<p><SPAN name="link2HCH0020" id="link2HCH0020"></SPAN></p>
<h2> CHAPTER XX—DINNER-GIVING SNOBS FURTHER CONSIDERED </h2>
<p>If my friends would but follow the present prevailing fashion, I think
they ought to give me a testimonial for the paper on Dinner-giving Snobs,
which I am now writing. What do you say now to a handsome comfortable
dinner-service of plate (NOT including plates, for I hold silver plates to
be sheer wantonness, and would almost as soon think of silver teacups), a
couple of neat teapots, a coffeepot, trays, &c., with a little
inscription to my wife, Mrs. Snob; and a half-score of silver tankards for
the little Snoblings, to glitter on the homely table where they partake of
their quotidian mutton?</p>
<p>If I had my way, and my plans could be carried out, dinner-giving would
increase as much on the one hand as dinner-giving Snobbishness would
diminish:—to my mind the most amiable part of the work lately
published by my esteemed friend (if upon a very brief acquaintance he will
allow me to call him so), Alexis Soyer, the regenerator—what he (in
his noble style) would call the most succulent, savoury, and elegant
passages—are those which relate, not to the grand banquets and
ceremonial dinners, but to his 'dinners at home.'</p>
<p>The 'dinner at home' ought to be the centre of the whole system of
dinner-giving. Your usual style of meal—that is, plenteous,
comfortable, and in its perfection—should be that to which you
welcome your friends, as it is that of which you partake yourself.</p>
<p>For, towards what woman in the world do I entertain a higher regard than
towards the beloved partner of my existence, Mrs. Snob? Who should have a
greater place in my affections than her six brothers (three or four of
whom we are pretty sure will favour us with their company at seven
o'clock), or her angelic mother, my own valued mother-in-law?—for
whom, finally, would I wish to cater more generously than for your very
humble servant, the present writer? Now, nobody supposes that the
Birmingham plate is had out, the disguised carpet-beaters introduced to
the exclusion of the neat parlour-maid, the miserable ENTREES from the
pastrycook's ordered in, and the children packed off (as it is supposed)
to the nursery, but really only to the staircase, down which they slide
during the dinner-time, waylaying the dishes as they come out, and
fingering the round bumps on the jellies, and the forced-meat balls in the
soup,—nobody, I say, supposes that a dinner at home is characterized
by the horrible ceremony, the foolish makeshifts, the mean pomp and
ostentation which distinguish our banquets on grand field-days.</p>
<p>Such a notion is monstrous. I would as soon think of having my dearest
Bessy sitting opposite me in a turban and bird of paradise, and showing
her jolly mottled arms out of blond sleeves in her famous red satin gown:
ay, or of having Mr. Toole every day, in a white waistcoat, at my back,
shouting, 'Silence FAW the chair!'</p>
<p>Now, if this be the case; if the Brummagem-plate pomp and the processions
of disguised footmen are odious and foolish in everyday life, why not
always? Why should Jones and I, who are in the middle rank, alter the
modes of our being to assume an ECLAT which does not belong to us—to
entertain our friends, who (if we are worth anything and honest fellows at
bottom,) are men of the middle rank too, who are not in the least deceived
by our temporary splendour, and who play off exactly the same absurd trick
upon us when they ask us to dine?</p>
<p>If it be pleasant to dine with your friends, as all persons with good
stomachs and kindly hearts will, I presume, allow it to be, it is better
to dine twice than to dine once. It is impossible for men of small means
to be continually spending five-and-twenty or thirty shillings on each
friend who sits down to their table. People dine for less. I myself have
seen, at my favourite Club (the Senior United Service), His Grace the Duke
of Wellington quite contented with the joint, one-and-three, and half-pint
of sherry, nine; and if his Grace, why not you and I?</p>
<p>This rule I have made, and found the benefit of. Whenever I ask a couple
of Dukes and a Marquis or so to dine with me, I set them down to a piece
of beef, or a leg-of-mutton and trimmings. The grandees thank you for this
simplicity, and appreciate the same. My dear Jones, ask any of those whom
you have the honour of knowing, if such be not the case.</p>
<p>I am far from wishing that their Graces should treat me in a similar
fashion. Splendour is a part of their station, as decent comfort (let us
trust), of yours and mine. Fate has comfortably appointed gold plate for
some, and has bidden others contentedly to wear the willow-pattern. And
being perfectly contented (indeed humbly thankful—for look around, O
Jones, and see the myriads who are not so fortunate,) to wear honest
linen, while magnificos of the world are adorned with cambric and
point-lace, surely we ought to hold as miserable, envious fools, those
wretched Beaux Tibbs's of society, who sport a lace dickey, and nothing
besides,—the poor silly jays, who trail a peacock's feather behind
them, and think to simulate the gorgeous bird whose nature it is to strut
on palace-terraces, and to flaunt his magnificent fan-tail in the
sunshine!</p>
<p>The jays with peacocks' feathers are the Snobs of this world: and never,
since the days of Aesop, were they more numerous in any land than they are
at present in this free country.</p>
<p>How does this most ancient apologue apply to the subject in hand?—the
Dinner-giving Snob. The imitation of the great is universal in this city,
from the palaces of Kensingtonia and Belgravia, even to the remotest
corner of Brunswick Square.</p>
<p>Peacocks' feathers are stuck in the tails of most families. Scarce one of
us domestic birds but imitates the lanky, pavonine strut, and shrill,
genteel scream. O you misguided dinner-giving Snobs, think how much
pleasure you lose, and how much mischief you do with your absurd grandeurs
and hypocrisies! You stuff each other with unnatural forced-meats, and
entertain each other to the ruin of friendship (let alone health) and the
destruction of hospitality and good-fellowship—you, who but for the
peacock's tail might chatter away so much at your ease, and be so jovial
and happy!</p>
<p>When a man goes into a great set company of dinner-giving and
dinner-receiving Snobs, if he has a philosophical turn of mind, he will
consider what a huge humbug the whole affair is: the dishes, and the
drink, and the servants, and the plate, and the host and hostess, and the
conversation, and the company,—the philosopher included.</p>
<p>The host is smiling, and hob-nobbing, and talking up and down the table;
but a prey to secret terrors and anxieties, lest the wines he has brought
up from the cellar should prove insufficient; lest a corked bottle should
destroy his calculations; or our friend the carpet-beater, by making some
BEVUE, should disclose his real quality of greengrocer, and show that he
is not the family butler.</p>
<p>The hostess is smiling resolutely through all the courses, smiling through
her agony; though her heart is in the kitchen, and she is speculating with
terror lest there be any disaster there. If the SOUFFLE should collapse,
or if Wiggins does not send the ices in time—she feels as if she
would commit suicide—that smiling, jolly woman!</p>
<p>The children upstairs are yelling, as their maid is crimping their
miserable ringlets with hot tongs, tearing Miss Emmy's hair out by the
roots, or scrubbing Miss Polly's dumpy nose with mottled soap till the
little wretch screams herself into fits. The young males of the family are
employed, as we have stated, in piratical exploits upon the landing-place.</p>
<p>The servants are not servants, but the before-mentioned retail tradesmen.</p>
<p>The plate is not plate, but a mere shiny Birmingham lacquer; and so is the
hospitality, and everything else.</p>
<p>The talk is Birmingham talk. The wag of the party, with bitterness in his
heart, having just quitted his laundress, who is dunning him for her bill,
is firing off good stories; and the opposition wag is furious that he
cannot get an innings. Jawkins, the great conversationalist, is scornful
and indignant with the pair of them, because he is kept out of court.
Young Muscadel, that cheap dandy, is talking Fashion and Almack's out of
the MORNING POST, and disgusting his neighbour, Mrs. Fox, who reflects
that she has never been there. The widow is vexed out of patience, because
her daughter Maria has got a place beside young Cambric, the penniless
curate, and not by Colonel Goldmore, the rich widower from India. The
Doctor's wife is sulky, because she has not been led out before the
barrister's lady; old Doctor Cork is grumbling at the wine, and Guttleton
sneering at the cookery.</p>
<p>And to think that all these people might be so happy, and easy, and
friendly, were they brought together in a natural unpretentious way, and
but for an unhappy passion for peacocks' feathers in England. Gentle
shades of Marat and Robespierre! when I see how all the honesty of society
is corrupted among us by the miserable fashion-worship, I feel as angry as
Mrs. Fox just mentioned, and ready to order a general BATTUE of peacocks.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />