Table manners

In comparison to our Indian culture, the English culture has very many table manners.  While official dinners are a rite in themselves, even everyday meals at home are bound by some etiquette.  Back in India, we do follow some basic manners, mostly out of reverence for the food that is prepared, but we're not as strict as the English.  So even without tables we do follow some table manners!

I distinctly remember the rule about folding the plate, either a banana leaf or woven with leaves, after a meal.  It was during one of the rare visits to Mangalore that we made and during one marriage (it was mostly for marriages that I visited Mangalore as a child) being told that after meal, the indicator of having had  enough is to fold one's plate.  However if one folded it towards oneself, it indicated that the meal was good and appreciated.  If one folded the plate away from oneself then it was a sign that the meal was not good.  Another lesson I learnt while I volunteered to serve at one such meal was not to scrape the serving bowl.  It indicated scarcity of cooked meal - that we were running short of food! 

Back then, as a child, I dreaded those visits to Mangalore because we had to meet and greet like a million people, all of whom would know us but we'd know no one!  It was all too much of a crowd for me.  However,  I guess the pendulum now has swung to the other extreme.  One hardly knows anyone else!  It's ten years since I last visited Mangalore.  

Mind your own business

In Europe, people normally tend not to interfere with other people's affairs.  So on a train, one hardly notices the other person sitting beside - leave alone enter into a conversation or exchange pleasantries. In fact, even attempting to do the latter is considered impolite and rude! The rule of manners is summed up in 'mind your own business'.  The first time I heard this phrase during a lecture on manners, I felt a bit odd.  A bit offended, actually.  But I've now come to realize that the English really mean it. It really means a lot to them!

Back in India, if I were not to introduce myself to my new neighbours or greet them politely, I would be considered a prude or a sinister person with some secrets agenda.  If I were to do the same here, I would be intruding their private sphere!  So much so, even to reverse (even halfway) into someone's drive for some urgent reasons would be considered very bad manners, even lead to trespassing!

Perhaps this is also one of the reasons the library is so silent and everyone is lost in their own work.  Looking at the brighter side, I don't think this scenario will ever be possible in an Indian library!  (At least it never was during all my years of 'regimental' rule at Karunapuram or Kondadaba!)

Why swear?

There are several reasons for justifying swearing (not the 'taking oath' swearing!).  Most common and acceptable among them is that it expresses best what one feels.  They rather than tell, manifest very forcefully what one is actually feeling.  That indeed is true.  However an argument can be made to the effect that we could coin a sound which would convey this, perhaps even with the same effect.  Say 'yuck' in contrast to 'shit'.

That and several other reasons put together brings me to fact that most swear words are taboo words.  They find their meaning and connection with things that are not considered 'good' or 'pure'.  So using a swear word is like a double attack.  Defy a broken rule!

I think that the whole notion of swear words and their rationale lie in the human conscious (or sub-conscious) need for polarity or duality. Our very thinking is dualistic.  We need 'bad', to show what is 'good'.  We want the 'impure' to retain the notion of 'purity'.  So however consciously we abhor 'evil' or 'bad' or 'impurity' we still need it to prove its counterpart.

So can a 'civilized' society totally do away with swear words? Never. It may not have the ones that we are used to hearing, but it certainly will have its own version.  If 'shit' isn't, 'yuck' would be!

Manners and morals

Initially I thought that manners are offshoots of morals.  That manners and etiquette are byproducts of morals.  Therefore they serve the same purpose as morals, albeit on a less grievous or serious tone. Both are needed for the smooth running of society.

However, I'm beginning to doubt if that's true.  That manners and morals are related, is true. But does being well-mannered mean one is morally sound too - or the vice-versa.  If one has his morals right, would he or she be well-mannered automatically?  I don't think so. 

One could be well behaved and polite and courteous in society, but in reality be an immoral person. Take for instance, the politician (one can practically include every politician, anywhere in the world). On the other hand, take a tribal or one belonging to the indigenous population. Or even a simple person from a rural setting.  Most often they have their morality or ethical practices very sound.  They are not really corrupted by the malicious mind of civilization and technology.  However, his 'manners' may appear crude or unpolished.  

From another viewpoint, would it be right to call someone who goes about swearing (not at anyone in particular, though) and behaving in an uncouth manner, immoral?  Or would it be right to say that his moral compass is skewed?  Manners are contextual while morals are universal (or are they?).  Manners change as per place, time, persons, occasions.  Morals don't (at least not as fluidly as manners).  

While both manners and morals are rooted in society, culture, tradition, and history, they may not always be on the same side.