Michael Henderson suggests

Email registration

Free weekly email update

Great products and special offers for Spectator readers

Click here for great value events

Click here for exclusive articles, offers, tasting notes and discussion

Dear Mary

Mary Killen

Wednesday, 12th March 2008

Your problems solved

Q. Somewhat fortuitously I was recently a guest of an eminent London picture dealer in an excellent restaurant in the West End. Among the assembled were various racehorse owners and trainers. I happened to be sitting next to a lord whose family are members of the Beerage. I could not help but notice that the said peer had a monogram of his title with coronet above, embroidered on his shirt. Due to his ample bosom this was very obvious. Do you consider this correct or is it rather parvenu, Mary?

W.M., Stonegrave, York

A. Monogrammed shirts are not quite so bad as personalised number plates. Monogrammed slippers are acceptable if worn at home because they are slightly jokey. Equally, boxes of matches with coronets are fine inside the home. The Earls of Sandwich kept, for many years, a caravan on the Isle of Wight with their coat of arms emblazoned on the door — also as a joke — but the general rule is that drawing attention to one’s rank or riches in public is never acceptable. So the peer in question has committed a faux pas.

Q. We have a very nice au pair staying with us. As great foodies we like to buy ourselves treats — passion fruits, expensive chocolates, roasted macadamia nuts and artisan cheeses. These cost a fortune. In the past our au pairs much preferred supermarket cheddar, thought passion fruit looked disgusting and bought their own snacks, so we were safe. But this girl rather enjoys availing herself of our treats. How can I tell her not to polish off our Neal’s Yard Stichelton and gobble through the passion fruits without sounding like stingy tightwads? Please help.

T.D., London SE5

A. There is no full solution to this problem. Two-tier eating systems are always invidious and au pairs, in any case, are supposed to be treated as guests. Certain treats (nuts, chocolates) can be tacitly rendered off-limits by placing them in an earthenware jar with lid next to your computer. A computer desk is, of its very nature, generally perceived as an off-limits exclusion zone. But it would be unrestful — and undignified — for you to hide the luxury cheeses et cetera and then eat them furtively. Au pairs originally stayed as one of the family and helped out, just as a guest would help out, with loading dishwashers and occasional babysitting but did not receive any payment. Then they started being given small amounts of pocket money. Soon they were being given wages. Since there is no full solution to this annoying dilemma you should consider whether it might be cheaper to have someone in for three hours a day at ten pounds an hour, rather than giving board and lodgings and low wages to someone else who will easily wolf their way through £100 worth of luxury food per week.

1 | 2 Next page

More articles from: Mary Killen | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (1)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

S. Harper

March 17th, 2008 12:02am

With respect, Brewer's doesn't appear to support your interpretation Mary (at least the 15th and 16th editions, which have identical entries). Perhaps this is one for Dot Wordsworth, if she hasn't covered it already