DEAR MISS MANNERS: Does Miss Manners consider the "upgrading" of a gift to be a faux pas? Here's the scenario:

Parents generously invite son and daughter-in-law on a cruise for which the parents have saved, reserving standard accommodations for all. Son and daughter-in-law, without any further discussion, "improve" upon this generous gift by purchasing an "upgrade" for themselves.

Some claim this is bad manners indeed because it relates to the parents that their very generous gift (they didn't have to do this, after all) is somehow not good enough. Others claim that the younger set are only trying to make their dream trip come true also, since they couldn't have afforded the trip otherwise and may never again.

Never having taken such a cruise, I can only guess that the distinction of the "upgrade" lies in various amenities and maybe having a bathtub instead of a shower, or dinner with the captain.

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners has learned to be wary of hearing about people pursuing their dreams, as it so often is at the expense of others. What about the parents' dream, which is literally at their expense?

The rule is that you can do what you like with a present once it is yours, provided the giver of it never discovers that it was not entirely satisfactory. If the couple were being sent off on their own, they might be able to get away with upgrading.

But how are they going to explain being in a grander cabin, most likely on a different deck, and probably being assigned to a different dining room? This would not only indicate dissatisfaction with the present, but a preference for extra luxury over family proximity.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: At least once a week, I have lunch or dinner in a restaurant with a group of friends or co-workers or networking group. Inevitably, when the check comes, it is passed around and everyone gives money to cover their share.

I can only recall one time when the payment didn't come up short. Last night, for example, the money collected was $60 under the total bill. Usually the burden of paying more falls to the ones, like me, who choose to linger and chat over coffee, while others rush out as soon as they have finished their meal.

Should the host call those people the next day and inform them that the bill was short and they should plan to compensate at the next gathering? This problem has seemed to exist everywhere! What is a tactful way to make sure everyone pays their fair share? I don't want to have to pay $40 for a salad anymore.

GENTLE READER: What your group needs is not a bill collector with the unpleasant, although not impolite, task of calling around saying, "I'm afraid you miscalculated your lunch bill," giving the correct sum. It needs an accountant.

Invariably, Miss Manners observes, people who are asked to figure their own costs calculate only the price of the food, omitting the tax and tip. You need to put one person in charge, who asks each of the others what he or she ordered, figures the cost and says what is owed before anyone departs.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband and I found out two years ago that I am infertile. Since then, I have undergone several extremely painful diagnostic tests, as well as two very expensive and unsuccessful rounds of in-vitro fertilization treatment. One of these ended in a rare type of miscarriage, eventually resulting in my having to go to the ER, in danger of bleeding to death.

I also felt compelled to leave my previous job after my supervisor threatened to fire me for taking two days off to recover from the miscarriage. So, to put it mildly, my husband and I have been through the infertility wringer.

In the first year or so after I was diagnosed, I was still happy to receive friends' and relatives' announcements of their pregnancies and the births of their children, as well as baby shower invitations, etc. However, as our finances have been steadily depleted and our hopes of ever having a child even more so, it has become increasingly difficult for me to react with anything other than extreme sorrow and depression to others' "baby news," even though, on another level, I am genuinely happy for them.

I know from reading comments on the Internet of other women who are infertile that I am far from alone in reacting this way to such announcements. I realize I can hardly avoid every pregnant woman or young child, nor do I want to -- at least not in the long term. However, in the short term, I am still grieving and having great difficulty coming to terms with my situation.

I am wondering, therefore, if it would be rude to send an e-mail to several friends and relatives whom I know are pregnant or who have recently given birth, politely asking them to please refrain from sending my husband and me birth announcements, Christmas cards containing pictures of their cherubic toddlers, etc. (We certainly do not expect anyone to go out of their way to buy or make us a separate card -- if they just leave us off their lists, that is fine by us.)

While I believe these good friends and close family would probably be understanding, I am still afraid to cause offense to people. Would such a request be inappropriate?

GENTLE READER: With the greatest of sympathy for you, Miss Manners cannot condone your telling people that their happiness upsets you. Fortunate people have feelings, too, and it would be dreadful to insinuate that their children constitute some sort of affront to you.

In the long run, as you know, you cannot avoid the fact that people you know will propagate. What you can do now is to get someone to censor your regular and electronic mail so that you will know who has sent you cards or greetings without having to see pictures that upset you.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have a casual friendship with a man I meet in the park. My problem is that every time the man and I part, he leaves with the saying "God bless." That's all, not "Nice seeing you" or "Have a nice day." How am I supposed to reply to "God bless?"

GENTLE READER: "Goodbye." It means the same thing.

:

A cry of freedom went up when dress codes were abolished. Comfort! Creativity!

At last, a civilized society had recognized that it is what is inside a person, not outside, that counts. Even such oppressed minorities as school children, office workers and fashionistas finally gained the right to throw off all strictures (and practically all garments).

And what are we doing with this privilege?

Trying to end it, from what Miss Manners hears.

Schools and offices are re-instituting regulations, and so far, they are not encountering the sort of revolutionary opposition that had made them drop the ones they had. Airlines are wondering how to placate customers who complain about sitting next to exposed and (they inevitably add) smelly flesh. High-priced restaurants are fretting that a single baseball cap will drive away untold numbers of patrons who value "atmosphere." The fashion industry has switched from recommending that grown-ups dress like their children to suggesting that they dress like their grandparents.

What went wrong?

One reason that dress codes were easy to demolish is that those who fought to save them were in the untenable position of opposing comfort and creativity. Other arguments went unheard (as Miss Manners knows, because she was making them at the top of her ladylike voice) while these charges were being made.

And they will be made again. Miss Manners is not so naive as to believe that lessons learned from experience are remembered once the dissatisfactions that arose from the experience are removed. We just now happen to be in a period where the problems of rule-free clothing have become generally apparent.

While everyone gives voice to the desire for comfort, it is not a genuine concern for a sizeable number of people. Low-slung pants, stiletto heels and skin-tight jeans are no more comfortable than were such equally faddish styles as high, stiff collars and corsets. But those who really do put comfort above all turned out to be thinking only of their own comfort, however much discomfort it causes others who happen to be jammed up against them.

Creativity also offends others when it takes such forms as obscene slogans and threatening symbols. But it even rattles those who endorse it. For many, dressing has become too competitive, too confusing or -- of all things -- too boring.

Parents and teachers focus on how distracting and expensive it is for teenagers to dress to -- as they claim -- express themselves, but when the competition is free-form, even professionals find it overwhelming. Fashion arbitrators are notorious for promulgating ever-changing and outrageous styles for others while they stick to wearing black basics.

Others simply don't know what to wear. Confusion is rampant because the claim that clothing choices will not be interpreted -- that lofty argument about caring only about what is inside the heart, as if that could be glimpsed -- is false. Miss Manners finds it pathetic that innocent people who choose to dress as hookers or jailbirds are surprised and indignant when they are treated as being loose or suspicious.

Employers have come to realize that unprofessional dress symbolizes unprofessional attitudes to outsiders, and may even foster these in the workers themselves. And people who are told to wear whatever they like to a social event are well aware that they could still be judged as being over- or underdressed for the occasion.

Strangest of all is the absence of variety that comes of an absence of rules. Clothing conventions, like any social code, cover a myriad of conditions, including whether it is day or night, what season it is and what the venue or occasion is. When these faded out of use, only two amorphous styles were left: Casual and Wedding-Prom.

Miss Manners only asks for some semblance of order, not that everyone dress as she happens to see fit. Although she does note with astonishment that upswept hair, long skirts, brooches and gloves have been declared the latest fashion.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: The topic of brunch was at discussion in my home this weekend, and what was at debate was the proper time brunch is served. Keeping with proper etiquette, can you please inform me at what time is brunch served?

GENTLE READER: At that morning hour when your guests can manage proper etiquette. Of course Miss Manners knows that they are polite all the time, but she suggests not pushing it by scheduling brunch before they are awake enough to enjoy making conversation or waiting until they are hungry enough to feel cranky. Generally, this means starting some time between 10 a.m. and noon.

: