Dumbing Down & Dressing Down: The New Cunard?

[Mareblu]

On 6/30/2024 at 10:26 AM, Mareblu said:

It's not a matter of whether "they would kick you out...for wearing a pair of capris and a nice shirt", although I have twice in several Oceania sailings witnessed, at entrance to GDR on different ships, guests being politely requested to perhaps return dressed in something more suitable.  Rather, it's how one feels if underdressed.  Capris, which when ankle length and nicely cut, present as an elegant evening pant, when matched with a suitable top and lifted even more with some attractive jewellery.  To me, "casual all the time" as you describe, is sportswear day and night.  Some Oceania guests do dress that way for a dinner in The Terrace, but most don't, and not ever that I've witnessed passing the entrance to any of the other restaurants aboard.  "Smart casual", as described by Cunard, is entirely different.  That description refers to the type of dress one would wear to dine at one's golf club, or a fine dining restaurant;  collared shirt (tie optional) and jacket for him, dressier than that for lunch for her.  Smart casual abounds in the evening on Oceania.

Oh dear.  The “nineteenth hole” reference is obviously directed at me and my previous post on golf club attire.  Those actually familiar with golf clubs would be aware that “polos and chinos” are indeed acceptable in the sports bar of golf clubs, which is where golfers gather for “a round after a round”.  For dining, at least at my golf club, Cunard’s directive for “smart casual”, as I describe above, is to be strictly followed, unless for a gala or formal evening (we have them frequently, not unlike Cunard), when formal attire is worn.  It is not I who first referenced polos and chinos.  Perhaps the poster’s golf club, if it exists, is the “wrong” golf club.  
 

I agree that it is sad to witness dress standards lapse.  I repeat another remark I previously made:  the attire one wears for the evening sets the tone for the evening.  
 

Please, may we engage in rational and polite discussion, or even debate, without resorting to condescending remarks and sweeping generalisations?  

 

[Victoria2]

What I find hard to understand is the fact those who bang on about standards are falling re dress codes, is that without the changes and bearing in mind I preferred the old three codes of yesteryear, there will be no Cunard in a few years time as folk won’t book to sail on  an anachronism.

 

Now that won’t bother those who are getting on and who won’t physically be able to cruise in a few years time  but selfishly, it would bother me.

Yes the youngsters like to scrub up for a Gala night but put on jacket and maybe a tie on other evenings ?
Don’t think so.
Those who want to do that, can. Those who don’t want to, don’t. Best of both worlds and those newbies who hesitate to book Cunard for the first time due to what they thought was a required  onerous  dress style will have no worries about pretentious Fashion Police who don't actually exist onboard, looking down their noses in print at anyone's attire just because they followed advisories. Respect for all and here's to another decade or more for us personally, on Cunard.

[missson1967]

1 hour ago, Victoria2 said:

What I find hard to understand is the fact those who bang on about standards are falling re dress codes, is that without the changes and bearing in mind I preferred the old three codes of yesteryear, there will be no Cunard in a few years time as folk won’t book to sail on  an anachronism.

 

Now that won’t bother those who are getting on and who won’t physically be able to cruise in a few years time  but selfishly, it would bother me.

Yes the youngsters like to scrub up for a Gala night but put on jacket and maybe a tie on other evenings ?
Don’t think so.
Those who want to do that, can. Those who don’t want to, don’t. Best of both worlds and those newbies who hesitate to book Cunard for the first time due to what they thought was a required  onerous  dress style will have no worries about pretentious Fashion Police who don't actually exist onboard, looking down their noses in print at anyone's attire just because they followed advisories. Respect for all and here's to another decade or more for us personally, on Cunard.

What we "find hard to understand" is why those who apparently "bang on about standards are falling re dress codes" (amongst other things) are inferred to be anachronistic and described as: 

 

(i) "getting on and who won't physically be able to cruise in a few years time"; and

(iii) "pretentious Fashion Police who don't actually exist onboard, looking down their noses in print at anyone's attire just because they followed advisories".

 

And yet, all within the same post from someone who apparently advocates "Respect for all".

 

Strikes us as somewhat inconsistent.     

[exlondoner]

All this fuss because a few people turn up in T-shirts and shorts in the wrong place. I totally agree this is an unpleasant sight. Nonetheless, compared to the apparent complete demise of classical concerts, this seems a very minor step towards the end of civilisation. Yet hardly anyone cares about the concerts, while minding very much about dress. Why is this, I wonder?

[Victoria2]

41 minutes ago, missson1967 said:

What we "find hard to understand" is why those who apparently "bang on about standards are falling re dress codes" (amongst other things) are inferred to be anachronistic and described as: 

 

(i) "getting on and who won't physically be able to cruise in a few years time"; and

(iii) "pretentious Fashion Police who don't actually exist onboard, looking down their noses in print at anyone's attire just because they followed advisories".

 

And yet, all within the same post from someone who apparently advocates "Respect for all".

 

Strikes us as somewhat inconsistent.     

Not at all.

The respect for all was aimed at those who look down on some with regards to dress. Nothing more, nothing less.

Anachronistic referred to the idea of a cruise line living in the past. If you want to extrapolate that to involve passengers, if the cap fits and all that, feel free.

 

As to your point i, what's wrong with it? It's a fact those who can no longer cruise won't be worried what others wear. I could have said those who will no longer be with us but decided that was a bit 'much'! 😃

 

Let's get one thing straight.

I love dressing for dinner

My husband always wears a jacket and has never ever let the chair wear it even when encouraged to do so in years gone by when the air-con couldn't cope

We ALWAYS dress to our standards of ten years ago [well apart from a tie occasionally]

 

but

 

I want Cunard to be around in years to come and sailing pretty full. To do that they have had to accommodate changes.

 

Like it or lump it, the Cunard of the past has changed and yes, the 'old' Cunard will be seen as an example of cruising in the Golden era and even the early years of this century will be mourned by me along with many others but it will also be seen as an anachronism in years to come.

 

[reeves35]

Dressing up for a special night is fun but it is just that, a fun night of dress-up, it is not reality.  We're not living in Downton Abbey so don't pretend it really means much.  It is a fun thing to do as part of your Cunard holiday just likes lots of other things you do on a cruise.

 

 

[Brummel]

1 hour ago, reeves35 said:

Dressing up for a special night is fun but it is just that, a fun night of dress-up, it is not reality.  We're not living in Downton Abbey so don't pretend it really means much.

This is the mistake Cunard is making, thinking women wearing beautiful gowns is "dressing up"  and men wearing tuxedos is "channeling your inner James Bond."

 

We are not children. Formal attire is part of our great Western cultural tradition. A tux (or dinner jacket as our British cousins call it) is not an anachronism, nor is it a costume. And it is worth celebrating and preserving.

 

I suggested to my Cunard contacts how they could up their sales, not by becoming yet another luxury line (but with older ships) but by doubling down on the dress code. 

 

Here's how.

 

Embrace the dress code, don't water it down. Yes, bring back the mandatory jacket and tie in the MDR for dinner. Last time I looked, the program used the words "We suggest..." A dress code is not a set of suggestions. Enforce it, gently but firmly. The boor on the QE who insisted on wearing his baseball cap in the MDR should have been escorted out by the sergeant-at-arms. The MDR would have erupted in applause, believe me. That actually happened on my first crossing, when another boor  (American, I am ashamed to admit) refused to wear a tie, even one proffered by the maitre d'hotel. He was back the next night, pre-tied tie in place.

 

Education. As described in an earlier post, too many passengers, young and old, have a negative view of dress codes because they don't understand why they exist. Tell them! Have every voyage include at least one lecture on some aspect of Western dress. The NYC to Southampton should always have a program dedicated to shoppiing men's clothing in London, perhaps even offering excusions to Savile Row and Jermyn Street.

 

Restore the once glorious standard of cuisine. Holland equals Cunard, Princess usually bests it. If you raise the fares a few hundred to cover this, do so. You will not lose a single fare. You will gain guests for life.

 

At least, please, do this on all QM2 crossings.

 

I really hate flying.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:55 AM by Brummel

[david63]

4 minutes ago, Brummel said:

Have every voyage include at least one lecture on some aspect of Western dress.

And would it be made compulsory to attend?

5 minutes ago, Brummel said:

Yes, bring back the mandatory jacket and tie in the MDR for dinner

Please NO. I have no objection to wearing a tie but I do not want to be forced to wear one in order to have a meal - that ended when I left school some 60 years ago.

[DukeBeetle24]

14 minutes ago, Brummel said:

This is the mistake Cunard is making, thinking women wearing beautiful gowns is "dressing up"  and men wearing tuxedos is "channeling your inner James Bond."

 

We are not children. Formal attire is part of our great Western cultural tradition. A tux (or dinner jacket as our British cousins call it) is not an anachronism, nor is it a costume. And it is worth celebrating and preserving.

 

I suggested to my Cunard contacts how they could up their sales, not by becoming yet another luxury line (but with older ships) but by doubling down on the dress code. 

 

Here's how.

 

Embrace the dress code, don't water it down. Yes, bring back the mandatory jacket and tie in the MDR for dinner. Last time I looked, the program used the words "We suggest..." A dress code is not a set of suggestions. Enforce it, gently but firmly. The boor on the QE who insisted on wearing his baseball cap in the MDR should have been escorted out by the sergeant-at-arms. The MDR would have erupted in applause, believe me. That actually happened on my first crossing, when another boor  (American, I am ashamed to admit) refused to wear a tie, even one proffered by the maitre d'hotel. He was back the next night, pre-tied tie in place.

 

Education. As described in an earlier post, too many passengers, young and old, have a negative view of dress codes because they don't understand why they exist. Tell them! Have every voyage include at least one lecture on some aspect of Western dress. The NYC to Southampton should always have a program dedicated to shoppiing men's clothing in London, perhaps even offering excusions to Savile Row and Jermyn Street.

 

Restore the once glorious standard of cuisine. Holland equals Cunard, Princess usually bests it. If you raise the fares a few hundred to cover this, do so. You will not lose a single fare. You will gain guests for life.

 

At least, please, do this on all QM2 crossings.

 

I really hate flying.

 

 

 

 

 

 

But what you're suggesting is not "doubling down on the dress code", you are suggesting "reverting it back". 

 

The current dress code is clear. Black tie for Gala Evening. Smart attire for non Gala Evenings. If you don't want to dress for either, there are venues where you can remain in casual attire after 6pm. 

 

I have no doubt there will be a handful of people who don't adhere to it.

 

This would happen regardless of what the stated dress code actually is, but suggesting having people escorted out of dining venues by the sergeant-at-arms is a bit over the top. In fact, I would imagine it would put people off, rather than encourage them to try Cunard. 

[Brummel]

As noted, this actually happened to a boob who refused to wear a tie during dinner. He was escorted out to cheers and applause.

 

Oh, those were the days!

[rj1227]

Much like Cunard, the time devoted to dress-code issues on the Cunard forum is a throwback to a past age, even if one only two or three generations ago. 

 

This forum largely consists of two groups: Cunard devotees, and those thinking about a Cunard cruise or wanting a greater understanding of how Cunard is different. Though I have sailed before on Cunard (the quintessential TA crossing on the QM2), I still fall in the latter category.

  

Regarding dress code, I actually started perhaps nine months ago a thread on whether on nonformal nights a man could wear, instead of a collared shirt, a mock turtleneck, preferably with a sports coat. I personally think I look as smart in that attire as I might with a collared shirt. The thread lasted pages. I do not mention my prior thread as an attempt to relitigate the specific question raised. I do so only to highlight how passionate and even divisive these dress debates can surprisingly be. 

 

Again, my position: If the rules are clear and I sail, I will follow them. I have no intent of causing myself or anyone else at my dinner table discomfort over my dress. That would be rude. If I find the rules too bothersome, I won't sail. 

 

Going forward, Cunard's choices seem threefold as a matter of logic: 

 

1. Clearly define and maintain current dress standards. 

 

2. Revert to the past and make even more formal the dress standards, at least for some voyages like the TA crossings on the QM2. For example, the dress for men on the nonformal nights is coat and tie. 

 

3. Because of passenger demands, relax gently over time the dress requirements, at least on certain voyages like those on warm-weather cruises. To me, it does seem possible to tinker with, but still maintain, the core of Cunard's dress code, especially with sailings in the Caribbean. For the above discussion, I recognize there are those who disagree with my statement.

[S1971]

20 minutes ago, Brummel said:

 

Oh, those were the days

 

But that's the whole point, those days are gone and won't be returning.

[foodsvcmgr]

Stepping away from dress momentarily, are classical concerts truly gone in all ships or just QA?

No violins anywhere?

No cocktail pianists doing classical?

And if so, yes to me a greater concern than the man at the next table not wearing a jacket.

[exlondoner]

54 minutes ago, foodsvcmgr said:

Stepping away from dress momentarily, are classical concerts truly gone in all ships or just QA?

No violins anywhere?

No cocktail pianists doing classical?

And if so, yes to me a greater concern than the man at the next table not wearing a jacket.

So a bright young member of the ents. staff told someone on another thread, but whether true or not, I have no idea. A string trio has been spotted since a think, but that’s not exactly a classical concert in the afternoon.

[exlondoner]

4 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

So a bright young member of the ents. staff told someone on another thread, but whether true or not, I have no idea. A string trio has been spotted since a think, but that’s not exactly a classical concert in the afternoon.

See post 38 on the Northern Europe thread.

[alc13]

1 hour ago, foodsvcmgr said:

Stepping away from dress momentarily, are classical concerts truly gone in all ships or just QA?

No violins anywhere?

No cocktail pianists doing classical?

And if so, yes to me a greater concern than the man at the next table not wearing a jacket.

I agree completely.  Not only classical, but live music is one of the great pleasures of Cunard.  We were on a so-called-luxury line once where someone classical selections on an electric piano.  Synthesized sound is not the same as the warm sound of actual strings.

[Brummel]

1 hour ago, foodsvcmgr said:

Stepping away from dress momentarily, are classical concerts truly gone in all ships or just QA?

No violins anywhere?

No cocktail pianists doing classical?

And if so, yes to me a greater concern than the man at the next table not wearing a jacket.

Sadly, while not entirely gone, definitely diminuendo. The string quartet is now a string trio. However, every year there is a music crossing with an orchestra aboard that plays two concerts featuring British and American music.

 

Holland used to have a classical music venue, Lincoln Center, which has fallen to the forces of darkness.

[Wordzz]

One of the highlights of our QV world voyage earlier this year were the classical concerts - or more precisely, perhaps, recitals. They were in the Queens Room in the afternoons, and were wonderful. Aside from these, there was live music all over the ship. I certainly hope that remains the case for our next cruise (also on QV), as it really sets Cunard apart.

[DukeBeetle24]

2 hours ago, foodsvcmgr said:

Stepping away from dress momentarily, are classical concerts truly gone in all ships or just QA?

No violins anywhere?

No cocktail pianists doing classical?

And if so, yes to me a greater concern than the man at the next table not wearing a jacket.

Despite the messages you've received on this since, you can find the Daily Programme from the most recent voyages which has been uploaded and there seems to be a good mix of live music, both string and pianists: 

 

[*Miss G*]

No one wants to be told how to dress, as it is offensive to both the staff who may be required to enforce it as well as the offending party. The easiest way to enforce this is for the passenger to familiarize themselves with the standards and to follow them. If they have not read them, in advance, the daily newsletter certainly provides the information. It also states that it’s okay if you want a more informal dress, and here is where it is accepted.

 

Those who have been brought up with those standards, and/or those who have a job where it is a requirement of employment, will certainly know how to dress. “Renegades” will challenge the bar. So do children. They push to see how far they can go and at what point they make no further headway. It is a question of control and it will always be. 

 

Ultimately, control lies with the entity who makes and enforces the rules. That comes from the top on down. None of this matters if there is a break in the chain. Everyone will see the new parameters if the existing ones are no longer in force.

[Camberley]

3 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

But that's the whole point, those days are gone and won't be returning.

And thank heavens for that

[King Amo]

18 minutes ago, *Miss G* said:

“Renegades” will challenge the bar. So do children. They push to see how far they can go and at what point they make no further headway. It is a question of control and it will always be. 

 

Is this a general point about children, or are you implying that kids not being in jacket and tie is somehow consciously contributing to an erosion of the standards onboard? 

[*Miss G*]

11 minutes ago, King Amo said:

Is this a general point about children, or are you implying that kids not being in jacket and tie is somehow consciously contributing to an erosion of the standards onboard? 

 

It is an implied comparison. The standards are outlined. There will always be those who push to see how far they can go. The hard part is to enforce it.

[S1971]

40 minutes ago, *Miss G* said:

Ultimately, control lies with the entity who makes and enforces the rules. That comes from the top on down. None of this matters if there is a break in the chain. Everyone will see the new parameters if the existing ones are no longer in force.

 

In there lies the problem, Cunard are inconsistent when it comes to enforcing their own dress code as per some of the comments on this thread alone suggest, they also use term "suggested" in some of their literature rather than perhaps compulsory, "suggested" is simply the get out clause some are looking for!!

Edited Tuesday at 04:34 PM by S1971

[JT1101]

Good Golly Miss Molly...

 

226 posts and counting on this? Methinks we have talked it to death.