Books: The Rough & the Smooth

LEARNING HOW TO BEHAVE (95 pp.)

Arthur M. Schlesinger—Mocm/7/on ($2).

Harvard Historian Schlesinger* is almost apologetic about this busman’s holiday—a review of American books of etiquette from the 17th Century to the present day. “Nothing that concerns human beings can fail to concern the historian,” he wrote; “the rise and progress of courtesy . . . deserves attention.”

Rough, religious Americans of the 17th Century had a handful of homemade rules of etiquette that were ambitious (“Cloath your selves with the Silk of Piety, the Satin of Sanctity, the Purple of Modesty . . .”) and sometimes blunt (“Fish and visitors stink in three days”). By the 18th Century, they had learned to plagiarize the French and English rule-books, after carefully tossing out all that smacked of aristocratic cynicism.

Andrew Jackson’s entry into the White House—previously tenanted only by the “better people” — symbolized a sharp break from accepted manners. Jackson himself, says Author Schlesinger, was naturally courteous, but the new-rich were afraid that mere courtesy was not enough. Ostentation became the rule. Wrote one commentator: “Always keep callers waiting, till they have had time to notice the outlay of money in your parlors. . . .”

If It Bites, Say Nothing. But most etiquettists were deadly serious in wising-up social aspirants: “[Do not] seize ladies by the waist.” Never let your hostess “know that you have found . . . insects in your bed.” If you “throw down a waiter loaded with splendid cut glass . . . you should not. .. appear the least mortified.”

By the turn of the 19th Century, conversational ease had become a “hallmark of the elite.” Tasteful topics must be chosen, e.g.: “The conversation may gradually center on the Egyptian obelisk, or the Tower of London.” Some guides printed “model conversations.” Example:

The Gentleman: “We must be careful not to step on that elaborate train.”

The Lady: “Yes, indeed, that would be a mishap. But trains are graceful in spite of their inconvenience.”

The Gentleman: “Oh, I admire them, of course. Only I have such a dread of stepping on them and bringing down the wrath of the fair wearer on my devoted head.”

Formality v. Courtesy. Schlesinger agrees with Emerson that “defect in manners is usually the defect of fine perceptions,” and holds that today’s abhorrence of snobbish formalities should not extend to contempt for simple courtesy. He finds promise of improved manners not so much in private homes as in public dealings: 1) in the businessman’s realization that courtesy increases dividends; 2) in the wartime effort to make the G.I. respect the forms of citizens of other nations; 3) in the basically polite approach of the Good Neighbor Policy.

-Not to be confused with Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., his son, author of a Pulitzer Prize biography of Andrew Jackson: The Age of Jackson (Little, Brown; $5).