Arts & Entertainment
Breach of manners
New book explores why some things drive us crazy
‘Would It Kill You to Stop Doing That? A Modern Guide to Manners’
By Henry Alford
Twelve
$24.99
243 pages
Stop it.
Just cut it out. Quit snuffling, chomping your gum and snapping your fingers in people’s faces. Don’t be rude and don’t do that thing with your foot, OK? Stop with those annoyingly intrusive questions, and by the way, no one appreciates your disgusting bodily noises.
Why is it that manners are something we possess but no one else does? Why do some things bother us, while others don’t? And, as author Henry Alford asks with his new book, “Would It Kill You to Stop Doing That?”
Why do we bother with manners? Henry Alford wondered that while he was in Tokyo. Japan, he says, is the “Fort Knox of the World Manners Reserve,” but we here in North America know a few things about that subject, too.
Scientists know, for instance, that we’re nicer to people we know. We define manners, not as protocol (a subset of mannerly behavior), but as sensitivity to others. Experts have hypothesized from where “Southern Charm” sprang. And when it comes to manners, we unequivocally say that we present good manners, while bad manners are what others have.
Of course, though, in our zeal to be polite, we do boneheaded things. We don’t think. We don’t listen. We say “no problem” instead of “thank you,” or we apologize insincerely or not at all. We bum-pat, hug (or are horrified by huggers), and we often eschew email etiquette.
So why are we this way? One of the reasons might be what doctors call “inattentional blindness,” which means that we’re too focused on other things, to the detriment of being nice. We might not be adept at small talk. We hide behind a group, an email alias or a Facebook page because we can.
There are things we can do about widespread rudeness, however. Summon your inner chat-ability at parties, but know that there are limits. Teach manners to your children. Pay attention to cultural differences. Cultivate the art of the smart (but ohhh-so-genteel) comeback.
“Would It Kill You to Stop Doing That?” is a quirky book. It’s not exactly an etiquette book, although there’s advice in here. It’s not a how-to, either, unless you do a lot of reading between the lines.
This book is more of a look at how we behave (or don’t) and why it bothers author Henry Alford — and that last part is what makes this book worth a read: Alford is pretty good at being Everyman. Like him, aren’t we all grossed-out by unflushed public toilets? Don’t we all hate drivers with perpetually turned-on turn signals? Haven’t we all committed a faux pas that made us want to slink away?
This book holds a mirror up to our foibles and though it, too, has its impolite moments, it’s also got some laughs. I think if you’re rubbed wrong by rudeness, you’ll like it but beware — start reading “Would It Kill You to Stop Doing That?” and you may not be able to stop.
Sports
US wins Olympic gold medal in women’s hockey
Team captain Hilary Knight proposed to girlfriend on Wednesday
The U.S. women’s hockey team on Thursday won a gold medal at the Milan Cortina Winter Olympics.
Team USA defeated Canada 2-1 in overtime. The game took place a day after Team USA captain Hilary Knight proposed to her girlfriend, Brittany Bowe, an Olympic speed skater.
Cayla Barnes and Alex Carpenter — Knight’s teammates — are also LGBTQ. They are among the more than 40 openly LGBTQ athletes who are competing in the games.
The Olympics will end on Sunday.
Movies
Radical reframing highlights the ‘Wuthering’ highs and lows of a classic
Emerald Fennell’s cinematic vision elicits strong reactions
If you’re a fan of “Wuthering Heights” — Emily Brontë’s oft-filmed 1847 novel about a doomed romance on the Yorkshire moors — it’s a given you’re going to have opinions about any new adaptation that comes along, but in the case of filmmaker Emerald Fennell’s new cinematic vision of this venerable classic, they’re probably going to be strong ones.
It’s nothing new, really. Brontë’s book has elicited controversy since its first publication, when it sparked outrage among Victorian readers over its tragic tale of thwarted lovers locked into an obsessive quest for revenge against each other, and has continued to shock generations of readers with its depictions of emotional cruelty and violent abuse, its dysfunctional relationships, and its grim portrait of a deeply-embedded class structure which perpetuates misery at every level of the social hierarchy.
It’s no wonder, then, that Fennell’s adaptation — a true “fangirl” appreciation project distinguished by the radical sensibilities which the third-time director brings to the mix — has become a flash point for social commentators whose main exposure to the tale has been flavored by decades of watered-down, romanticized “reinventions,” almost all of which omit large portions of the novel to selectively shape what’s left into a period tearjerker about star-crossed love, often distancing themselves from the raw emotional core of the story by adhering to generic tropes of “gothic romance” and rarely doing justice to the complexity of its characters — or, for that matter, its author’s deeper intentions.
Fennell’s version doesn’t exactly break that pattern; she, too, elides much of the novel’s sprawling plot to focus on the twisted entanglement between Catherine Earnshaw (Margot Robbie), daughter of the now-impoverished master of the titular estate (Martin Clunes), and Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi), a lowborn child of unknown background origin that has been “adopted” by her father as a servant in the household. Both subjected to the whims of the elder Earnshaw’s violent temper, they form a bond of mutual support in childhood which evolves, as they come of age, into something more; yet regardless of her feelings for him, Cathy — whose future status and security are at risk — chooses to marry Edgar Linton (Shazad Latif), the financially secure new owner of a neighboring estate. Heathcliff, devastated by her betrayal, leaves for parts unknown, only to return a few years later with a mysteriously-obtained fortune. Imposing himself into Cathy’s comfortable-but-joyless matrimony, he rekindles their now-forbidden passion and they become entwined in a torrid affair — even as he openly courts Linton’s naive ward Isabella (Alison Oliver) and plots to destroy the entire household from within. One might almost say that these two are the poster couple for the phrase “it’s complicated.” and it’s probably needless to say things don’t go well for anybody involved.
While there is more than enough material in “Wuthering Heights” that might easily be labeled as “problematic” in our contemporary judgments — like the fact that it’s a love story between two childhood friends, essentially raised as siblings, which becomes codependent and poisons every other relationship in their lives — the controversy over Fennell’s version has coalesced less around the content than her casting choices. When the project was announced, she drew criticism over the decision to cast Robbie (who also produced the film) opposite the younger Elordi. In the end, the casting works — though the age gap might be mildly distracting for some, both actors deliver superb performances, and the chemistry they exude soon renders it irrelevant.
Another controversy, however, is less easily dispelled. Though we never learn his true ethnic background, Brontë’s original text describes Heathcliff as having the appearance of “a dark-skinned gipsy” with “black fire” in his eyes; the character has typically been played by distinctly “Anglo” men, and consequently, many modern observers have expressed disappointment (and in some cases, full-blown outrage) over Fennel’s choice to use Elordi instead of putting an actor of color for the part, especially given the contemporary filter which she clearly chose for her interpretation for the novel.
In fact, it’s that modernized perspective — a view of history informed by social criticism, economic politics, feminist insight, and a sexual candor that would have shocked the prim Victorian readers of Brontë’s novel — that turns Fennell’s visually striking adaptation into more than just a comfortably romanticized period costume drama. From her very opening scene — a public hanging in the village where the death throes of the dangling body elicit lurid glee from the eagerly-gathered crowd — she makes it oppressively clear that the 18th-century was not a pleasant time to live; the brutality of the era is a primal force in her vision of the story, from the harrowing abuse that forges its lovers’ codependent bond, to the rigidly maintained class structure that compels even those in the higher echelons — especially women — into a kind of slavery to the system, to the inequities that fuel disloyalty among the vulnerable simply to preserve their own tenuous place in the hierarchy. It’s a battle for survival, if not of the fittest then of the most ruthless.
At the same time, she applies a distinctly 21st-century attitude of “sex-positivity” to evoke the appeal of carnality, not just for its own sake but as a taste of freedom; she even uses it to reframe Heathcliff’s cruel torment of Isabella by implying a consensual dom/sub relationship between them, offering a fragment of agency to a character typically relegated to the role of victim. Most crucially, of course, it permits Fennell to openly depict the sexuality of Cathy and Heathcliff as an experience of transgressive joy — albeit a tormented one — made perhaps even more irresistible (for them and for us) by the sense of rebellion that comes along with it.
Finally, while this “Wuthering Heights” may not have been the one to finally allow Heathcliff’s ambiguous racial identity to come to the forefront, Fennell does employ some “color-blind” casting — Latif is mixed-race (white and Pakistani) and Hong Chau, understated but profound in the crucial role of Nelly, Cathy’s longtime “paid companion,” is of Vietnamese descent — to illuminate the added pressures of being an “other” in a world weighted in favor of sameness.
Does all this contemporary hindsight into the fabric of Brontë’s epic novel make for a quintessential “Wuthering Heights?” Even allowing that such a thing were possible, probably not. While it presents a stylishly crafted and thrillingly cinematic take on this complex classic, richly enhanced by a superb and adventurous cast, it’s not likely to satisfy anyone looking for a faithful rendition, nor does it reveal a new angle from which the “romance” at its center looks anything other than toxic — indeed, it almost fetishizes the dysfunction. Even without the thorny debate around Heathcliff’s racial identity, there’s plenty here to prompt purists and revisionists alike to find fault with Fennell’s approach.
Yet for those looking for a new window into to this perennial classic, and who are comfortable with the radical flourish for which Fennell is already known, it’s an engrossing and intellectually stimulating exploration of this iconic story in a way that exchanges comfortable familiarity for unpredictable chaos — and for cinema fans, that’s more than enough reason to give “Wuthering Heights” a chance.
Crimsyn and Tatianna hosted the new weekly drag show Clash at Trade (1410 14th Street, N.W.) on Feb. 14, 2026. Performers included Aave, Crimsyn, Desiree Dik, and Tatianna.
(Washington Blade photos by Michael Key)













-
Baltimore3 days ago‘Heated Rivalry’ fandom exposes LGBTQ divide in Baltimore
-
Real Estate3 days agoHome is where the heart is
-
District of Columbia3 days agoDeon Jones speaks about D.C. Department of Corrections bias lawsuit settlement
-
European Union3 days agoEuropean Parliament resolution backs ‘full recognition of trans women as women’

