[Proper Table Length is Crucial]
In some sort of strange and undocumented beginning, the growth of extravagance in Russian culture is fascinating. In no way is that meant to have a negative connotation, in fact, the following will be an apt sociological report, as such, it is crucial to suspend any notion or positivity and negativity. We're going to look at hard evidence, try to derive meaning from it and hopefully come to some sort of conclusion here.
There seem to be five integral components to the Russian Banquet event, and in no particular order they concern: attire, consumption of alcohol, the gossipology element, consensus of standards and finally gift giving procedure.
Prior to anything the women who attend these events are perhaps most interested in what they will wear. This is not scandalous nor surprising, obviously the dress a woman chooses needs to highlight the best of their physical features. In no way would a female attendee wear something that would showoff any of her shortcomings (these shortcomings are usually deemed by the greater group of participants, in that if, for instance, you have scars or something on your back you're going to hide them). It is unfortunate that this is the case, but then again we're strictly focusing on what goes on. There is a spectrum of dressdom. One could have an over the top type of dress. One that has attachments and phallic extensions and perhaps feathers. This type would most certainly be the easiest to identify due to the very provocative nature of the dress. People talk about it for days, perhaps weeks afterwards until of course, the next banquet. Then there are choices of attire among women that may be provocative for the lack of fabric. In this case the goal is to extenuate the blessings offered by genetics, such as a displaying breasts (much to the favors of every man) or the rear in a manner that is skin tight and leaves male segment with their mouths on the ground. Of course there is the neutral dress, which does not cause any intrigue but at the same time remains respectfully reserved. Hair is perhaps also an accessory to attire. It is not enough to leave the hair in its natural state. At one of these events it is clear that there has been some sort of treatment to the hair and/or some sort of product. One would be hard pressed to find an individual whose got nothing in their hair except of course, for those with no hair. The men are also just as immersed in the realm of extravagant attire. The choices a fellow man makes can reveal something about his personality. If he wears bright colors he may indeed be a flamboyant individual. In some cases it can denote a femininity of the male, but its masked by an arcane desire for “pussy.” So in effect a man can be wearing more colors, have more product in his hair, more moisturizer in his skin and cleaner nails than some girls and yet be the ones who are getting the “pussy.” It is a backwards way that perhaps redefines what “masculinity,” actually is. It is important to note that a minority of the males are dressed in a manner that begs attention, most go neutral and fulfill the natural tendency of male attire: traditional neutrality in an effort to maintain traditional masculinity. The one accessory that man gets to toy around with is facial hair. Most men are cleanly shaven, unless the slight shadow of the beard is there. In this case, masculinity is indeed being displayed. Mustaches are a rarity and only seen on old men and very brave, masculine, intelligent, funny, brilliant men. All of these factors serve to form an integral component of the Russian banquet. It has its roots in superficial one-up-manship, but has evolved into a silent beauty contest among the women. Some men choose to enter this contest among the men, but the majority of the men do not care. If one chooses to ignore this component then they are truly disregarding the foundation-less notion of “dressing to impress.” It is not customary to ignore this rule.
Perhaps the most notable aspect is the copious consumption of alcohol in a mechanical, meta-human type of way. One does not simply not drink at a Russian banquet, unless they're working, and even then some would bet these waiters are sneaking some (which is totally cool). There are certain procedural steps within this component, in that words of wisdom and experience is repeated. First of all it is unwise to mix beverages. One does not simply go from tequila to whiskey to vodka, no they stick with the initial brand and do not deviate. If one does deviate then there will almost certainly be issues ranging from vomiting to crying. Most attendees are well aware of the duty to drink as much as possible, its universally acknowledged among the collective but there is no real clear reason. Is the point of drinking the birthday or the point of the birthday to drink? It works very much as a cycle and it's inexplicable adoption is bewildering. It serves as the catalyst for good times and bad times, but certainly not “meh,” times. Attendees are taking a bet that is 50/50 in either direction of good or bad. The overall group generally has the good time and isolated incidents of too much are a stark and minimal concern. It is unlikely everyone gets too drunk. The drinking schedule is also quite severe and punishing. There exists a type of attendee who encourages or initiates a given shot. Often times this person is the consistent director and purveyor of the drinking. It is necessary for this person to use his (and sometimes her) better judgment on the drinking. This individual is pours the shots and commences toasts. Without him or her the drinking could be in disarray. He or she is also not responsible for the groups drunkenness in its entirety, they're responsible for his or her own designated quadrant, specifically the two people to his or her left, right, and the two people sitting directly across. There are visitors from other quadrants and this individual pours a shot when he or she usually recognizes that his or her glass is empty. The choice of this individual to pour a shot is quite important, too much and the quadrant gets fucked up too fast and if the re-pouring is too infrequent then the events are very boring. The resulting circumstances of this consumption lead the way to the final components of the Russian banquet.
There is a large element of gossipology to the Russian banquet. It just so happens that there is fodder before the event, during and after. It can only be a result of the magnitude of hype revolving the said event. The gossipology does not necessarily need to be negative. It is conglomeration of all the issues into a slow whining and discussion of elements surrounding who is going. Often times people will invite their friends, for instance the host will invite person A and person B and those persons are are at odds with each other, but not with the host. In this scenario shit can get ugly,especially, if the drink pourer is poor at pouring. Luckily, this writer has not experienced such a scenario. The real gossipology starts post party, and it is perhaps entirely unavoidable. For instance this particular written piece can be seen as a form of gossipology. This writer would personally disagree with that, but the fact remains: this can be called gossipology. It is unknown if said gossipology is necessary, however, it does indeed occur almost every time. A good example of positive gossipology would be a banquet I recently attended, which was fantastic, there was literally no drama and arguably everyone had an awesome time, the only gripe was that people had to go home at the end of the night. It is less interesting and less talked about. The type of gossipology that occurs when something negative happens has the capacity to last years, from broken showers to ex-boyfriends. It really develops itself. Also, it may seem that the adults at the event, and even some of the younger folk are actively judging you. They stare and do not make an effort to hide the fact they are staring. One who is being looked at can feel the judgment by the onlookers and can feel how wrong they are about you. It is akin to a girl looking at people magazine and judging “who wore it best.” The feeling of judgment is so strong, so pure, so authentically putrid it can actually induce vomiting. Soon some issues come up regarding standards and procedural elements, which in and of itself is a whole other issue.
To the individual who does not frequent these banquets it is crucial to know some ground rules. One of which is time of arrival. I personally make this mistake time and time again, but no one else does. The time that is given in the invitation is incorrect, and it is knowingly given as the incorrect time by the host and somehow is translated without explanation as the incorrect time to the attendees. For instance if one is invited for 7:30 p.m. it would be proper to arrive around 8:15 p.m. for no discernible reason. Perhaps it stems from an inability for guests to arrive on time, so the host provides a time that is earlier to ensure people get there at the appropriate 8:15 p.m. It can get complicated because apparently everyone knows this, and as such may delay his or her arrival past the 45 minute leeway given by the host. There is an overlooked variable in this scenario: the individual who is not clued in. What is this person to do? Well, they wait, they came on time and were penalized for not being clued in to the standards and procedures. The conclusions of this components are treacherous in that people cannot be trusted by the host to be on time (with good reason), and attendees show their level of respect by way of what time he or she arrived. Yet it should be clear that circumstances like work, or prior engagements would be excused from criticism. Other procedural variables come in many forms, like if one smokes he or she (but usually he) must make sure he or she has enough for themselves and roughly an equal amount to give away. One does not simply go outside to smoke by themselves at a Russian Banquet. There is an undefined buddy system. Often times a cigarette is needed by smokers after a shot or two. The resulting effect is roughly 33.33% of attendees are hanging around outside. Some would say the cool people are outside, but that is up for opinion. Also the benefit of somewhat fresh air helps dilute the amount of dancing that occurs.
The final and perhaps most controversial component to the Russian banquet is the gift one gives. This issue goes into the pre-event gossipology and is rooted in ethics and politics and no one wants to be on the wrong side of the gift because then he or she will be the conversation of the post-event gossipology. First off there is no actual tangible gift, one must only give cash, anything otherwise would be a violation of the unspoken standards and procedures. The next issue is how much cash to give. Here lies the the topic of most internal mind conversation. The goal by most (and this “most” would never admit it) would be to give as little as possible without being the one person who gives the least. Speculation is at its highest right before the event. Attendees will call each other in an effort to gain a consensus of what people are giving, then the attendee will make a decision and once that cash is sealed in the envelope the decision cannot be overturned. It is highly important and relevant to keep this subject as taboo as fucking possible, because one may never know if he or she was the person who contributed least. If word gets out about a frugal patron then a reputation can be at stake. It can be supposed that attendees may enjoy a lower number, but then again some consistent factors will remain. Everyone knows that the event is expensive, everyone knows that it could be an issue and everyone knows that they don't want to really give but have to.
The Russian banquet is something of sociological lore. People who are not immersed in that particular culture are prone to confusion, ethnocentrism and a sentiment of senseless hedonism that goes on for hours. Hopefully this little inquiry into the operational components of the Russian banquet have allowed for cleared up any issues for those who have yet to attend one.
No comments:
Post a Comment