DEAR MISS MANNERS: At a concert put on by an amateur choral group and orchestra, where my husband and I were quite impressed with the performance, a piece that had several movements was performed. I have always believed that one is supposed to wait to the end of the entire piece to applaud, rather than to applaud at the end of each movement.

But in this case, many people began applauding at the end of each movement. The conductor did not turn to acknowledge the applause, and he continued with the next movement, so I feel we were correct in waiting to applaud. However, I did feel uncomfortable not to applaud with others at a performance that I enjoyed. What is correct in this situation?

GENTLE READER: Stripped of its cultural particulars, your question is whether it is correct to be correct or better to join others in being incorrect.

If pressed, Miss Manners could produce examples of good manners requiring suppressing one's own good manners in order not to expose the understandable ignorance of others. Heads of state famously drink from their fingerbowls if their foreign guests do out of unfamiliarity with the custom, but this does not mean that people in ordinary situations should lower their standards to meet those of people who should know better.

In this case, you would be disobeying a practical rule, intended to allow the composition to be heard as a whole, without benefiting anyone. Other members of the audience are unlikely to be overcome with shame at your failing to interrupt the conductor in mid-stream, and he, as you noticed, was clearly annoyed.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Please give me your thoughts about people who send flowers for a funeral service and designate that the flowers go to a certain family member after the service. Isn't that a lot to ask of a grieving family, to have that extra chore? And doesn't it show favoritism to a certain member of the family? When flowers are sent, shouldn't it be up to the family where they go after the funeral service?

GENTLE READER: The family may be inconvenienced by this, but Miss Manners notices that the person who is slighted is the deceased. Flowers sent to the funeral itself should be addressed "To the funeral of --" and are generally taken to the gravesite afterward.

Flowers may also be sent as a condolence to bereaved individuals by their own particular connections. Miss Manners would hope that a grieving family would not be so petty as to fret over who gets more.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a vegetarian, and I am wondering what to do when responding to wedding invitations that offer a meal choice between two meat alternatives. I do not want to demand a "special meal" from my hosts. Do I not check any? Or check either one and tell the server at the wedding? Or do I just write vegetarian on the invitation?

GENTLE READER: Your desire to spare your hosts preparing a special meal is admirable, but we are not talking here about their spending hours in the kitchen. This is not a true social form, but merely a tally for a caterer, and any experienced caterer will count on serving a certain number of vegetarian meals.

Still, Miss Manners agrees that simply ordering a meal sounds crude. She suggests writing, "No meat, thank you."

:

When the United States Supreme Court strode bravely through two fields of etiquette that Miss Manners knows to be strewn with landmines, she had full confidence that it would emerge safely. This is because the justices were careful to stick to handling the legal aspects, at which they are quite good, and leave the difficult part to her.

The two fearsome areas are canvassing and tipping. In the etiquette business, they are recognized as major sources of annoyance and anxiety in which the rude are generally rewarded and those trying hardest to be polite are the most likely to be victimized.

The doorbell rings, and the resident allows himself to be interrupted and to be addressed on views and beliefs that are considered so personal that one is cautioned not to bring them up lightly with even one's most intimate friends. Many feel that once they discover that the summons is not connected with an anticipated package or guest, they are trapped and owe the courtesy of listening, even if they have no intention of changing their politics or religion. It is the ones who respond rudely with threats, insults and slammed doors who minimize the imposition.

Tipping upsets both those who are worried that they are not giving the right amount and those who are certain that they are not getting the right amount. The formulae are so complicated with factors of geography and luxury level, as well as job description and quality of service, that there is plenty of room for abuse from all parties -- customer, employee and employer -- and it usually comes laced with some form of rudeness.

Rudeness is not illegal, nor should it be, even though it would save Miss Manners a great deal of trouble to be able to back up her persuasive powers with police action. The law has quite enough to do without nosing into every case of petty irritation.

The Supreme Court upheld freedom of speech when it struck down a village ordinance that would control door-to-door canvassing through issuing permits. In regard to tipping, it dealt only with the tax angle, permitting the Internal Revenue Service to estimate tips when calculating payroll taxes.

Fortunately, Miss Manners can offer some relief to polite people who feel obligated to hear out strangers who ring their doorbells. The choice is not between rudeness and pretending to be interested when one is not. Those who have peepholes in their doors may ignore any summons entirely, and those who open the door mistakenly may properly close it quietly after saying, "Thank you, but I'm not interested." They should regard it as saving the canvasser's time, as well as their own.

Tipping is a more difficult area, because the etiquette outrages are legion: Customers who stiff low-paid employees whose tips are an expected part of their income, workers who use embarrassment or insult to extract larger tips, industry spokesmen who give out false etiquette information about how much tipping is proper, and so on.

Even the supposed advantages of the tipping are questionable. The idea that one gets better service by paying above the stated price cannot escape the implication that substandard service is otherwise provided -- unfair as that may be in the case of hard-working individuals. And the notion that it is a way of rewarding hard work is undercut by the fact that the lavish tips go to the august people who assign tables rather than to the people who bus those tables.

Having long campaigned in vain to abolish this unseemly system and build the cost of service into the price of doing business, Miss Manners sees hope in the new decision. Whatever is said in defense of tipping as a privilege for the customer and an incentive for the worker, it is an open secret that its true value is its elusiveness in regard to taxes.

Should this decision make it worthwhile to pay restaurant and other workers a full and dependable income, she will be most grateful to her legal sisters and brethren.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: When you are having a party, dinner or whatever the occasion, and you state a time that it starts, what do you do when a guest comes unexpectedly an hour early? What is the proper etiquette on handling guests arriving to a party before the start time of the event?

GENTLE READER: First you reassure the embarrassed guest that he need not be embarrassed by saying, "I'm so glad to have a chance for a real visit with you before the others get here." Then you leave him sitting alone in the living room while you finish getting dressed.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am having a dinner party where I am going to serve a fish casserole of crab, shrimp and scallops and a side dish of steamed fresh asparagus with lemon butter sauce. Do I set the place with fish forks and knives, dinner forks and knives or both?

GENTLE READER: Although etiquette has a reputation for making mealtime difficult, this is false, if not slanderous. Miss Manners has never been able to understand how people can think such mean thoughts about something that is only trying to help.

The rule is to provide only the table implements that are necessary to get the food into the mouth without causing undo stress on the tablecloth, rug or appetites of other diners. Everything you mention on this menu can be eaten with the fish knife and fork, so there is no need to provide a meat knife and fork. The asparagus may even be properly eaten with the fingers, although if you happen to have those lovely little silver asparagus tongs, you will want to provide them.

Oh, that must be how etiquette got its reputation.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am increasingly encountering a problem at social events that I hope you can help me with. It concerns the prevalence in gay social circles of kissing other gay men during greetings and goodbyes.

As a gay man who restricts his kissing to boyfriends (my own) and close family members only, I frequently find myself trying to dodge the proffered lips of fellow party guests. I further note that the kissers generally do not extend this behavior to straight men or to women of any sexual orientation. It is an "honor" reserved almost exclusively for other gay men.

Up to now I have successfully employed your excellent advice for anyone attempting a kiss-dodging: a pre-emptive handshake, friendly smile and cheerful hello or goodbye. Unfortunately, I now sometimes find myself foundering in the post-handshake aftermath.

A small minority of kissers are easy to deal with: They make some remark implying that I must be uncomfortable with my sexuality, which gets them a raised eyebrow, a firm goodbye and an entry onto my "Do Not Invite" mental list. The real problem is the folks who are genuinely trying to be friendly and who are hurt by my desire to impose some sort of limit on public displays of affection (especially ones from which heterosexual men and all women are excluded). These guys won't say anything, but it is apparent that they are a little taken aback by my "unconventional" departure.

Can you suggest a comment suitable for the awkward post-handshake pause that lets the kisser know that: a) he should not take this personally (kiss-bearing women also get pre-emptive handshakes unless they are blood relatives); b) refusing the kiss is not a sign of dislike; and, c) I intend to stand by my nonkissing standards no matter how sad a look I get. I am hoping for a pithy phrase that will convey these sentiments more gracefully than this rather lengthy note.

GENTLE READER: Sorry, no pithy. You will not accomplish your goal of disarming possible feelings of rejection by clever quips at these people's expense.

The phrase you need is, "I am delighted to see you," and Miss Manners' instructions are to boom it out heartily at the first sign of a smoochy approach. This establishes you in advance as welcoming. More importantly, a moving target is harder to hit.

: