I don’t read much fiction, and when I do, it’s most often a return to the stories of my youth – the Bond adventures, the mysteries of Agatha Christie and Rex Stout. Even so, a while ago a friend gave me A Gentleman in Moscow, a novel by Amor Towles, the account of the life of the Count Alexander Ilyich Rostov, a member of the Russian aristocracy who by happenstance is sentenced to house arrest for life in the most prestigious hotel in Moscow (rather than being shot like the majority of his station) when the Bolsheviks take over Russia. The Count is one of the most charming fictional characters I’ve ever encountered, a gentleman of taste, tact, and refinement. If you have the life space, I heartily recommend the book.
This summer, I posted a note, “Honorifics and Beyond,” in which I lamented the Wall Street Journal’s then-recent decision to dispense with honorifics – courtesy titles such as “Mr.” and “Ms.” – in its news pages. I indicated then and believe now that the Journal’s decision was simply a bow to a cruder culture.
Perhaps our friend provided me the book in part because the Count had sentiments similar to mine as he faced a transition early in his house arrest:
“‘It has been brought to my attention,’ the [hotel] manager continued, if somewhat haltingly, ‘that various members of the staff when speaking to you … have continued to make use of certain … honorifics.’
‘Honorifics?’
‘Yes. More precisely, I gather they have been addressing you as Your Excellency …’
The Count considered the manager’s assertion for a moment.
‘Well, yes. I suppose that some of your staff address me in that fashion.’
The manager nodded his head then smiled a little sadly.
‘I’m sure you can see the position that this puts me in.’
In point of fact, the Count could not see the position that this put the manager in. But given the Count’s unmitigated feelings of sympathy, he decidedly did not want to put him in any position. So, he listened attentively as [the manager] went on:
…
‘Naturally, I have little choice but to insist that my staff refrain from using such terms when addressing you. After all, I think we can agree without exaggeration or fear of contradiction that the times have changed.’
In concluding thus, the manager looked to the Count so hopefully that the Count took immediate pains to reassure him.
‘It is the business of the times to change. And it is the business of gentlemen to change with them.’
The manager looked to the Count with an expression of profound gratitude – that someone should understand what he had said so perfectly no further explication was required.
…
Your Excellency, the Count [later] reflected philosophically. Your Eminence, Your Holiness, Your Highness. Once upon a time, the use of such terms was a reliable indication that one was in a civilized country …
Here, the Count gave an indefinite twirl of the hand.
‘Well. It is probably for the best,’ he said.
…
For the times do, in fact, change. They change relentlessly. Inevitably. Inventively. … [Emphasis in Original].”
The fictional Count was largely correct; it is the business of gentlemen (and ladies 🙂 ) to change with the times, and the times do change relentlessly, inevitably, and inventively. I obviously concur with his reflection that the use of honorifics provides a reassuring indicator that one is in a civilized country. But I would respectfully question his conclusion that change – at least in all instances – is probably for the best.
Thus endeth this pontification 😉 . May you be able to embrace the Holiday Season upon us.
McCoy's Noise 