DEAR MISS MANNERS: We were at dinner last evening and one in our party asked if they had any glasses for red wine. The waitress said they only had one style of wine glasses. Is it bad manners to use the same type of glass for both white and red wines?

GENTLE READER: You will be shocked to hear that etiquette does not mandate the use of highly specialized implements at table.

"What?" (Miss Manners hears you reacting). "Aren't you the people who invented the terrapin fork and the claret glass? Aren't you the folks who make others feel stupid for not knowing which to use?"

Well, yes and no. We did invent all that stuff, in a late Victorian frenzy of consumerism. At the same time we maintain, in a stunning display of hypocrisy, that we value simplicity more than a pompous insistence on over-specialization. So while we not only distinguish between glasses for red and white wine, but also recognize that red Burgundy, white Burgundy and claret also have their special glasses, we do not consider it bad manners to use an all-purpose wine glass. On the contrary, we consider it bad manners to make others feel stupid for not possessing this equipment or knowledge.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: As the mother of the bride, what are my responsibilities? And how should I dress? I don't like any "mother of the bride" dresses that I have seen, but I want to look young and beautiful, too.

GENTLE READER: There is not much Miss Manners can do to make you young and beautiful, unless you would settle for the beauty that comes from within as a result of knowing that you are perfectly behaved. Somehow she doesn't think that is what you have in mind.

She can, however, relieve your anxiety by assuring you that there is no such thing as a "mother of the bride" uniform.

Mind you, she does not pretend not to know what you mean: lace in some nursery color, sprinkled with tiny sparkles and worked into a formidable shape unknown in nature. For reasons best known to themselves, many ladies do wear such outfits at their daughters' weddings.

Etiquette does not bear the responsibility, however. Contrary to popular opinion, it does not even mandate that there be matching mommies, or insist that the mothers be coordinated with the flower arrangements. It presumes that people who are old enough to have marriageable children know how to dress themselves not only with taste, but in keeping with the occasion, the degree of formality and the time of day. In regard to a wedding, this means no black or white and nothing so outrageous as to undercut the solemnity of the ceremony.

If, after a treasure hunt with these instructions in mind, you have any energy left, you could tend to such responsibilities as charming the bridegroom's relatives, making sure the arrangements take into account the comfort and pleasure of the wedding guests, and -- oh, yes -- explaining the meaning of marriage to your daughter.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My mother taught me that one has shoulders covered for dinner when the occasion is formal (or even "festive," in the new locution). Shoulders may be bared after dinner, if there's dancing. Still the case?

GENTLE READER: Lest anyone suspect your mother's sound counsel of being based on prudery, Miss Manners points out that no mention was made of bosoms. As long as the shoulders are covered, much of the bosom need not be, a situation of which Victorian ladies took startling advantage.

The distinction is between a dinner dress and a ball dress. A strapless dress worn at dinner gives the effect, to the opposite side of the table, of a naked lady sitting in a bathtub. More importantly, a dinner dress does not have a billowing skirt likely to encroach on the gravy-spilling area allotted to the gentlemen on either side. Ball dresses may lack sleeves and add the extra material to the skirt.

While it is true that dinners sometimes include dancing, and balls sometimes feature midnight suppers, Miss Manners expects ladies to follow the rules for the primary events they attend. If they solve the problem by stripping half way through the evening, she promises to look the other way.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I work for a large corporation where, due to budget constrictions, many people spend time in "phone meetings." More and more of these people are acquiring wireless headsets that allow them to migrate from their cubicles.

I and a few others have become aware of these people actively talking in these calls while wandering around the office. While this may be an advantage for them during long meetings, many of us are finding it very rude and distracting.

If they stay in their cubicles people can still hear them; however, it is always easier to tune them out when the sound remains in one place.

I can see if a person is a passive participant, doing more listening than talking, but the constant wandering by people's cubicles while they are trying to focus and concentrate is becoming a problem. Some people have taken to working from home, more and more, because of this. Personally, I do not have the luxury of doing that.

I am not sure how to prevent these people from doing this, but if you publish this, perhaps they will recognize themselves. During summer, they could opt to wander outside for their meetings. If I had a lot of meetings and a wireless setup, that is how I would choose to stretch my legs. Otherwise, there are other areas besides around the cubicle areas they can go to as well.

GENTLE READER: What you need in your office is a bulletin board, electronic or cork. Miss Manners dares say that all it would take to solve this problem is to use it to inform the wanderers frankly, and without rancor, that the noise is distracting.

However, when it comes to anything involving mobile telephones, the usual method is for those annoyed to make accusations imputing not only the manners but also the motivations of the telephoners. While Miss Manners approves your wanting to solve this problem without confrontation, she assures you that polite requests need not be insulting.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband and I will be celebrating our 50th wedding anniversary next year if the Lord is willing and we are still both here, and I would like to have our names printed on the napkins. The question is which one of his names to use.

All our friends and family that live in the state where we were born and attended school called him by his middle name. He was in the Army for over 20 years, and wherever we lived and where we have lived for almost 40 years, people call him by his first name.

We are hoping some of our friends and relatives will be coming for the reception from our home state. I don't want to have two stacks of napkins. Kind of confusing, as people here would wonder what is going on. So, which name should be put on the napkins?

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners has more faith in your friends than you do. They are unlikely to scrutinize the napkins and say, "Huh? Who is this guy? Aren't you two married to each other?"

If you sense a danger, however, you could put his full name, along with yours, on the napkins. Etiquette has not deigned to prescribe a form for paper napkins, but such formality is not out of place on marriage-related occasions.

: