Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-07-26
/ NEW FASHION IN DINNERS.
Small Separate Tables Instead Of ths
Large One.

AM St WV
The Paris correspondent OF the London
Daily Telegraph referred recently 20 an inno-
walton just introduced by fashionable lady
in the practice of dinner giving, which. should
il become prevalent is calculated, the 1eie-
graph thinks, Ito arouse general CONSERVATION
among those who really understand the he
art OF gastronomy. Tho reforming-or. per-
haps, il should with greater strictness be said,
the neutrality-suspicious. Of Lutetia accom-
modated her guests at number OF small sepas
rate tables. instead OF gathering them together
at the family board. II is understood that such
a movement has been for some time past in con-
temptation, and II is asserted that the change
is likely 10 become popular with enterprising
mothers who wish TO give the younger guests
an opportunity OF fotegsthering for the pur-
pose of Irritation. and. furthermore. that 10
VIII serve 60 promote 'csuserie," OF that
light, sparkling conversation in which the
Gaul 10 supposed TO excel
IAN connoisseurs in good living will remem-
Der toitaires couplet written nearly hundred
and nifty years ago, which sets forth how when
the dinner is done, the company digest, argue,
tell stories, laugh and calnmniate their neigh
bors; but the Sage OF Ferney certainly said
nothing about the story telling and the back
biting taking place during the repast or that
! the dinner table itself should be disintegratcd
| into 50 many isolated and independent ocnters
| OF badinage and chaff The advocates OF the
| new system claim that under the old system OF
dining at one large table the conversation was
frequently monopoliZed by some 'hon.' or by
some influential Parsonage commonly called q
| refrigeration, who was bound TO be listened
| TO ana whose time-honored Jokes and anecdotes
| had 10 be apparently relishcd
| But to this the answer Is obvious that at q
| large dinner party, say, OF fve-And-iwenfy
| guests, the influential parsonage, who is Of
course, placed on the right hand Of the hostess
4 d ,lk- .IT ~
dotes polntless. TO bore his hostess and a, tho
most two or three other people opposite 20 hiIn
and one or two by his side. The ladies and
gentlemen who are fortunate enough 10 sit far
! away from the influential parsonage do not
| care one halfpenny about him and continue to
| eat and drink and prattle and say good things
| II they have any to say-in cheerful indlffor-
ence OF what the exalted being in the distance
may be talking about
\ Again. at a small party saw Of eight or ten
| one clever raconteur, or even one cheerful and
| somewhat impudent buffoon, is pearl OF great
price TO the hostess. There are many thou
| sands OF estimnble but perfectly dull people
| who go out every year TO dinner in London or
| Paris; but their foregatherings would be abso-
| lutely lntolerable 10 their Ampbifryon and TO
| themselves If there were not nj least one good
| story teller or one good jester at the board.
| Even Tom Fool IL he be voluble and good
natured, ID a most valuable adjunct TO a stupid
| dinner party. If We do not laugh with him,
We can laugh at him; aud laughter is a price,
| less addendum to a bill of fare. IL we can only
laugh, we will forgive the GOODNESS Of the soup
| and the warmth of the champagne, the thick
ness OF the melted butter and the thinness OF
the claret The advocates of the small table
| scheme have the hardihood 20 maintain that IL
| the guests are gathered in groups instead OF
being assembled at n single board, the tongues
OF dozen voluble Frenchmen and French
| women may be let loose at the same time aud
| thus everybody would have a chance OF a hear
| ing.
Il s.Tt ~
strike the advocates of innovation a at il four
| and-twenty guests were scattered about at the
| rate OF four guests 20 q table. il would 10
| scarcely possible to reckon on the supply OF a
brilliant lady and gentleman TO each table;
| thus to every two amusing people there would
| be two bores, whereas II four-and-twenty peo-
pie were gathered together at a single table,
not twelve, but SIX really clever guests would
| suffice TO enliven the entire gathering Az to
| the contention that the segregation of the COM
pany would encourage Irritation. il must be
pointed out first that in well-regulHted society
people go out to dinner 20 eat and drink and
talk their best, and not TO fiirt, Irritation being
a process which is interesting only TO the two
/ parties concerned, while 10 the bystanders 10
appears TO trench narrowly on the idiotic
/ "A judicious hostess might, perhaps. think
| that she had surrounded palpable difficulty
by placing two loving couples at one table; but
| four-handed Irritation il very dangerous
| game, and before the rubber was finished 10
| might be discovered that fierce war had broken
| out between the parties and that the tricks had
| got hopelessly mixed. There would be some
| thing else of a verdsnt nature besides Chart
| reuse served with the sweets-the green-eyed
monster jealousy, TO wit. Furthermore. gour-
| NETS who regarded a set dinner as n really seri-
| Gus function would not fail to remind the in
novators that very yonng people, either ladies
or gentlemen, are only admitted on sufferance
to the dinner table. Their proper places are
at lunch, at a ball or at a reception
.'Balzac said long ago that young girls
rule did not know how to dine; and it is very
certain that there Is q vast multitude of de-
lightful young dAmsels of the existing period
who, If they had their choice, would begin
their dinner with the pastry aud the cosiec-
tionery and conclude it with fruit A young
lady just out still feels the shackes OF the
schoolroom on her wrist; she NAV be thinking
q vast deal, but she rarely knows how 20 say it,
Usually she is water drinker, and in the ma
jority of cases she cares very little about
| scientifically prepared dishes, for the simple
reason that her palate has not been educated
| to understand and appreciate the mysteries OF
Ia haute cuisine BY all means let this ami
able and interesting young person have the
| amplest scope for Irritation. but there are very
many places and occasions where and on which
| she can fIrt without feeling uncomfortable
| herself and making other people feel uncom-
| Portable at dinner. Where gastronomy is re-
garded from serious point of view, the young
lady who eats little and drinks less, and who,
| for the rest can only blush, shipper and ASK
her neighbor what he thinks of the 'Meister-
| singer, is more Objectionable than a 'refriger-
| ator.' She is positive detrimental
IF the separate table heresy were allowed 10
| spread the host and hostess would get no din
| ner at all, since, during the whole course Of
the repast, il they were really worthy Of the
name of enter tanners, they would be constrained
TO fit from table TO table TO look after the well
fare Of their guests. What are the real duties
| Of the host and hostess2 They must welcome
| their guests with effusion that they may feel
quite at home before sitting down TO dinner.
They must try, il possible, TO introduce all the
| guests to each other before the banquet be-
gins.
The erudite Baron Brisse goes further than
| this. He maintains In the preface TO his
| Three Hundred and Sixty-six Menus that the
Amphitryon must always have his eyes on the
plates and glasses Of his guests, to make
sure that they have all that they require; and
| that il guest refuses a dish the host must try
| his utmost to persuade him to change his mind
| "A host pursues the enthusiastic baron whose
| guest has had to ask for anything would lie q
dishonored man Now, what we ask would be
| the result il the separate table system were
| adopted? It would be impossible 70 expect the
hostess to trot about from table TO table asking
/ the company il they had all they needed; but
| the unhappy host would be degraded 20 the
| level of head waiter or groom Of the cham
bers.
mime de sevigne, writing in 1871 TO her
4 -. At =