Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Knife, fork setting safe bet in eatery

Judith Martin United Features Syndicate

Have the rules for setting a table changed?

Miss Manners is astounded to see this question attached to her Gentle Readers’ expressions of surprise when they encounter restaurant tables that are set differently from what they had believed to be correct.

Considering the state of behavior in today’s society, does anyone imagine that the Etiquette Council is lolling around with nothing to do and has started messing with perfectly workable old rules just for the fun of it? Do people really imagine that the noble profession charged with guarding civilization gets its jollies by setting traps for innocent folk on their hard-earned meal breaks?

Yes, come to think of it, people do believe that. While the rude are commonly excused on psychological grounds, the polite are under suspicion. The very word “etiquette” conjures up a cadre of killjoys with an unnatural and unpleasant interest in skewering people, preferably while they are taking nourishment.

Historically, this can be traced to a short period in the 19th century when table implements suddenly proliferated among the up-and-climbing. No sooner had most people mastered one novelty than another came along, leaving them in a state of befuddlement that earned the scornful pity of the few who delighted in keeping up. Anyone who has ever sprung for the latest electronic gadget will understand how this works.

Before and after the silver frenzy, table settings have consisted of the basic tools needed to eat whatever was served, nothing more and nothing less. There are no trick items thrown in solely as a test. The pattern – spoons and knives on the right and forks on the left, set down in the order in which the food is served, from farthest from the plate to nearest – is so simple a child can do it.

Restaurants are not the place to learn how to set a table. Aside from employee error, which is not uncommon, they are at an inherent disadvantage. Not knowing in advance what food will be ordered, they must take their chances by putting out what is most often needed, and, in good restaurants, supplementing this setting with anything else required for the customer’s particular meal.

They would be safest with a meat knife and fork, although a seafood restaurant should have a fish knife and fork instead. If soup or a salad are likely to be ordered as first courses, they should provide a soup spoon (not a teaspoon, because if tea is ordered the spoon should arrive on its saucer) and salad fork.

But these are just guesses about what the diner is likely to order. There is no disgrace in replacing what is not needed with what is. Nor in the customer’s asking for what is needed to consume the meal.

The home diner has no such problems, as the menu is known in advance. Five minutes devoted to the principles of table setting at home will give anyone enough expertise in the subject not to worry about what restaurants may do.