By Henry Alsford for the New York Times article How the Internet Has Changed the R.S.V.P.
With ease come presumption and murk. Take, for instance, the modern R.S.V.P. The Internet has allowed a host or event producer to painlessly publicize his or her event to sultans and skateboarders in minutes, the digital invitation beaming on their computer screens and cellphones like an onion puff dangling from a stick.
âThe Evite has also saved us from the plumed scroll and the careful unrolling of the parchment,â said Francine Maroukian, who has written books about entertaining for Esquire and Town & Country. âNot to mention glitter in envelopes.â
But hasnât all of this ease and streamlining also helped erode the social contract that is at the heart of an R.S.V.P.? Hunt Slonem, a painter and frequent dinner party host, said: âI donât know if people take an online invitation as seriously as a printed one anymore. A lot more people R.S.V.P. than show up because itâs so easy to R.S.V.P.â
The chef and television host Rocco DiSpirito concurred. âPeople have gotten extremely wiggly about R.S.V.P.âing,â he said. âPeople either donât R.S.V.P. and show up anyway, or they R.S.V.P. yes to everything and decide later what their best option is.â
If youâre looking for evidence of Monsieur Reservezâs reduced circumstances, you need look no further than the fact that itâs not uncommon these days to be emailed a reminder that the event to which you R.S.V.P.âed three weeks ago is happening tonight. Or that itâs now possible, with a Facebook invitation, to be offered the option âMaybe.â Both are canaries in the R.S.V.P. coal mine.
However, guests â even those who do respond to invitations in the affirmative but who then text their regrets at the last minute â are not solely to blame. Hosts themselves are upping the murkiness factor. Earlier this year I, but not my boyfriend, received an invitation to the glamorous Brooklyn brownstone of someone who knows us both. As it turned out, I was fairly sure that a 6 p.m. obligation that same evening would preclude my attendance. Given the host and the augustness of the occasion for which the party was being held, I was 90 percent certain that the party would be catered, and therefore that a head count would be important; however, the invitation did not bear the initials âR.S.V.P.â So the party was exclusive enough that only one member of my dyad was invited, but not so exclusive that an R.S.V.P. was required. My mind slightly reeled.
A few months later I received a dinner invitation from a different source in which I was told that I wasnât required to respond but that âit might help anyway.â
The newly relaxed attitudes toward R.S.V.P.âs can be especially acute with events that are not specifically dinner or cocktail events. Mari Meehan, a retiree in northern Idaho, said that a few years ago she and her husband were emailed an invitation to the wedding of the son of a former business associate of her husband. âMind you, we had never met the son nor his lady and had not had any contact with the business associate for years. So Hub clicked on the âWill Not Be Attendingâ option. A few months later he received an e-announcement: itâs a boy. A few months later he received an e-announcement that a boy had actually been born. It seemed to us that it was a rather tacky solicitation for gifts in both cases.â
Paul Cram, an actor in Minneapolis, said that two years ago he R.S.V.P.âed yes to an Evite for a play that a friend was performing in. Once in attendance, Mr. Cram discovered that the not-wonderful play was almost three hours long and that his friend had only a few lines in the last four minutes of the show. After the show, Mr. Cram congratulated his friend but also conveyed his surprise that she wanted him in attendance. âShe tells me: âOh, no, I didnât mean that to be taken as a you-have-to-attend personal invitation. You should have called me to see if itâs something I wanted you to come to.â Now I donât respond to Evites.â
Several factors fuel this new R.S.V.P. squishiness. On the guest front, some people cite lack of experience. Rena Sindi, who moved into Sean Combsâs townhouse on Park Avenue in the 1990s and gave some of that decadeâs most fabulous theme parties, said: âItâs the people who donât entertain who are the worst at R.S.V.P.âing. Those who entertain know that numbers are important.â
With a larger party like the ones Ms. Sindi is known for, guests are often invited in waves of desirability; thus, an inviteeâs failure to send his regrets is often keeping another guest from being invited. Ms. Sindi said that she always tries, as a guest, to answer promptly. âAnd unless Iâm on my deathbed, I show up.â
Other critics of guest-based laxness cite not a lack of experience in general, but a surfeit of the wrong kind. Ms. Maroukian said, âWe have before us a generation of people who grew up eating in restaurants, not at dinner parties.â Ms. Maroukian said that these people need to realize that âa restaurant doesnât care about you in the same way a host does: itâs going to serve dinner with or without you.â
âBut a dinner party host really cares,â she continued.
When it comes to hosts or event producers, the squishiness has its own roots. In the case of the people who reached out to Ms. Meehan and Mr. Cram, the willy-nilliness of the invitations breathes of excessive Internet usage. If youâre going to use Paperless Post as a way to fill seats or get presents, you havenât simply blurred the line between private and public, youâve obliterated it.
In the case of my cocktail-party host and others like her, itâs more difficult to generalize. Initially I ascribed this R.S.V.P.-less invitation to a kind of partial munificence: âCome to my catered little shindig if you (but not your boyfriend) can, but I donât need to know if you canât make it.â But the more I thought about it, the more I was able to ascribe empathy to it. Some hosts are so conscious of the overstuffed quality of their guestsâ lives that they overgenerously ease parameters in an effort to get the guests to show up.
This easing of parameters can, in some cases, rob parties of their mystery. âI heard of one party where the hosts published the menu with the invitation, so the gluten-free would feel free to come,â Ms. Maroukian reported. âAs the writer Max Frisch once said, technology is âthe knack of so arranging the world that we donât have to experience it.â â
Indeed, now that some of us use Facebook to manage our friendships and acquaintanceships, turning friends into âfriendsâ and genuine admiration into ideograms of thumbs, perhaps itâs only fitting that weâve made less binding the handshake in the dark that is an R.S.V.P. Moreover, electronic communication is supposed to render our lives easier, and what, in the heartless blinking of your computerâs electromagnetic field, seems easier about a Saturday night thatâs a month away than âMaybeâ?
But how quickly Maybeâs buttery aroma of intention metastasizes into lizardy default. Kate Rezucha, the internal communications manager for the San Francisco-based Esurance, said: âIâve learned that the best way to secure guestsâ attendance at your hopeful childâs birthday party is to ignore guestsâ positive or nonexistent R.S.V.P.âs and to call each childâs parents, imploring them to bring their child âbecause Iâm afraid no one else is going to make it, and I donât want her to be left without any friends on her birthday.â Unlike the year my ex-husband was in charge and did not make said calls. The lone party guest turned to my sad 8-year-old and said, âDonât you have any friends?â â