Skeptical about those instant remedial etiquette classes being offered for children at fancy venues, Miss Manners now finds that she has something along similar lines to recommend.

It is not a class, so you can't drop off your children and expect to get them back that afternoon professionally civilized. Unfortunately, nothing can relieve parents of the 20-year, around-the-clock task of teaching their own children how to behave toward others. That burden is called child-rearing, and there are no quick fixes.

However, she sympathizes with the occasional yearning parents have to inject an unnatural modicum of sophistication into the unsuspecting young. And there is a seasonal opportunity that might appeal to them.

Miss Manners is not referring to the punitive Santa Claus threat. It takes children half a minute to recognize that bluff. And anyone old enough to have lived through one New Year's Eve sees the flaw in the bribe of being allowed to stay up to watch the adults make fools of themselves: People who are making fools of themselves are not vigilant.

The instrument in question is the nutcracker. Or rather, "The Nutcracker." With the proper preparation, it can turn your perfectly healthy modern child into the sort of fetchingly-dressed combination of excited enthusiasm and charming nervousness who inspires adults inadvertently thrown in their company to comment, "Awwww" instead of "Ewwww."

The wrong way to go about this is to tell the child who is going to a performance for the first time that he or she has nothing to worry about, it's just like going to the movies only better, it's fine to dress comfortably, just relax and you'll have a great time. The adult equivalent of this misbegotten attempt to entice is the overuse of the word "casual" in invitations. It only advertises that the occasion will be nothing special.

Rather, this is the time to reverse all those lectures against succumbing to peer pressure about appearances and announce that all the other children will be dressed up and yours would be embarrassed not to be. Strangely enough, it is true. "The Nutcracker" is for children what the Academy Awards is for actresses -- the wrong time to go in for understatement.

Teaching children audience manners -- to sit still and not talk, what to look for and when to clap -- is accomplished by another childish argument, namely that there will be other children who won't know how to behave. Superiority of social knowledge is not a nice incentive, but, as adults know from their own experience, it is a powerful one.

So is the urge to be in show business. By using child dancers -- in the first act party scene and, in some productions, throughout -- "The Nutcracker" exerts a powerful hold on its young audience. The thought "I could be up there, with everyone applauding me" is an American article of faith that recognizes no boundaries of talent or willingness to work.

Should that lead to pleas for ballet lessons, the parents' job will indeed be made easier. There is nothing like an old-fashioned ballet class run like a Siberian labor camp to give the lie to the notion that children are immune to disciplined formality -- and to make even the most exacting parents seem lenient.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband and I have two children and my brother-in-law has only one child. When birthdays and holidays come up we exchange gifts with the children. I would like to know if I am supposed to spend twice as much on his child because he has only one and I have two children that he gives to?

I have asked this question of some of my friends, and they all say I should not spent twice as much on his child because my children will only be getting a $25 gift when his son will be getting a $50 gift. What should I do?

GENTLE READER: Have you thought of buying your nephew a present that you think will please him, and which you can afford?

If that violates the spirit of your holidays, Miss Manners suggests you consult an accountant about how to factor in the children's ages (and therefore who has been collecting longer than whom) and an appraiser to assess the value of what your child receives.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I was taught that ladies do not wear jewelry made with precious stones, particularly those that sparkle, until after five o'clock in the evening. The background for this is that precious stones (except for one's engagement and wedding rings) are for formal dress, which was a nightly event in homes where the financial status made the ownership of such jewelry possible.

Did the advent of well-paying jobs for women, along with credit cards, make it possible for women of any age to purchase such jewelry themselves, as well as being the recipients of such jewelry from persons who may not have had the advantage of being taught the old rules?

What has prompted my question is that I often see diamond earrings, bracelets and pendants being worn around the clock and would appreciate knowing if this is an acceptable practice in correct society. Has correct society gone the way of the chaperone?

What is your feeling about the wearing of rings on every finger, even the thumbs, of both hands, again, around the clock or at any time?

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners' feeling is that she would rather not shake hands with such a person. This has less to do with her disapproval of flashiness than with her fear of being crushed by all those minerals.

However, she does disapprove of the incongruity of fancy jewelry with daytime clothes, and the rule remains in place. How many people flout it to flaunt it is as irrelevant as who pays for it. And the magic hour is six, not five, unless you are counting transportation or going to a Wagner opera.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I attended a social engagement put on by my wife's boss -- a To-Be-Seen Party where several executives and government officials were in attendance. As the party progressed, and more guests arrived, I found myself quickly tongue-tied and looking for a deep well to jump into.

It was a new experience, my being unable to converse with anyone, and not enjoyable in the least. I'm quite sure I came off as aloof or standoffish. I do not wish for this to impact my wife's career and am asking for help. How may I re-establish my small-talk abilities without dominating circles and becoming a boor?

GENTLE READER: By remembering that small talk is supposed to be small. Miss Manners has observed that is when people feel they have to come up with big talk -- something wise, original and stunningly witty -- that they become tongue-tied or boorish. Or do something foolish such as jumping in a well.

Charm does not consist of impressing other people, but of allowing others to impress you. You needn't quiz others about themselves. The smallest opening -- introducing yourself as your wife's husband, observing how much she enjoys working there, admitting that you know few people at the party -- will do to present someone else with the opportunity to talk big. Or to surprise you by being just as charming, in which case you may actually come to think of this as a party rather than an ordeal.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: How long from the time you're invited to one's home for dinner should the dinner be served? Every dinner invite from my in-laws or sisters-in-law tends to cause an argument.

Generally we are lucky if it is under 90 minutes after the invite time. I refuse to think that somewhere north of 30 minutes is acceptable unless there are finger foods supplied or it's stated what to expect. There have been times upward of two hours that people just sit there while the turkey or roast continues to cook -- once two and a half hours, when they forgot to turn the oven on. I do not even have to go as far as saying the turkey was done 70 minutes prior to the actual time dinner was served; that would be another story.

My remedy is to show up 30 to 45 minutes late; however, that could be taken as being rude. Furthermore, if we do not show up on time, they call at one minute past the invite time to make sure we are on our way. Generally we are very prompt for every invite, but we see the caller ID when we get home and find out they called.

Then we get there and dinner is still 90 minutes late. I've been polite, making minor jokes, or even not so polite, but it doesn't seem to faze any of them. Dinner at our house for guests is generally within 30 minutes or less so we can socialize in a relaxed environment after dinner. All it does is cause more arguments. This isn't about who's right or wrong, but what is the proper etiquette.

GENTLE READER: No, it's about who is right or wrong. Family questions always are, in Miss Manners' experience. Contented relatives don't stake their good-natured bets on matters of etiquette.

Propriety requires only that guests should know when to expect to be fed so that they can adjust their stomachs accordingly. Ordinarily, this should not have to be spelled out. It is supposed to be understood that dinner is served in about half an hour after the stated time, just as you say, allowing a bit of leeway for last-minute adjustments ("That's not what you're wearing, is it?") and traffic.

Unfortunately, this understanding has been seriously damaged by the cycle of guests arriving late, dinner thus being served late, impatient guests vowing to arrive even later next time, and so on. Nevertheless, the rule remains in effect, and guests who violate it should expect to find dinner in progress and to be told, "We knew you wouldn't want us to wait."

However, Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners are often served in the afternoon. Football schedules aside, this is a custom left over from the early 19th century, when everyone ate the main meal during the day. It is still necessary to schedule time for relatives to sit around needling one another, but this could be after dinner, when they are cross because they feel stuffed, or before dinner, when they are cross because they are focused on the food to come.

The only way to mitigate this is to alert people when the meal will be served -- "Come at 2, and we'll eat at 4." This does not allow you to skip the socializing and arrive when you can get straight to the food, but it does allow you to fortify yourself with lunch before you set out.

And are you sure that those missed calls were not to say, "If you haven't left, hold off, because we're running late"?

: