Virtually No Dress Code on Our Summit Cruise

[drrich2]

I did a little looking around Cruise Critic & learned the dress code 'war' isn't just being waged on Celebrity. The Carnival board has a lengthy (& vehement) thread.

 

Reading through it, and a thread in this Celebrity section on anytime dining, a couple of interesting points came out.

 

An excerpt from Vijoge's post:

 

We were pleased on our NCL cruises to find that one dining room is designated "Formal" and another "casual".

 

They both serve an identical menu and those who want to dress and experience the formal atmosphere are able to and those who don't want to dress up can still experience the more special meal that is usually served on that night. Seems to make everyone happy.

 

That sounds to me like the thing to do, particularly given that the large ships have more than one level.

 

An argument often levied against the casual folks is 'go eat in the alternative whatever,' the hole in the argument being that it's not the same service/product. This way, it would be.

 

Although the increasingly casual aesthetic of our modern society seems to be troubling to some, I suspect there are enough people who 'like to dress up' that formal venues will remain options on many ships for many years to come. Just somewhat more marginalized/one choice rather than 'the' choice.

 

One issue that has greatly rankled some on the forum (not just in this thread) is the extent to which people are morally bound to follow the cruise line's stated policy (in this case, dress code, but the same idea applies to people sneaking in booze in their luggage).

 

On the one hand, some people believe it's the line's ship, their moral right to dictate policy, and all passengers are morally bound to obey - those who don't are wrong, commiting an act of wickedness/evil, etc... And some seem taken aback not all share this view.

 

I suspect that one pervasive factor in our society's disregard for some rules is the sense that regulatory agencies tend to be progressively restrictive, that great compliance with rules seems to breed more rules, that resistance to authority often discourages authorities into either backing off on regulations or at least not adding more, and the belief by some people that some things are 'their own buisiness' & not to be regulated by outside forces.

 

People driving 60 in a 55 mph zone are disregarding rules. People sneaking in bottles of booze in their luggage may be (I imagine it varies by line) - but may believe as long as they're not endangering or disrupting others that the line has no right to stop them, establishing an on-board monopoly for its own liquor products. Many people don't report small amounts of cash income (gifts, proceeds from sales of small items - say a rifle for $200 to a brother-in-law) on their income tax as miscellaneous income. Many people bet small amounts of money on sporting events in violation of state law.

 

My point is, in modern U.S. society, I think most people hibitually violate 'rules' so often over the course of their lives that when confronted with one, like a dress code, those who don't perceive a need for it, don't value it, and learn they can get away with ignoring it to some degree, often will. Not all, but some.

 

This isn't a moral ruling on whether that's right or wrong, just an observation. I'm sharing because I've seen posters deeply offended by disregard for rules (here specifically the dress code, but the principle extends beyond that), vilifying some who think it's fine & dandy, and wondering how in the world anyone but a selfish sociopath could think that way. I think the truth is more complicated than that.

 

For my own practices thus far (one cruise), I tried within reason & my own limited knowledge to comply at least roughly with the dress code. That said, I'm large, fat & male, retain heat & get uncomfortable easily, and while my suit coat was worn into the dining room on formal night, it went on the back of the chair when I got uncomfortable. After on our upcoming February Constellation cruise, while I intend to wear my suit on formal nights, after I leave the dining room, my feet are going back in my comfortable New Balance walking shoes, because dress shoes get painful after awhile.

 

But I don't wear jeans, sweat pants or shorts on a formal night. There's a difference between rough compliance & outright excessive flaunting of the social custom in place. I'm no stickler for formality, but I'm not out to create a disruption, either.

 

Richard.

[Xcruiser]

I did a little looking around Cruise Critic & learned the dress code 'war' isn't just being waged on Celebrity. The Carnival board has a lengthy (& vehement) thread.

 

Reading through it, and a thread in this Celebrity section on anytime dining, a couple of interesting points came out.

 

An excerpt from Vijoge's post:

 

 

 

That sounds to me like the thing to do, particularly given that the large ships have more than one level.

 

An argument often levied against the casual folks is 'go eat in the alternative whatever,' the hole in the argument being that it's not the same service/product. This way, it would be.

 

Although the increasingly casual aesthetic of our modern society seems to be troubling to some, I suspect there are enough people who 'like to dress up' that formal venues will remain options on many ships for many years to come. Just somewhat more marginalized/one choice rather than 'the' choice.

 

One issue that has greatly rankled some on the forum (not just in this thread) is the extent to which people are morally bound to follow the cruise line's stated policy (in this case, dress code, but the same idea applies to people sneaking in booze in their luggage).

 

On the one hand, some people believe it's the line's ship, their moral right to dictate policy, and all passengers are morally bound to obey - those who don't are wrong, commiting an act of wickedness/evil, etc... And some seem taken aback not all share this view.

 

I suspect that one pervasive factor in our society's disregard for some rules is the sense that regulatory agencies tend to be progressively restrictive, that great compliance with rules seems to breed more rules, that resistance to authority often discourages authorities into either backing off on regulations or at least not adding more, and the belief by some people that some things are 'their own buisiness' & not to be regulated by outside forces.

 

People driving 60 in a 55 mph zone are disregarding rules. People sneaking in bottles of booze in their luggage may be (I imagine it varies by line) - but may believe as long as they're not endangering or disrupting others that the line has no right to stop them, establishing an on-board monopoly for its own liquor products. Many people don't report small amounts of cash income (gifts, proceeds from sales of small items - say a rifle for $200 to a brother-in-law) on their income tax as miscellaneous income. Many people bet small amounts of money on sporting events in violation of state law.

 

My point is, in modern U.S. society, I think most people hibitually violate 'rules' so often over the course of their lives that when confronted with one, like a dress code, those who don't perceive a need for it, don't value it, and learn they can get away with ignoring it to some degree, often will. Not all, but some.

 

This isn't a moral ruling on whether that's right or wrong, just an observation. I'm sharing because I've seen posters deeply offended by disregard for rules (here specifically the dress code, but the principle extends beyond that), vilifying some who think it's fine & dandy, and wondering how in the world anyone but a selfish sociopath could think that way. I think the truth is more complicated than that.

 

For my own practices thus far (one cruise), I tried within reason & my own limited knowledge to comply at least roughly with the dress code. That said, I'm large, fat & male, retain heat & get uncomfortable easily, and while my suit coat was worn into the dining room on formal night, it went on the back of the chair when I got uncomfortable. After on our upcoming February Constellation cruise, while I intend to wear my suit on formal nights, after I leave the dining room, my feet are going back in my comfortable New Balance walking shoes, because dress shoes get painful after awhile.

 

But I don't wear jeans, sweat pants or shorts on a formal night. There's a difference between rough compliance & outright excessive flaunting of the social custom in place. I'm no stickler for formality, but I'm not out to create a disruption, either.

 

Richard.

 

Thank you, Richard and I would agree and respect that others may not. Very well said.

[SusieV]

Even if the choice of a formal or casual dining room is offered, that still means that people will be dressed casually at the after dinner entertainment. On X, the dress code is for the evening, not just for dinner. I wouldn't want to sit next to someone in jeans or shorts at the show while I'm wearing a gown anymore than I'd want to sit next to them at dinner, sorry.

[Xcruiser]

Even if the choice of a formal or casual dining room is offered, that still means that people will be dressed casually at the after dinner entertainment. On X, the dress code is for the evening, not just for dinner. I wouldn't want to sit next to someone in jeans or shorts at the show while I'm wearing a gown anymore than I'd want to sit next to them at dinner, sorry.

 

I have been saying the same as to the fact that they have a casual option. I really don't care if at the show after dinner if the person next to me wears anything at all...I might just look at them funny:eek:

[Drew B]

And would guests have to announce their planned formality pre-cruise so that they could be seated only with like-minded folks on the appropriate level? Otherwise, it would have to be open-seating. What would happen if I intend to dress for dinner but my tablemates don't? What if our table is on the casual level? See what I mean?

 

Even with pre-planning, what happens if somebody intended to dress for dinner, but on formal night just doesn't feel like it? Will they be able to switch to the casual area or will they just show up underdressed?

 

It's a good idea, but I don't think it solves the issue.

 

To me, as long as the casual folks can get the exact same food delivered to their cabin as room service or can choose to eat in casual dining with a different menu, I'm not sure what the problem is. They have three different choices. All have some things they like but something they don't. Choose and settle down. If you don't wish to participate in something that this cruise line very clearly sets forth as part of their brand, I'm not sure why such extensive accomodations have to be made to make sure you are 100% content...

[C 2 C]

Even if the choice of a formal or casual dining room is offered, that still means that people will be dressed casually at the after dinner entertainment. On X, the dress code is for the evening, not just for dinner. I wouldn't want to sit next to someone in jeans or shorts at the show while I'm wearing a gown anymore than I'd want to sit next to them at dinner, sorry.

 

On our recent Constellation cruise we passed our evenings in Michael's Club practically every evening. No matter what the dress code was for the evening, people wearing shorts, were also there.

We noted the same lack of Code as the OP's Summit. As stated earlier, many Celebrity staff members from head office also ignored the code.

 

Having a choice will not change this trend.

[Xcruiser]

And would guests have to announce their planned formality pre-cruise so that they could be seated only with like-minded folks on the appropriate level? Otherwise, it would have to be open-seating. What would happen if I intend to dress for dinner but my tablemates don't? What if our table is on the casual level? See what I mean?

 

Even with pre-planning, what happens if somebody intended to dress for dinner, but on formal night just doesn't feel like it? Will they be able to switch to the casual area or will they just show up underdressed?

 

It's a good idea, but I don't think it solves the issue.

 

To me, as long as the casual folks can get the exact same food delivered to their cabin as room service or can choose to eat in casual dining with a different menu, I'm not sure what the problem is. They have three different choices. All have some things they like but something they don't. Choose and settle down. If you don't wish to participate in something that this cruise line very clearly sets forth as part of their brand, I'm not sure why such extensive accomodations have to be made to make sure you are 100% content...

 

I’m not sure I follow you on this but I prefer the traditional dinning. I hope =X= doesn’t go the casual open seating model that I witnessed on Azamara Quest. That is not working at this point IMOHO.

 

I just think that if everyone puts more effort into enforcing a “Strict” dressing code which I feel 95% already comply, than the sooner we see the demise of traditional dinning.

[Coco Creek]

Even if the choice of a formal or casual dining room is offered, that still means that people will be dressed casually at the after dinner entertainment. On X, the dress code is for the evening, not just for dinner. I wouldn't want to sit next to someone in jeans or shorts at the show while I'm wearing a gown anymore than I'd want to sit next to them at dinner, sorry.

 

And, maybe someone in casual dress would not want to sit next to you. At some level, should we not respect the rights of each other and other guests to enjoy the ship's events and facilities after dinner assuming they respected the dress code and stayed away from the formal dinner so that you can gain full enjoyment of a formal dinner setting?

[SusieV]

And, maybe someone in casual dress would not want to sit next to you. At some level, should we not respect the rights of each other and other guests to enjoy the ship's events and facilities after dinner assuming they respected the dress code and stayed away from the formal dinner so that you can gain full enjoyment of a formal dinner setting?

 

The point is that they aren't respecting the dress code. On X, the dress code is for all public areas with the exception of the casual dining area. It is not just for the dining room. Therefore, those guests are in violation of the dress code.

[dforeigner]

The point is that they aren't respecting the dress code. On X, the dress code is for all public areas with the exception of the casual dining area. It is not just for the dining room. Therefore, those guests are in violation of the dress code.

 

Yep, people will do what the can get away with.

[Drew B]

I’m not sure I follow you on this but I prefer the traditional dinning.

 

My point was, if they decided to go with one level of the dining room for those who wanted to dress formal and one level for those who didn't, they'd almost HAVE to go open-seating for those nights. Otherwise, how could they arrange the regular seating to insure that all those on one level would dress formal and vice versa. I agree with you and I don't want open seating, either. That's why I don't think that the formal/casual level idea would work.

[jt1120]

Joe: You said it all.

 

So often it seems that someone has heard great things about Celebrity. Leaving their "own" cruise line behind, they now want to apply their own standards, or lack there of, on the cruisers who like Celebrity's rules of conduct. Refusing to follow "suggestions", they wish to rationalize their actions by not caring about anyone else who likes the very things they disdain.

 

Right back at 'cha, C2C, and it would be an honor to sit at your table on any cruise! You and I must be in the same boat.

 

Get it? Same boat? Gawd that's funny.

[Host Walt]

So many shots taken (and removed), so little time.

 

This thread is closed. In the future, please discuss the topic, not each other. Thanks.