DEAR MISS MANNERS: My girlfriend is having her second child, and her family decided not to have a baby shower for her since she "just had one" (two and a half years ago) and they didn't think it was appropriate to ask people to give again. I could tell she felt bad about this, and since she is having a girl this time, I willingly offered to hold "something small" for her.

Well, we are now planning this thing and it's gotten out of hand. She registered at baby stores yesterday, and the guest list is up to 18! She made several menu suggestions and told me what flavor cake she wants and where to buy it! I told her that I had planned on baking the cake myself. (I've been asked to do birthday cakes for several of my friend's children's birthdays, so I'm kind of getting into it.)

I told her privately that my initial intention was to do something small and intimate, maybe a private luncheon at a quaint local spot. She suggested that everyone pay for their own meal at a restaurant. I explained to her that this was my gift to her, I wanted to do it and that I would be paying for it.

The next day, she added three people to the list. Furthermore, her mother, who didn't want to give the shower in the first place, has invited four people and had to be consulted on the date and time!

My family and I just moved into a larger house and we tend to be generous with our friends. I think she's getting the impression that we have a lot of money and can afford it and that it's no big deal. I feel like I'm being taken advantage of!

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners is beginning to understand why someone who has given one shower for this lady refuses to give another. It's too bad you found this out too late.

But perhaps it is not too late. If the invitations have not gone out, you should inform her that you can either do a small luncheon or a larger tea, and that if neither suits her, you will not feel hurt if she cancels the event.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My oldest daughter is graduating from college, and we are having a small family lunch after the ceremony. I was wondering if it is OK to send formal announcements about her graduation without inviting everyone to the lunch. We are so proud of her and just wanted to let people know what she has accomplished. What do you think?

GENTLE READER: Parental pride is a lovely thing, but correspondence involves two people, so it is not only your reaction to your daughter's graduation that Miss Manners needs to know.

What is your best guess as to the reaction of each person to whom you propose sending an announcement? If it is "Oh, my, Kristin is graduating from college already, how wonderful," by all means send an announcement. But don't if it might be "She already told us, so why is she sending this?" or "Do we know this kid?"

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have been dismayed by the rude and boisterous behavior of people while visiting museums and art exhibits. Just this week, I asked a group of three young women who were speaking loudly and laughing if they would be kind enough to lower their voices. The exhibit was crowded and there were many people quietly looking at the paintings and reading the descriptive material.

Unfortunately, one of the women took umbrage and seemed truly insulted that someone would ask her to lower her voice, and continued to act however she pleased, even though it was disturbing other museum visitors.

It seems very inconsiderate to talk/laugh loudly while other people are quietly viewing the exhibit. I have asked the museum to consider making small signs to remind visitors to keep their voices low and respect others' viewing space.

I have also noticed that there are those people who will be instructing the person accompanying them about the merits of the painter, the period, etc. These folks, too, could be reminded that not everyone may want to share in the art history lesson and that using a soft and quiet voice would be much appreciated by those close by. What is the proper etiquette for museum visiting/exhibit viewing?

GENTLE READER: Without countenancing boisterous behavior, Miss Manners has to say that discussing the art in a museum is not high on her list of activities that must be brought under control if we are to lead civilized lives.

Would you settle for a ban on saying "They call that art?" and "That's the one I want to take home"?

Or perhaps we could require people who attend blockbuster shows in such numbers as to make them crowded and noisy to show proof of having first visited the museum's permanent collection.

Conversational tones are permitted in museums. Unless the person is actually shouting -- in which case guards will probably remove him before he spray-paints the pictures -- you should move to another room and return when quiet prevails.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband and I are in gentle disagreement over the following scenario: We were invited to a karaoke 40th birthday party for a person with whom we have a budding friendship. The party started at 8 p.m. and we arrived at 8:35 p.m.

My husband fretted that our timing was rude because we were too "early," and that the first 45 minutes of a party are reserved for close friends. I disagreed, for if people wanted time with close friends, they could invite them over for an earlier time than the rest of the guests. He insists I am wrong. I apologize for fibbing that we are in "gentle" disagreement over this.

GENTLE READER: Much as she sympathizes with someone who wants to arrive late for a karaoke party, Miss Manners must disallow your husband's ingenious excuse. In polite society, guests are all equal.

That is in theory, of course. Close friends may be asked to come early to help out, or even to have private visiting time, but "early" means before the time stated on the invitation. For extra-large parties, the invitations could even give staggered times, but then care must be taken to divide the list so that it appears to be a totally arbitrary division.

P.S. Please don't apologize. Miss Manners loves euphemisms.

:

Watch out for the paparazzi.

You don't have to be famous and they don't have to be professional. The American dream of being constantly pursued by people who are crazy to capture your every moment on film is coming true for everyone.

The latest means for effecting this miracle is the picture-taking-and-transmitting cellular telephone. We also have the wristwatch camera, the pen camera, and a variety of ever-smaller cameras and camcorders that can pop out of nowhere and snap away, but it is the telephone one that worries Miss Manners. All we needed was a new irritant to stir up the hostility between that half of the population who has not yet acquired cell phones, and the half that has but has not yet learned to use them politely.

What with all the commotion made by people screaming into cell phones and people screaming about cell phones, the camera function may not be immediately suspected by its targets. And they could be anyone -- household members thinking they were at leisure, guests caught off guard, strangers assuming shared privacy in gyms and anonymity in the streets.

Not that there is a lot of pictorial privacy to lose. We are all already starring on numerous security films, presumably caught in the act of going about our lawful business. Some who claim to have been going about lawfully find that the traffic-regulating film on which they have made cameo appearances argues otherwise.

Most people seem to be used to being on camera, although Miss Manners has to remember not to stop and use video monitors to pat her hair into place as she passes through surveillance. She also has trouble remembering why a society composed of people angling to get on television to confess their disappointments or, now that we have reality television, demonstrate their shortcomings, would defend privacy with a straight face.

Apparently it is the right to straighten up their faces (a euphemism, Miss Manners notes, for pulling in their stomachs) that invasive photography overrides. In the days when being photographed involved fitting the head against an iron clasp and going immobile until the photographer scared the daylights out of you with a burst of sound, light and possibly smoke, you were at least not caught unawares.

But the complaint of the bride was a familiar one. She said the unauthorized pictures made her look fat.

Even the lady's lawyer was not willing to take up that angle, nor is Miss Manners concerned with the particulars of indignant movie stars. What struck her is that no one -- not even a famously beautiful professional actress while she is posing for other cameras in her wedding dress -- feels safe from photographic ridicule.

And surely ordinary people going about their lives -- whether relatives who are corralled or strangers who are caught -- matter more than the stirring arguments one hears from camera wielders about their art and their duty to the historical record. If such subjects do not give permission in advance, they should at least be offered the chance to delete.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I'm hoping you can help me -- my family and I have a bit of a debate on this issue. I am currently a graduate student studying for my master's degree. I currently hold another master's degree, for which I received a hood at graduation. At my upcoming graduation, is it appropriate for me to wear my other hood? If I continue on for my doctorate, do I wear both hoods?

GENTLE READER: Your head may be stuffed with knowledge, but Miss Manners presumes you have only one, currently and otherwise. So however many disciplines you can juggle, she is afraid you can wear only one hood at a time.

: