DEAR MISS MANNERS: Last week my husband and I were invited to a dinner party by a couple we met ?recently and do not know very well. I offered to bring an ?appetizer and she graciously accepted my offer. Weeks before her dinner, ?she asked me several times if I was still bringing ?the appetizer, and I indicated that I was. I thought that was odd that ?she kept asking me -- but let it go.

Anyway we showed up that early evening with the appetizer and a good bottle of wine. Their home was very beautiful and elegant and the ?dining room was set for a sit down dinner ... again, elegantly set.

We all started showing up and I noticed there were no other appetizers out but mine. ?There were 14 people meandering around, and the host and hostess were ?spending more of their time showing off the house than tending to their guests.

We finally were offered a glass of wine -- and my meager appetizer tray was eventually gone. Dinner was finally under way after an hour and ?some of us ladies assisted. The dinner was meager and disappointing. ?I guess I did not enjoy the evening; in a nutshell, it was a strained ?evening.

What struck me was these people are not without financially -- and did not seem to go out of their way to entertain their guests -- it appeared to ?be more emphasis on presentation. It was very disappointing.

Do you think she felt my appetizer was enough to serve her guests? I ?felt a bit put ?off by the entire thing and still do. What do you think, Miss Manners?

GENTLE READER: That it is high time for guests and hosts alike to stop thinking of every invitation as a cooperative venture. More often than not, what is intended as a gesture of good will results, as this did, in hurt feelings and perhaps badly fed guests.

Miss Manners is not defending your hosts who, you report, neglected their guests. When you were invited to dinner, you need only have responded with your thanks. It is not necessary, as many people now assume, to assume that you will also be catering. Nor is it helpful to bring one bottle of wine, as more than one would be needed for a dinner party.

But once your offer was made and accepted, you needed to know how many people you had volunteered to feed. In a genuinely cooperative meal, when groups of friends or club members regularly get together with each contributing part of the food, this is an obviously necessary piece of information. If you weren't told, you need to ask.

But in this case, you must have simply assumed that there would be either fewer guests or more appetizers. And the hostess assumed that the appetizer course was taken care of and she need think no more about it. (Even in relating it, you speak of your offering "an" appetizer, and her checking that you were bringing "the" appetizer.) Possibly she farmed out the other courses just as carelessly, which explains why the meal was meager.

Please help Miss Manners to put a stop to this by going back to the system by which the work and expense were indeed shared -- but by the simple method of taking turns entertaining.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: If a couple live together but are not engaged do both have to be invited to a family bar mitzvah?

GENTLE READER: Yes, and it doesn't matter if you approve of the person or the arrangement. Sorry.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Who should be responsible for the cost of the wedding? Should the bride and groom help with the wedding expense or ?should all of the cost fall to the parents? If so, what percentage should ?the parents pay and what percentage should fall on the bride and groom to ?be?

Our daughter is planning her wedding. The bride and groom are 28 years old ?and this is the first marriage for both. They have college degrees and good-paying jobs. In fact, they make approximately twice what the mother and father of the bride do. Both the bride and groom have their own homes. Neither of them have been dependent on either of their parents for five years.

My daughter feels that traditionally parents should pay for the ?entire wedding and want to do so. I realize that I married 32 years ago and ?things are not the same price as they once were but 15k to 20k is a little ?hard to handle.

I will also mention: Mom and dad will be borrowing most of the money ?for this wedding. I need some help on this matter. I do want to do the ?right thing.

GENTLE READER: No doubt your daughter does, too. A young lady with so much respect for tradition will doubtless be grateful to Miss Manners for explaining the circumstances of the tradition she is so eager to follow.

The parents of the bride did, indeed, pay the wedding costs for a bride living under their protection as their dependent. They also planned the wedding so that it met their taste standard, in addition to costing what they could reasonably and comfortably afford.

As circumstances changed, and brides tended to be older and more independent, these arrangements shifted. Parents conceded more -- often totally -- to the taste of the bridal couple, who are, by definition, at a self-absorbed stage of life and less experienced at entertaining. Weddings became ever more extravagant and expensive. The bridegroom's parents took over responsibility for the night-before dinner, and will sometimes volunteer to contribute more. The couple often pays some or all of the costs in order to get the wedding they want but that their parents cannot afford.

Etiquette never interfered with these arrangements as long as they were voluntary and within the families involved. But at no time did it condone people dunning one another, whether it is the children dunning the parents, the bride's family dunning the bridegroom's family or, the latest vulgarity, the bridal couple dunning the wedding guests.

Miss Manners strongly advises you not to take financial counseling from people who have demonstrated that they are indifferent to the plight of their own parents going into debt.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Occasionally someone at work will bring in a box of candy and set it in the office for all to enjoy. We've been debating as to whether or not one should take the paper candy holder when they take a piece of candy. Some say that to leave it leaves a mess. And others say that, although it is a bit messy, it should be left in the box as a place holder so the candies correspond to the map of candies if there is one.

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners does not recognize the existence of paper place-marks that allow workers to spend too much time hanging over the desks of their generous colleagues. The policy here should be throw as you go.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I like to play bridge on an irregular basis and have the opportunity to play with a variety of people. But I really dislike the "Why didn't you do this/do that?", "If you did this/or that, then I could have, it would have ..." -- the inevitable obit by one member re how they could have made some fabulous play if someone else had done something else.

I come to have fun, not "up" someone, or question why anyone did what they did.

I find this inquisition (whether directed at me or anyone else) really rude. Do you have any thoughts on this irritant to me? I have mentioned, attempting to be humorous, that I really don't like the obituaries -- they seem more critical in nature than information/learning opportunities.

GENTLE READER: Then you are in the wrong game. Miss Manners does not mean to suggest that you ought to be playing, oh, say, polo, or Simon Says, instead of bridge. Only that you need to get into another bridge game.

It is not that you want to play for fun and these people don't. It is that their idea of fun is letting you know that except for your bungling, they would have won. Like people who boo at baseball games or the opera, they consider it part of the sport.

Although this seems to be true of the entire variety of people with whom you play, there are others who will be only too glad to escape their partners (in bridge, but sometimes often in life) by forming another table.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My friend and I met our friends' boyfriends and they were all referred to by their first name. After the wedding, they all refer to them as "my husband" all the time. I would like to know if we are friendly with these men, should they be referred to as husbands since we know them and their names?

GENTLE READER: Your newly married friends are getting a thrill from saying "my husband." Unless you would be thrilled to refer to them as "your husband," Miss Manners permits you to continue to call them by their names.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I don't understand why you advise people not to mention price except in matters of business. I'd hate to think that I may purchase a new auto and later realize that a friend had purchased the same car for a much lower price. Would you consider reconsidering?

GENTLE READER: This will not be necessary after you reconsider your notion of etiquette.

Like many people, you assume that its rules are so crudely fashioned as to be inflexible, regardless of circumstances. (But then again, Miss Manners prefers that attitude to that of people who believe that etiquette is so flexible that it never stops them from doing whatever they want.)

We need that rule. Aren't you sick of being asked by strangers what you paid for your shoes?

All the same, etiquette, like its harsher cousin the law, recognizes extenuating circumstances. It would be rude to ask your neighbor what he paid for his car if your motivation were to gage his worth or to announce that he is a sucker because he could have gotten it more cheaply. But you could get away with saying, "I'm thinking of buying a car like that. Do you mind my asking how much you paid for it?"

: