DEAR MISS MANNERS: My wife and I are casual and infrequent entertainers. As we plan an evening's meal, we invariably have a rather pointed discussion on the role of hors d'oeuvres.

My wife wants to dispense with them altogether and seat guests at the dinner table five to 10 minutes after they arrive. If we serve drinks and appetizers, she claims, people just fill up on snacks and don't have room for the main meal. She claims that this senseless custom just encourages overeating.

On the other hand, I say that inviting guests to sit in the comfort of our living room for half an hour allows them to transition from their hectic day and road travel into a relaxing dinner. Besides, having this little gathering before being seated for dinner is what people expect, given that it seems to be the norm when we are guests at others' homes. It feels awkward to not offer guests anything while we put the finishing touches on dinner.

What is the protocol for pre-dinner drinks and appetizers?

GENTLE READER: Wait -- your dinner guests all arrive on time? Miss Manners congratulates you.

For most hosts, serving drinks and hors d'oeuvres is essential, so as not to inflict undue hardship on polite guests while waiting for tardy ones. It is also a time to introduce guests to one another, and to rethink the seating arrangements when you notice who turns out to have had bad romances with whom. All very useful.

However, it needn't go on and on. Nor need the food be filling. Throw them a thin carrot stick or a bit of celery with something on it, and most people will be relieved not to succumb to more fattening fare while anticipating a satisfying meal.

Neither should your disagreement have gone on and on. If your wife concedes 10 minutes after the last arrival (not the first) and you argue for 30, surely you could split the difference.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I grew up with the rule that a wedding invitation requires a gift, even if the invitee does not attend the wedding. But friends have been telling me that rule is obsolete.

I've been invited to the wedding of a first cousin twice removed, whom I haven't seen since she was 5. Her parents and I are in touch only through Christmas cards.

I have no idea why I was invited and have no intention of going to the wedding, which will not be in my town. It would involve an expensive overnight hotel stay. Must I send a gift?

GENTLE READER: Those among whom you grew up were generous but misinformed. If you find this disillusioning, Miss Manners notes that at least it will save you money.

Getting married does not grant people license to distribute bills to those who are minding their business. A wedding invitation is merely an offer of hospitality. As such, it must be answered, one way or the other, and it should also prompt a letter wishing the couple happiness. There is nothing wrong with also sending a present, but that is certainly not required.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: A board that I am a part of is having a heated discussion on the usage of "Mrs. John Smith." Some participants have not changed their last names and thus are not happy to be called Mrs. John Smith since they are Mrs. Jane Doe.

Others who have taken their husbands' last name do not like Mrs. John Doe, as they feel it obscures their own identity and they did not change their first name to John -- they prefer Mrs. Jane Smith.

The third group says that Mrs. means "wife of," and the only formal way to address a married woman is Mrs. John Smith, although they do concede that if the woman didn't change her name, Mrs. Jane Doe is acceptable.

Does it change things if the woman in question has expressed her preference for Mrs. Jane Smith?

GENTLE READER: Will it change things if Miss Manners pleads how weary she is of this debate and begs all sides to get rid of those emotional analyses that fuel it?

Probably not. The pressure to standardize female life -- not just nomenclature but whether mothers should have jobs, what constitutes good mothering and so on -- is relentless.

We do not now have a standard form of address for wives. The traditional form, Mrs. John Smith, is impractical for professional use, so an even older form, Ms. Jane Doe (from the once-respectable honorific Mistress, from which Mrs. and Miss both derive) was revived. Mrs. Jane Doe is a form that, however common, was never sanctioned by etiquette.

But the mere prospect of change let loose a torrent on ideas of marriage. Ever since, it has been impossible to address an envelope without having to consider everyone's tedious ideas of the symbolism being imposed.

Ladies, these are conventions. Some people are attached to the old one; some see the value of the revived one. Miss Manners appreciates both.

What she fails to understand is why, when there is no agreed-upon standard, people should not be addressed in the way they choose to be addressed.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: With the bread-and-butter plate on the left, it is difficult to avoid getting one's sleeve into the gravy and mashed potatoes. (It's less of a problem for ladies in sleeveless gowns, of course.)

Why on earth were they put there in the first place if diners are expected to hold their knives in their right hands?

GENTLE READER: Eeew. Miss Manners thanks you for that picture of ladies in sleeveless dresses not minding that their forearms are in the mashed potatoes because it will be easier to wash up than to visit the dry cleaner's. Or perhaps because they figure they can lick themselves clean....

Let us stop right there. The problem does not actually exist, because no one should be leaning across the dinner plate to butter the bread. Bread is properly broken into small pieces, with the left hand holding it while the right hand spreads the butter.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a high-school junior looking forward to my first prom. One of my good friends told his good friend, who was organizing a prom group, to set me up with a blind date so I would be in their group.

My good friend confirmed which girl the guy would set me up with for prom and told me that he was going to be in the prom group, but had not yet found a date.

That night, I called the girl, asked her out to prom, and she said yes.

The next day, my friend who had been hanging out with me the night before told me he had met my prom date and said she was very nice. The next Saturday, I called up my prom date and asked her what color her dress would be, so I could find a tuxedo and cummerbund to complement her outfit.

That night, my friend took my prom date out to a movie and made out with her. My friend has now asked me if I would be willing to allow him to take my prom date and have the guy who is organizing the prom set me up with another girl he knows.

I am angry with my friend for making me make this choice, and I am angry that he made out with my prom date. At the same time, I am unsure how angry I should be because I have never met my date, and I have only talked with her three times on the phone.

I have asked my friend if he would take another girl and remain in our group, but he has said that if he does not take my prom date, he will join another group. I have become really good friends with this guy over the past few weeks, and I really want him to be in my group. He is also one of the few guys I would know if I went with this group.

I have talked with my prom date and my good friend, and they have both stated that they would like to go together. They, however, feel really bad about the whole situation.

I know I have done nothing wrong, and I feel like I have no obligation to accommodate my friend and my prom date's wishes. If I accommodate them, I will feel like a complete pushover.

At the same time, I do not want to weaken my friendship with my friend, and I really want him to be in my prom group. He is a really nice guy, but I am very frustrated with him right now. What should I do?

GENTLE READER: Hold out until you get what you want -- a prom date and a good friend who are pining for each other but are stuck on principle with you and his still-to-be-chosen date?

Is that your idea of a good time?

Miss Manners understands that you believe there is a principle at stake here. She just can't figure out what it is.

Romantic fidelity? Well, not really, when it concerns someone you never met. Fidelity to social engagements is, however, a serious matter. But the young lady has not ditched you; she and her new beau are apologetically asking your permission to change the arrangements.

Miss Manners would like you to consider this experience part of your education. The lesson is graciousness, and you are fortunate enough to be able to learn it at little sacrifice to yourself.

Visit Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com, where you can send her your questions.

: