ad libbing, unless you’re super-confident.
• Remember the formalities of the speech. It is customary to begin by reading out any messages – usually by text or email – from friends and relatives who couldn’t attend. Make sure that you pronounce their names correctly (ask ahead if need be).
• Once you’ve spoken about the groom, remember to include some stories about the couple – how they met, their relationship and a few warm-hearted compliments to the bride.
• The speech should conclude with reiterated thanks to all involved in organising the wedding, and a toast to the newly-weds; you should also announce the cutting of the cake, if applicable.
• Resist giving in to your nerves and drinking too much before your speech – you may be deluded enough to think it will calm you down, but it will certainly impede your performance, sometimes disastrously.
• It’s fine to refer to your friendship with the groom, but keep it short – if you’re not careful, the speech will end up being all about you, and that’s a big no-no.
• Positively no dirty or off-colour jokes or swearing – you will be talking to a broad, multi-generational audience (possibly including children), so it is better to err on the side of being bland, rather than giving offence.
• You may fancy yourself as an all-round entertainer, but don’t get over-confident – you will run the risk of upstaging the bride and groom, and you should remember that first and foremost it is their big day.
Image: the lobby of the Cavalry & Guards Club in Piccadilly
Seventeenth-century London coffee houses were the ancestors of the private members’ clubs that evolved in the 18th century, reaching their peak in the Victorian period when there were over 400 in London (today there are less than 40).
Coffee houses were male retreats, where gentlemen could meet up, eat, drink, socialise, read newspapers and debate contemporary issues, and many of these essential traits persisted. Private members’ club were initially for men only; they provided a space outside the domestic, female-dominated sphere, where gentlemen could consolidate friendships, make professional contacts, or simply seek sanctuary away from everyday concerns and problems. A typical gentleman’s club provided a formal dining room, a bar, a library, a billiards room, and a suite of parlours for gambling or socialising. They were frequently located in grandiose, lavish buildings, providing luxurious and comfortable surroundings, which created a sense of the club being a “home from home”.
London’s clubs were concentrated in the affluent district around the St James area, in what became known as ‘Clubland’. While clubs were originally aristocratic, by the early 19th century they were bastions of the contemporary class system, wielding extremely strict controls over the background and calibre of potential members. Clubs tended to reflect common interests – political, professional or cultural – reinforced in the choice of members, which ensured that they would provide a coming-together of like-minded people.
Clubs were seen as social retreats, where it was bad form to talk about business. However, by fostering friendships and cementing social networks, they did in fact play an important role in building strategic business networks and enabling their members to advance professionally. Clubs were excellent proving grounds for young gentlemen, who were able to build up their own network of respectable contacts, whilst polishing their social skills and gentlemanly attributes. By demanding scrupulous acquiescence with a strict set of rules and rituals, these institutions promoted moderation and social cohesion – social transgressions could potentially be sanctioned by a humiliating exclusion.
The oldest clubs, such as White’s, Brook’s and Boodle’s, all provided an environment for gambling, which was illegal outside of members-only establishments. White’s was for Tories, Brook’s was for the Whigs, and Boodle’s was for the country set. Founded slightly later, the Carlton Club was for Conservatives and the Reform Club was for Liberals. The Travellers Club was for globe-trotting gentlemen, while the Athenaeum focused on men of science, literature and art. Housed in beautiful Palladian mansions with grandiose entrances, these clubs were at the heart of a part of London that catered for gentlemen – from the barbers of Jermyn Street to the tailors of Savile Row.
Given the benefits that accrued from club membership, it is scarcely surprising that the rituals of joining these establishments were very exacting. When a club accepted a member, it was known as an ‘election’. The membership voted for the election of new candidates, who were proposed and seconded by existing club members. Typically, voters chose from a large supply of black and white balls, and secretly cast a single ball into a ballot box (voting was strictly anonymous). When the voting was complete, the box was opened and the balls were counted. Black balls indicated a rejection of the proposed member; the number of black balls needed for disqualification varied from club to club – in some very exclusive establishments, a single black ball would be enough to deny membership – hence the phrase “to be blackballed”.
Clubs operated a gentleman’s code for taking payment. Members signed a chit for drinks and meals consumed, and in some cases did not even have to do this, as staff kept records. Regular accounts were sent to members at the end of the month, and the expectation was that they would be paid promptly, or incur a ten per cent surcharge. In some clubs if an account that was outstanding after ninety days the non-payer’s name went up on a board – a severe humiliation. In general, these establishments were run on an honour system, and if there was any shortcomings in a members’ behaviour, the club authorities would hold his proposer and seconder to account.
This exclusively gentlemanly world was inevitably challenged. Women’s clubs, intended to rival their male counterparts, began to be founded in the three decades before World War I. Some of these clubs aped the grandiosity and pomp of their male predecessors, others’ raison d’etre was to advance women socially and educationally. Ladies’ clubs were grouped to the north of Piccadilly, close to the shopping areas of Bond Street, Regent Street and Oxford Street. Famous ladies’ clubs included the Alexandra (1884), Pioneer (1892), Bath Club (1894), and the Empress (1897). These clubs provided strong-minded, independent women with comfortable facilities, well-appointed accommodation for visitors from out of town, and in some cases, programmes of improving lectures, as well as smoking rooms for the more raffish members.
Inevitably, as traditional gentlemen’s clubs have been forced to evolve and adapt in the changing social climate of the post-war years, one major concession for many has been the decision to admit women as guests and members. There are, however, some very notable, and traditionalist, exceptions, which retain their men-only status (although some allow female visitors), including: Brook’s, Boodle’s, the Garrick Club, Pratt’s, the Travellers Club and White’s. The University Women’s Club, founded in 1921, has no male members (in 2018 another all-female club, the AllBright, was added to the list).
While some bastions of tradition continue to exist, many clubs found themselves marooned in a fading historical anomaly. From the mid-1990s many members’ clubs have moved with the times, offering a much more nuanced and all-embracing experience of the luxury retreat. Many clubs that have been founded since the turn of the 21st century are now the preserve of millionaires and newly-affluent millennials, who seek an exclusive, and unique, experience.
While many contemporary clubs still nod towards the wood-panelled, book-lined, thickly-carpeted opulence of the Victorian era, the actual experiences on offer are infinitely more varied and attuned to 21st-century zeitgeist. Clubs now provide gyms, pools, saunas, hammams and fitness and wellbeing centres that offer everything from boxing to hot yoga. Gastronomic meals, cooked by top chefs, are a must.
No longer homes from homes where work is a secondary priority, many clubs today are used as places where members can work and engage in professional networking. As the divide between pleasure time and the world of work becomes more ill-defined, clubs provide excellent dedicated workspaces for laptop-wielding digital nomads, who are able to benefit from all the social contact that clubs provide.
Many also offer contemporary guest rooms for overnight stays, as well as laying on full programmes of exhibitions, lectures and concerts. Dress codes are notably relaxed (smart jeans and trainers are often tolerated), creating a less conventional ambience.
The more traditional clubs still adhere to relatively strict dress codes, which are perhaps more rigorously enforced than in most present-day communal spaces.
In general a ‘formal’ dress code is recommended for everyday attendance (a suit or tailored jacket and trousers, a collared shirt and tie, or the female equivalent – think smart business attire).
Some clubs relax this code to ‘smart casual’ for Friday evenings and weekends, which effectively means that ties can be discarded and, in some cases, smart pullovers may be worn instead of jackets.
In most clubs, certain items of casual clothing are not considered acceptable. These include: jeans, shorts, t-shirts, tracksuits, trainers, flip-flops, or clothing with brash logos.
While every club has its own particular traditions and practices, there are a certain number of etiquette rules that would typically be found in most establishments in the 19th century, and many persist to this day:
• Aspiring members should write, in the first instance, to the club secretary. It is generally necessary to be introduced and seconded by two existing members.
• If accepted, new club members should pay for their annual subscription by return.
• New members should familiarise themselves with the club rules and should comply with them. They should be very aware of existing hierarchies and privileges – for example they should not hog the latest newspapers or occupy the best chair. They should defer to older members at all times.
• New members should be cautious about butting into conversations between existing members. They should wait until a friendly remark is addressed to them before joining a conversational group.
• Club members are always amiable and courteous, reticent about inflicting their own views on others, and resist gossip about fellow-members at all times.
• Always leave club dressing rooms exactly as you found them as a courtesy to other members.
• If you are playing cards or billiards, you must immediately settle all gambling debts.
• Resist approaches for loans or credit from other members, who may well be persistent and adept at judging likely targets.
• While you must be diligent about upholding the standards of the club and your own behaviour, never be censorious of other members.
• Do not tip club servants. If you want to offer them some reward, there is usually a ‘Holiday Box’, where you can leave a contribution from time to time, which will be divided up between all the servants.
As we settle down to enjoy another great pillar of the summer Season, the Wimbledon tennis tournament, we contemplate the changes that have occurred over the last few years in how women are addressed.
Up until this year, Wimbledon’s honours boards treated men and women differently. Men were identified by their initial and surname, whereas women were given a title (Mrs/Miss), and initial and – if they were married, – their husband’s surname. Chris Evert, for example, who won the women’s singles in 1981 while she was married to John Lloyd, was credited as Mrs J.M. Lloyd for that victory.
Wimbledon, a bastion of British tradition, has reflected a practice that was long-established and codified in Debrett’s own Correct Form (first published in 1970), which declared that wives should be addressed by the prefix ‘Mrs’ and their husband’s initial and surname (“to be addressed by her own Christian name or initials implies that her marriage was dissolved. This mistake is frequently made”). This practice, which existed for centuries, came about because of the higher status accorded to married women in British society – indeed, young married women were given precedence over older single women on social occasions.
A grudging concession to modernity is made in the following footnote in the 1976 edition:
“Ladies, especially those engaged in business or the professions, who prefer not to disclose their marital status, have recently taken to using the prefix ‘Ms’ (pronounced ‘Muz’) in lieu of ‘Mrs’ or ‘Miss’. In 1976 the Speaker of the House of Commons agreed to lady Members of Parliament styling themselves ‘Ms’ if they so wished. This terminology should not be used unless a lady has indicated this preference, because it offends many more than it pleases.”
Society has moved on since the 1970s and Debrett’s now reflects these changes on its own website (with a nod to tradition):
“Traditionally, it is considered incorrect for a married woman or a widow to be addressed by her own forename or initials, as this implies that her marriage has been dissolved. However, it is becoming increasingly customary for married women and widows to use their own forenames and initials.
Some women, especially in a professional context, choose to retain their maiden names, in which case many prefer the prefix ‘Ms’.”
Increasingly, as society becomes less formal, titles denoting women’s marital status are dispensed with altogether. Last year, there was an uproar amongst Australian fans when Ashleigh Bartley was referred to as Miss A. Bartley on the honours board. This will no longer be the case, reflecting a more egalitarian stance.
In general, it is becoming quite acceptable to dispense with titles altogether. In business correspondence, for example, it is quite frequent not to use ‘Mr’, ‘Mrs’ or ‘Ms’ at all. This is our own ‘Business correspondence’ advice:
“Salutation considerations can be a matter of concern when commencing a business letter. Do you put ‘Dear John’? Or should it be Dear Mr Debrett’? It is becoming increasingly acceptable to put ‘Dear John Debrett’ instead, if you are writing to someone you have not met. To use the first name and family name is less formal and less impersonal than using ‘Mr’ or ‘Ms’ and the surname, but isn’t crudely over-friendly. It also deals with the difficult question of whether to address a female recipient as ‘Ms’, ‘Miss’ (old-fashioned, but preferred by some individuals), or ‘Mrs’.”
The British love of rowing dates back to the early 17th century, when watermen, whose job was to ferry passengers along the River Thames in London, competed in races (regattas) and were awarded prizes by the various guilds and livery companies as well as the owners of the great houses that lined the river. By the end of the 18th century “boat clubs” had become established at many of Britain’s leading public schools, such as Eton and Westminster, and colleges at Oxford and Cambridge followed suit in the early 19th century – Jesus College and Brasenose College in Oxford claim to have the two oldest boating clubs. The boat race between Oxford and Cambridge Universities first took place in 1829, and soon became a popular spectacle.
The town of Henley-on-Thames, which is located on the River Thames in South Oxfordshire, was perfectly placed to capitalise on the growing mania for rowing.
The Henley Regatta dates back to 1839, when the mayor and townspeople put it on as part of a fair. Presided over – and often attended by – the royal family, Henley’s famous annual regatta now attracts international crews and even Olympic champions, making it a must-see event in the sporting calendar. It is the best known regatta in the world, and a long-established event in the summer Social Season.
The Henley Royal Regatta comprises over 300 races of an international standard. These head-to-head knockout races take place over a one-mile 550-yard (2.11-km) course (112 m longer than the international standard). The most long-standing, and celebrated, race is the Grand Challenge Cup for Men’s Eights, awarded since the regatta’s inception and open to all established amateur male crews.
Races can be watched by the general public from various points along the Berkshire (towpath) side of the Thames. The Stewards’ Enclosure is situated on the Berkshire bank directly opposite the finishing line, and is the location for the awards ceremony on the final day. It is limited in access to the Stewards (former rowers who organise the regatta), and members of the enclosure and their guests; the waiting list for membership is years-long, though applicants for membership will be more successful if they are proposed or seconded by a Steward, or can show a demonstrable involvement in competitive rowing. The Stewards who run the event wear elegant silver badges, while members have a colour-coded metal badge, and guests are identified by a cardboard tag. The enclosure has covered grandstands, a bandstand, a marquee with a restaurant, bars and rolling lawns, and strictly enforces a dress code.
The Regatta Enclosure, just downstream from the Stewards’ Enclosure, is open to all by admission fee, and offers riverside seating and an open Grandstand.
For members of the public who want to avoid entrance fees and dress codes, there is always the option of watching the racing from Remenham Farm, next to Remenham church and village, where they can enjoy the entertainment at the Barn Bar.
Ladies wishing to enter the Stewards’ Enclosure must ensure their hemline is below the knee. Alternatively, they can wear jackets with trousers or trouser suits. Bare shoulders are fine and hat wearing is not obligatory, but is encouraged. Remember that high-heeled shoes will sink into the grassy banks. No shorts, leggings, tracksuits or jeans are allowed.
Gentlemen should wear lounge suits, or rowing blazers or jackets and flannels, and a tie or cravat.
There is no dress code for the Regatta Enclosure, where the atmosphere is much more informal, but many spectators do sport club blazers and dress up for the occasion.
It’s summertime and our summer holidays are just around the corner. For many of us, the fantasy of enjoying a week or two in a holiday cottage or villa with a few close friends is extremely seductive. But remember, the undoubted benefits of sharing your holiday space with a convivial crowd of people can all too often be offset by petty disputes and ill-feeling.
You should be able to head off any potential difficulties by following our simple advice – it’s just a matter of being observant and aware of everything that is going on and ensuring that chores are equally divided between all the guests:
If you are the prime mover, you will have probably found the property, rounded up the guests and taken charge of all the administration associated with the rental. This clearly represents a lot of work, and you should be rewarded for your diligence. You are entitled to choose your own bedroom, and other guests should recognise this and give you priority.
If the rental is a cooperative venture, you might find that you’re racing your fellow guests, trying to get to the property first and secure the best accommodation. This undignified land-grab can ruffle feathers at the outset and cause a poisonous atmosphere. It is better if you sit down your fellow guests beforehand, look at the property brochure or website, and try to allocate rooms on the basis of need. For example, a couple with a baby might need a larger bedroom; an elderly relative might prefer a room on the ground floor and so on. If there are no obvious priorities, why not have a lottery for rooms?
Discuss catering arrangements at the outset, preferably while you’re still planning the holiday. It’s pointless to impose a one-size-fits-all regime on a random collection of people with different tastes and proclivities. Presumably you will know your planned household very well, and will be able to adapt to their individual foibles.
It’s unnecessary to set up a rigid cooking rota if one of your guests is a passionate cook, who loves nothing better than visiting markets, sourcing and preparing local produce, and resents every minute he or she is shut out of the kitchen. In this situation, it would obviously be wise to make way for the enthusiastic cook – other guests could compensate by acting as sous-chefs when needed, and taking on full responsibility for washing up and clearing the kitchen.
If, on the other hand, nobody is stridently demanding kitchen privileges, then it is sensible to take it in turns to prepare the main meal, and it is obviously easiest if the person who is cooking is also responsible for shopping. If you’re adamantly anti-cooking, or resent being expected to prepare meals on your holidays, then you should treat your fellow guests to a meal out.
It might be that, as a group, you decide to eschew the whole home-cooking routine, and you plan to enjoy the food in the local pub, trattoria or taverna every night. If that is the case, you could all contribute to an eating out kitty at the outset; alternatively you could each take it in turns to pay for an evening meal. Whatever method you choose, you will need to be relaxed and laid back about ordering meals and paying for them – quibbling about who had what will definitely erode the holiday spirit.
You can be sure that nobody will want to take total responsibility for washing up, tidying and cleaning, so this is an area where it is essential that everybody shares the chores, and this should be made clear at the very beginning. We’re all grown-ups and are unlikely to appreciate a washing-up rota, so you will need to be observant and pro-active. If one person is washing up day after day, while fellow guests blithely loll on their loungers, then resentment is inevitable, and holiday good spirits will evaporate. Watch out for guests who are turning into drudges and stop the rot.
Remember it’s not just about preparing dinner. Throughout the day, drinks will need to be made and offered, and perhaps a light picnic lunch will need to be assembled. These countless small tasks can add up, so it is important that you’re alert and ready to jump up and offer to help.
Don’t look at a shared holiday rental as a chance to palm your children off on your unsuspecting friends. Your children remain your responsibility and, if you need help with them, this has to be negotiated on an ad hoc basis.
Leave everything as you’ve found it, dispose of your rubbish and maintain basic cleaning standards while you’re in residence. Report any spillages or breakages to the landlord before you leave.
Think about your neighbours: while you may only be in residence for a week or two, your landlord may have to mollify them and pick up the pieces if you’ve annoyed them during your stay.
Be aware of noise nuisance. Treat the place with respect and don’t pollute a quiet county neighbourhood with loud music, screaming kids and roaring engines. If you’ve brought your dogs, control loud barking and make sure they don’t stray into private property.
Drive carefully; you may be tucked away down a narrow country lane, so don’t enrage the locals with crazy driving antics. If parking spaces are not provided, be very considerate about blocking drives or obstructing passing places.
It’s school sports day season and the knives are out. All over the country, mild-mannered, supportive parents are being transformed into hysterical monsters, screaming encouragement and abuse from the side lines, suffused with a spirit of ultra-competitiveness and cutthroat rivalry.
As often as not, the targets of this naked lust for sporting glory are easily distracted and troublingly unfocused, determined to have a good time, even if it means coming an inglorious last in the sack race. Their main, and laudable, priority is to have fun, outside on a summer’s day, with their friends.
Why then, do parents unleash their inner demons on this most innocent of occasions? A possible explanation is that the sports day provides a legitimate excuse for a release of feelings that are pent-up and suppressed for the rest of the year. Parents want the best for their children; they want them to excel and their ambitions are boundless. Most of the time, they recognise that revealing their inner drive is counter-productive, liable to distress their children, giving them a bad case of performance anxiety.
Inevitably, parents are also hyper-aware of where their children stand in relation to their contemporaries. On play dates and at children’s parties, they cannot resist eying up the ‘competition’, comparing abilities, accomplishments, coordination and verbal skills. Much of this behaviour is to do with seeking reassurance; ascertaining their child’s abilities against a ‘control group’ of contemporaries.
All these tendencies are repressed most of the time. Parents encourage their children’s friends, are supportive of their parents, congratulate them on their children’s attainments, and try to radiate a general air of positivity and encouragement. One-upmanship and boasting about their own children’s achievements is definitely frowned upon, and may well lead to school gate ostracism.
Except on sports days (and match days)… These are the occasions when parents can toss aside their inhibitions and reveal themselves as ferocious partisans. This is acceptable up to a point, but once the social barriers are down it can easily get out of hand – some schools have even banned parents from attending sports day because staff and children feel intimidated by their threatening behaviour.
Ultimately, none of this is particularly helpful to our children. We strive hard to teach them about winning and losing and sportsmanship. We solemnly indoctrinate them with platitudes about being a good sport – it’s not all about winning the game or the race, it’s about playing or competing well. This means being magnanimous in victory and gracious in defeat. Of course, they must foster a highly developed sense of competition, but they must never let the urge to win debase their own conduct. Most importantly of all, they must accept defeat or victory with equanimity – no bragging, triumphalism, whining, arguing, or whingeing.
These are difficult lessons for any child to learn – their natural instincts urge them to go hell for leather, to rage or gloat with uninhibited glee. They have to learn to control these powerful impulses, and behave in a way that is highly contrived.
So it’s very counter-productive if they see their own hypocritical parents indulging in a storm of emotion in the spectator stands. Wouldn’t it be better if – as the proud parent of a small child – you led by example? Try and contain your more extreme emotions; support your child by all means, commiserate if they fail, congratulate them if they win, and extend the same courtesies to other children and their parents. That way, school sports day will be, as was always intended, the first step on the long journey towards civilised behaviour, rather than a shocking demonstration that (parental) nature is “red in tooth and claw”.
We have been consulting an excellent guide to good manners, Principles of Politeness and of Knowing the World, compiled from the letters of Lord Chesterfield, with comments by the Rev Dr John Trusler in 1775. John Trusler (1735–1820) was an eccentric English divine and literary man, who published copious works on a range of subjects, from history, travel and the English language to etiquette manuals, self-help guides and medical advice on longevity.
This entertaining volume is full of imprecations and recommendations to young men who are entering society. While some of the reverend gentleman’s musings are pompous and old-fashioned, much that he recommends is perfectly sensible advice for both men and women and, surprisingly, is still applicable to modern society and contemporary behaviour.
Here is a sample of what he calls the “sundry little accomplishments” that are the prerequisites of “good breeding”:
• “Pay some attention to your behaviour at the table, where it is exceedingly rude to scratch any part of your body, to spit, or blow your nose, if you can possibly avoid it, to eat greedily, to lean your elbows on the table, to pick your teeth before the dishes are removed, or to leave the table before Grace is said.”
Most of this list of admonishments still holds true today, though it is to be hoped that nobody would think it acceptable to spit at the table. Grace is rarely said these days, but of course – on the occasions when it features – you must bow your head and sit quietly until it is finished.
• “Eating quick, or very slow at meals, is characteristic of the vulgar; the first infers poverty, that you have not had a good meal for some time; the last, if abroad, that you dislike your entertainment.”
While we all have our own natural eating pace, it is certainly polite to try and conform to the general pace of the people around you. Bolting your food will mean you are left idle at the end of the meal with a reproachfully empty plate; eating agonisingly slowly will mean that everyone at the dinner table is waiting for you to finish and you may find yourself the object of unwanted attention.
• “Humming a tune to ourselves, drumming with our fingers on the table, making a noise with our feet, and such like are all breaches of good manners, and indications of our contempt for the persons present; therefore they should not be indulged.”
We might argue that a tendency to jiggle our feet or fidget does not necessarily express contempt for the company we keep, but we would certainly agree that all tics and distractions are extremely irritating, and in many cases will be seen as a troubling sign of nervousness.
• “Pulling out your watch in company unasked, either at home or abroad, is a mark of ill breeding… If at home, it appears as if you were tired of your company, and wish them to be gone; if abroad, as if the hours dragged heavily, and you wished to be gone yourself. If you want to know the time, withdraw.”
While scrutinising a pocket-watch was a very hard gesture to conceal, this advice still holds true today. Whether you are glancing at a wristwatch or quickly consulting your phone, it will still be obvious you are looking at the time, and the people you are with may feel affronted. It’s far better to wait until you can make an excuse – a visit to the bathroom, or taking a few minutes outside for a breath of air.
• “A polite manner of refusing to comply with the solicitations of the company is also very necessary to be learned; for a young man, who seems to have no will of his own, but does everything that is asked of him, may be a very good natured fellow, but he is a very silly one. If you are invited to drink at any man’s house, more than you think it’s wholesome, you may say ‘you wish you could, but that so little makes you both drunk and sick, that you should be only be bad company by doing it’.”
This sensible advice concerns the way in which we can all be led astray, especially when we are prone to accede to all sorts of ill-advised suggestions because we do not want to appear to be uptight or ‘party-poopers’. Tusler’s recommendation is that, by pleading our own risk or susceptibility, we will not cause offence to other people.
• “It were better not to know a diamond from the club, than to become a gambler; but as custom has introduced innocent cardplaying at most friendly meetings it marks the gentleman to handle them genteely, and play them well, I hope you will play only for small sums; should you lose your money, pray lose it with temper; or win, receive your winnings without either elation or greediness.”
While card-playing is no longer a customary practice at most social gatherings, the advice about gambling in still relevant, and may well be applicable if you join a group at a horse-racing event, for example, where it is common practice to have a flutter. It is still vitally important that you conceal your despair or joy (this may be painful for people who are nursing the pain of a loss) and don’t inflict your emotional highs and lows on your friends.
• “To write well and correct, and in a pleasing style, is another part of polite education… Epistolary correspondence should not be carried on in a studied or affected style, but the language should flow from the pen, as naturally and as easily as it would from the mouth. In short, a letter should be penned in the same style as you would talk to your friend if he was present.”
The admonition to write in a clear, conversational style – free from pretentious prose and pompous posturing, was clearly important in an age when the primary means of communicating with friends and family was by letter. In essence, it is still relevant today; it behoves us all to communicate as clearly as possible, whether we are using emails, texting or posting.
• “Be careful never to tell in one company what you see or hear in another; much less to divert the present company at the expense of the last. Things apparently indifferent may, when often repeated and told abroad, have much more serious consequences than imagined. In conversation, there is generally a tacit reliance that what is said will not be repeated; and a man, though not enjoined to secrecy, will be excluded the company, if found to be a tattler.”
This is timeless advice against gossiping. It is pointed out that seemingly trivial tittle-tattle may become much more ominous once it has been churned through the rumour-mill. We are also reminded that people who gossip, no matter how fascinating their friends might find it, are ultimately seen as unreliable scandalmongers, who cannot be trusted with a secret.
• “Some men are vain enough to think they are quite a consequence by alliance, or by an acquaintance with persons of distinguished character or abilities; hence they are eternally talking of their grandfather, Lord such a one; their kinsman, Sir William such a one; or their intimate friend, Doctor such a one, with whom, perhaps, they are scarce acquainted. If they are ever found out, (and that they are sure to be, one time or other) they become ridiculous and contemptible.… A man’s intrinsic merit does not rise from an ennobled alliance, or a reputable acquaintance.”
Name-dropping is just as problematic today as it was in Trusler’s time. It is a crude attempt to gain kudos from someone else’s reputation – as he points out, it is more likely to reveal feelings of social insecurity or to make you look like a sad celebrity-stalker.
• “Never be witty, at the expense of anyone present… you may possibly thus gain the laugh on your side for the present, but it will make the person, perhaps, at whose expense you are merry, your enemy for ever after; and even those who laugh with you, will, on a little reflection, fear you, and probably despise you.”
It is still the case that making fun of people is an easy way to get a laugh from the assembled company, but you can easily stray into dangerous territory, where your target may feel victimised or insulted (of course, there are exceptions to this rule, and some friends actively enjoy teasing each other). Be very careful about humour, as it can be easily misinterpreted – what you think of as light-hearted joshing may come across to other people as inappropriate and over-critical.
• “True politeness consists in making every body happy about you; and as to mortify is to render unhappy it can be nothing but the worst of breeding. Make it a rule, rather to flatter a person’s vanity than otherwise make him, if possible, more in love with himself, and you will be certain to gain his esteem; never tell him any thing he may not like to hear, nor say things that will put him our countenance, but let it be your study on all occasions to please; this will be making friends instead of enemies, and be a means of serving yourself in the end.”
We couldn’t agree more – it is always sensible to err on the side of amiability and kindness, thus ensuring that people enjoy your company and are well-disposed towards you.
