Anarchronism (sic)

Los Angeles, California


I think I inadvertently coined a new word recently. It was an uncaught typo; one of many that remain out there, I'm sure. I tend to publish posts (I'm not being lofty, that's what the button says: PUBLISH POST) hastily. I don't write them in haste. I go over them several times a day, during the course of about a week. I make a lot of changes and often move text around. This, too, causes problems, as I often leave part of a sentence behind, rendering what remains unintelligible. I'm only an average speller, but good enough to notice that spellcheck has its problems. After going over the posts quite a number of times, I eventually hit a wall and just punch that button to put the post up on my blog. Then, over the next couple of days, as I keep noticing errors -- typos, bad syntax and whatnot, I continue to make corrections, even though it's already out there.


And that is what happened with anarchronism, which I misspelled in the first paragraph of my last post, entitled, The Golden Age (and available here for a limited time or more). And don't bother looking there, as I've already cleaned it up. But, here's the thing. I kinda sorta like it. I've decided that anarchronism is the melding of anarchy and anachronism. This happens when the anachronisms are done out of rebellion. Like the rules of this time period don't apply to me! I saw this in Joseph Papp's production of Two Gentlemen of Verona. The hell with convention, let's send a telegram in the middle of Shakespeare's play. You know, sometimes mistakes can create a lightbulb-over-the-head moment. Ok, maybe this wasn't exactly one of those times . . .


In spite of my shortcomings, spelling and the like, I do know a couple of things. And, recently, I had a conversation with some friends about uncommon knowledge. We defined this as things we know that a lot of people don't. We weren't talking quantum physics here, nor even geometry, which might as well be quantum physics for my lack of comprehension of it. Rather, we were talking about things like words that are commonly mispronounced; words so commonly mispronounced that if you use the correct pronunciation most people will think you are the one pronouncing it incorrectly. Like flaccid, which I learned long ago is pronounced flak-sid. Luckily, like zoology (zo-ol-o-gy not zoo-o-lo-gy), it doesn't enter into my everyday conversation. However, when it does, I pronounce both the way everyone else does even though I know it's incorrect. Call me crazy, I just like to fit in.


And, while I'm on a roll here with the mispronunciations, I'd like to cry out against dropping H's. No, not like a Cockney dropped H a la Eliza Doolittle. But rather the ph and th sounds in amphitheater and anaesthetic. Ph as in fuh, and th as in the. Why on God's green earth do people say amPitheater and anaesTetic? There's a phuh and a thuh in there, people! Ok, sorry, just a pet peeve of mine.


As I recall, the conversation didn't start with the pronunciation of words, however. It started with disbelief at how fast rules of etiquette seem to be changing (or perhaps, more accurately, how they are currently being ignored). One of my friends, Debra, mentioned that she was aghast when, at a wedding reception she attended, a cash collection for the bride and groom was taken by passing around a large bowl. On point here, we recently received an invitation to an out-of-state wedding shower where it was indicated that the soon-to-be bride and groom, who both have quite good jobs, didn't really need anything. So could we all just pitch in and help send them on their honeymoon to Australia? Hmmm. I hate to be a buzz kill about this, but I think if you can't afford to take yourselves to Australia for your honeymoon, you should maybe set your sights a bit closer. Bakersfield, perhaps. I would say that it was just me feeling that way, but my friends seemed to agree. Still, the times they are a'changing.


I'm not quite sure what purpose etiquette serves anymore. While people do continue to beg forgiveness for an unexpected belch, a lot of the rest seems to have gone out the window. And I mean flown, not meandered on its way. And, evidently, some new rules haven't stuck around town for long. Clearly, as I learned from Sex in the City it is no longer a breach of etiquette to sleep with someone before the third date. The thing is, I didn't even know about the third date rule, and already it's old hat. It gets really challenging to keep up. In Calvin Trillin's new compilation Quite Enough of Calvin Trillin, he confides that he's "decided to skip holistic," adding that "the speed of trends being what it is these days, about the only way a citizen can exhibit an independent spirit is to remain totally inert." Inertia's not a bad thing, I think. And in the case of these new wedding trends, I think I'm going to give it a skip. Gluten-free? Ditto. Reality TV (do you really have to ask?)?


Therefore, I'd like to fall back on the very important things that I do know. I hope they are still true and impactful. Here's one: when a wedge of cheese is set out for self-serving, you should take your portion while maintaining the shape of the wedge. None of that slicing right across the point. No, no, and no. And, do you know that while you should leave a guest room and/or powder room in the same state as when you walked in, conversely you should never refold your napkin before you leave a dining table? This gets confusing because of those waiters who will run over and refold your napkin if you leave the table, say, to make a phone call or use the loo. Still, when your meal is finished and you are walking away from the table, you don't refold your napkin (you just don't).


And who decides this stuff anyway? Billy, who is rather a devout iconoclast, would be inclined to do these things just because he knows he's not supposed to. And yet. And yet, he can be a real stickler about other stuff. Don't even think about whispering even one comment to him during a movie. To him, this is a felony etiquette infracture; one to which he refuses to dignify with a response. Any response. He will not speak during a movie. Stonewall Jackson was a loose goose compared to Billy in this area.


Clearly, I believe structure and form serve a purpose, and I think some sense of etiquette has its place in our chaotic world. Isn't it fundamentally just bad manners for each of us not to let in one car ahead of us, when the adjoining lane is closing? And I fear that if we throw it all out, one day we'll find ourselves caught in the nightmare of passing the hat at a bridal shower to fund the bride's Vera Wang wedding dress. And with our luck, this would also be where we encounter the flaccid napkin, and that badly hacked wedge of cheese. But, I think it really is too exhausting to fight. Besides, it could just be that my dedication to the cause of maintaining order is misplaced; or worse, that in the last analysis, it is merely an anarchronism. Thank you for reading my fblog (F is silent).