Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not sure I'd put it down entirely to Osaka versus Kyoto. My impression is that these things often have at least as much to do with upbringing, formality, and social background as with region.

I don't know where you're from, so apologies if this is an unfair assumption, but in countries like the US or Australia people often seem less attuned to social class, whereas in places like the UK, France, and indeed Japan, those distinctions can carry more weight, even if they almost always go unspoken.

 help



In general, upper-classish dining probably used to be more formal in the US in terms of cutlery type and placement and other things. May still be in some circles but no one I know worries about such things and even very decent restaurants don’t. And when was the last time you saw a fish fork?

My mother-in-law always used to get annoyed at me for using my knife and fork in the European manor instead of the American way. She said it was boorish. I don't know anybody else here in the US who cares in the least which way you use your knife and fork, so I always interpreted it left over behavior from her upper class DC upbringing in the 1930-40's.

(I did try to explain to her that it was more related to my being left handed than my attempting to emulate European behavior. It didn't seem to make much difference to her.)


By American way do you mean cutting the food then transferring the fork to your right hand for eating? Or is there some other distinction?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ctrOZIJni8Q

This explains the difference. The European method seems the most optimal.


I thought this would simply be about the knife and the fork switching hands, but holding the fork tines up or down (spearing vs scooping) is new to me.

On the other hand, I don't think Americans ever pick up food with their fork and switch the loaded fork to the other hand, especially if the food is scooped, not speared. A lot of food would be dropped in the process.

As a non-conformist, I taught myself to use my knife in the non-dominant hand so that the fork is used in the same hand regardless of knife usage.


I typically just forgo the knife and cut food with the side of the fork. Unless it's a particularly thick slab of meat, it works just fine.

To save you a click, the answer is: yes.

This is bonkers. Just cut the food with your non-dominant hand. If you're so weak that you cannot cut the food with your non-dominant hand then you're either a small child, elderly, or you have a medical condition.

It's just awkward, I've held the knife with my dominant hand all my life.

Nonsense. If you can cut with your non dominant hand, then you can also spear and scoop with it.

Spear and scoop requires dexterity, hence the use of the dominant hand. Cutting is an extremely simple task with no special requirements.

You obviously haven’t done it both ways and are assuming that spearing requires more dexterity than cutting. Hilarious that you could just try it for yourself and figure out that knife in the dominant hand works well but choose instead to bore everyone with your ignorance and stunning closemindedness


Do you always get fish served deboned? Cutting it with non-dominant hand sucks, especially more bony ones like trout. For me doing almost anything with my non dominant part sucks, my left hand is 20x less useful.

Fish are gross and smell gross. I don't get them served at all.

Nonsense

Just guessing here, I'm left handed also. I don't trust myself to cut a piece of steak using the knife in my right hand. So, after cutting with my left hand, I put the knife down and use my left for forking.

Or, it could be what my English son-in-law does, he uses his fork and knife, in different hands to aid in pushing food onto his fork. (He's right handed, not that it matters in this case.)


That and you hold them in your fists or like a pen, rather than the European manner of holding cutlery.

Lee Van Clyf eating in good bad and ugly. Really underlines the savageness of the wild west.

> no one I know worries about such things

It went underground - those who know just note that you're nekulturny, and move on.

They don't bother telling you about it, nowadays nothing good would come of that.


Agreed. Was always taught to never put elbows on the table, but as an adult I see people do it everywhere.

Seeing people fail to meet a standard does not mean that the standard does not exist.

I think the deeper question is whose standards and why should we consider them the standard?

Some of them of course are invented whole cloth. British Received Pronunciation was invented and needs to be learned and is the standard of the upper class. It's neither right nor wrong but it's there to differentiate.

RP isn't really a thing any more, except among some of the older aristocracy and Tories and a few legacy BBC Radio shows.

Most people have settled into Estuary, which has split into a high/corporate/media Estuary-tinged dialect, and low street Estuary. The BBC has its own special neutral version.

Fifty years ago the difference between upper class/BBC/RP and street English was almost hilariously obvious. Watch a BBC show from the 50s and 60s - even something like Dr Who - and everyone is speaking a unique RP dialect that doesn't exist any more.


Idk. I’m in my early 40s, not a Tory, not aristocracy, and I speak with RP, as do many others I know. Maybe a product of schooling, but I wouldn’t say it’s dead.

In media, you’re quite correct - it has become rare bar presenters who are now in their 80s or older.


You say “needs to be learned” but that’s no more so than any other accent.

We just grow up with it because it’s how our parents and the parents of our friends speak.

If you want to change your accent you can, of course, get elocution lessons but most Brits do not. We just have a large variety of accents of which RP is one.


Not sure why this is controversial. RP is just an accent like any other now.

I didn’t have lessons for it and I don’t know anyone else that did. It’s just how we speak.


"Received Pronunciation was invented"

How so?


Maybe some of them may have had a purpose. With this one, if you were used to putting your elbows on the table and there were more people around, you just took up too much space and made it unpleasant for others around you.

That's the thing with standards: there are so many of them to choose from.

You don't have to follow them, but you do you should be ready to accept the consequences of your choice.


There are lots of standards, but some contradict one-another.

In the area I grew up in, caring too much about useless aesthetic stuff like “elbows on the table” would have a social cost.


When it comes to manners, I'd say seeing enough people fail to meet a standard means it's not a standard, at least.

No, that's argumentum ad populum.

Mind you, I'm not saying that standards must be followed. I am just saying the same thing I tell my kids:

- the standards are there, wishing they didn't exist doesn't invalidate them

- the reason rules and standards came to existence might or might not be applicable to our current context, but some people will expect you to follow them regardless.

- If a rule or standard seems silly to you, make your best attempt at understanding why people would still follow it. (Chesterton's fence)

- You are free to not comply to some rules, but always be ready to accept the consequences of your decisions.

- What your friends are doing or not doing is not reason enough for you to change your behavior or choices.


> the standards are there, wishing they didn't exist doesn't invalidate them

But not observing them does. There are standards no one in the world follows anymore. They may still “be there”, but are only used for mocking purposes.

> If a rule or standard seems silly to you, make your best attempt at understanding why people would still follow it. (Chesterton's fence)

The corollary to that is that anyone who rebukes anyone else for not following a standard must be able to explain why it exists. “Because it’s rude” it’s not good enough, explain why it’s considered rude.


I don't see anything in your responses that even remotely contradict or relate to what I said.

Are you just looking for an argument here?


It seems like you are making a different point than the other posters. If the majority of a group does not follow an etiquette standard, it is reasonable to say that the group does not hold that standard. Your point that if any group holds an etiquette standard, then that standard exists is true, but is more tangential to the other point that a rebuttal of it.

> Your point that if any group holds an etiquette standard...

Not quite. My original comment was in response to "I see people violating rule X anywhere, even though I was told it was 'wrong'".

All I am saying is one shouldn't be basing their behavior solely on what they see others "getting away with".


What is this, abuse?

"Appeals to public opinion are valid in situations where consensus is the determining factor for the validity of a statement, such as linguistic usage and definitions of words."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum


But the populus sets the standards. If people decide not to follow a particular one anymore, it stops being the standard.

You and I are using different meanings for standard.

then it’s a custom or etiquette, not a standard

And the point of etiquette is to signal conformity and social status.

I had a friend who came from a working class culture where social aspiration was measured by tiny nuances, like whether someone put milk in their tea before or after pouring it.

Outside of that culture these nuances were irrelevant. Middle and upper class people had a completely different set of etiquette markers - as well as more or less obvious displays of wealth - which the working class aspirers were oblivious to.


This is just great way to put it and explain.

> the standards are there, wishing they didn't exist doesn't invalidate them

If people act like a standard doesn't exist, then the standard actually doesn't exist, because that's the only thing that defines a standard.


Most people in the US use imperial unit, it doesn't mean metric doesn't exist.

Standards are not absolutes.


Yeah, as if we still have loose table tops, like in medieval times.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: