The deep end

Salon's Cary Tennis has a very Miss Conducty question today, from a woman whose husband has issued an open ('no need to call, just drop in!") invitation to use their pool, and a cousin who takes all-too-enthusiastic advantage of the offer.

Tennis's response is, as usual, meandering and bizarre, full of gratuitous swipes at Miss Manners (for whom I have nothing but the utmost regard and admiration, and whom Tennis has clearly never read) and unparseable statements like, "I am less interested in the rules that we live by than I am in the rules that govern our living" (?). But, again as usual, there are some interesting letters.

For those of you who like to quickly skip to solutions, the best one proposed in the letters section (that didn't involve surreptitious deployment of Baby Ruth candy bars) is to have a flag that you fly when the pool is really open to friends and family, and keep down the rest of the time. I like this--it spares everyone the embarrassment of asking and refusing or being refused, while still being utterly clear. Ethics, etiquette, and engineering--I keep saying it.

What I find more interesting (not having a pool myself) is the discussion of communication styles. Many responders are of the opinion that the cousin is doing nothing wrong, because the husband said that she could use the pool anytime, without calling. These people are advocating for a direct communication style. Others insist that any sane and couth person knows that this is polite overstatement, and you call first and limit your pool usage. These people are advocating for an indirect communication style.

Neither are right or wrong. Etiquette has, traditionally, been associated with the indirect style of nuances and polite evasions and symbolism, and I suppose that's what Tennis is railing on about. But there's no reason it has to be. "Direct" and "tactless" aren't synonyms. And sometimes--heck, almost always--making things clear to people is the kindest and most courteous thing you can do. (Assuming the thing you're making clear to them is any of your business to begin with, that is.)

Some folks are constitutionally set up to mourn the loss of these subtle nuances, and I get that. We can still have that kind of indirect, allusive communication with those who know us well, with those in our communities of spirit or work or hobby or longtime friendship. (Interestingly, I've read that there's a lot of use of indirect communication in the military. They can do this because it's so clear who's in charge of what, who has authority, and they've all been educated into the same set of social norms. So if an officer walks into a room and says, "It's stuffy in here," someone lower-ranking knows to open a window without being told.) But in general, in 21st century America, I think direct communication is the way to go. I can think of at least three reasons based on my own experience, and I'd like to hear your comments as well--

1. Diversity. Even among people born in America, there are huge personal, cultural, regional, and class-based differences around what statements like "Come over any time," "The party starts at eight," "I've got the check," or "This is my friend Joe" really mean. So, when necessary (and it isn't, always), clarify. "We'll have drinks at six-thirty and I'm serving dinner at eight," or "People will start showing up around eight--come by any old time after that." And stick to it. I'm starting a little social experiment lately in my own circle: when someone says they'll get the check, I don't argue, I just say "Thank you!" I figure if they did mean it then I'll have saved them the nuisance of fighting for the right to buy me dinner, and if they didn't, well, they'll know better next time. (Although next time, of course, I'd pick it up myself.)

2. The spectrum. Those of you who are on the spectrum or know someone who is are already laughing, I bet. For the rest of you, let's just leave it at this: there's a lot of folks out there who are never going to pick up on indirect communication and social subtleties. And it looks like there's more of them all the time. Possibly there's been a rise in autism spectrum disorders, maybe it's just that social life has gotten so complicated, and diagnosis so much more acute, that we're noticing a lot more folks like this. Why not make life a little easier for them?

3. Information overload. I'm not on the spectrum--I'm about as neurotypical as a person can get. But there's days when the subtleties and nuances pass me by, too, because I'm distracted by my column deadline on Monday, and book reviews are due next week, and I need to make a Trader Joe's run, and what is the subprime mortgage crisis all about anyway and should I be doing anything with my IRA. We're all living in an immensely complicated world of superdelegates and compatible software and children and dogs and spouses with needs and the Middle East and good fats and bad fats and it's March so it's really cold in the morning but I won't want to have to wear my heavy coat home so I need to layer and does orange go with grey and sometimes we just forget that when Amy says "Dinner at six" she means "Dinner at six" and when Abby says it she means drinks at six and dinner sometime around ten.

So I vote for being direct. Ask for what you want, state your boundaries, clarify ambiguities. What do you think?