on saying please summary

A.G. Gardner’s essay "On Saying Please", deals with the importance of the expressions ‘Please', or thank you', in daily social life. It settles many bitter arguments and softens harsh tempers. In this essay the writer talks about the value of good manner in the society. To strengthen his views A.G. Gardner gives example from his own experience. Once, a lift man throws a passenger out of the lift because the passenger did not say "Top please". This act of the lift man is wrong because one cannot punish impoliteness with physical violence. Hence the action of the lift man is not legally justified.

Impoliteness is not a legal offence and it cannot be treated by violence. If that can be done, the city will run with blood all day due to violence. Though, incivility and impoliteness are not legally wrong, they are extremely dangerous and it will affect the course of life. Bad manners are like infections. They actually do more damage to the general life than all crime in the world. The pain caused by bodily injuries passes away soon, but the wound caused by bad manners remains even green. Bad manners make life hellish where as good manner make life happy and cheerful. Therefore one should use good manners and politeness in social behaviour. The first requirement of good manners is that when one requires a service he/she should say 'Please’. When the service is made, one should gratefully say `thank you'. 'Please and 'thank you' are the courtesies by which humans can keep the machine of life oiled and graceful. These courtesies make life happy.

The writer narrates another personal incident. One day the writer boarded a bus. He felt that he had no money in his pocket. The conductor did not insult him but, recognizing him a gentleman, issued him a ticket. The writer found some money in his pocket and paid the fare. He was much impresses by the courtesy and politeness of this conductor. A few days later the same bus conductor trawled the writer's toe. He felt pain but the manner of the bus conductor was so pleasing that he forgot it. The writer recognised that the conductor was a model of good manners. He had a knack of making his passengers comfortable. He was extremely kind and considerate. With old people he was as considerate as a son, and with children as caring as a father. He created an atmosphere of good temper and kindliness. Hence a journey with him was a lesson in natural courtesy and good manners. He got through his work with ease and courtesy to others.

The writer says that war has badly affected our manner. War has made people uncivil and boorish. He advises to restore good manners to make life a happy one. One should teach moral lesson to those who are guilty of bad manners. In this connection people should follow the example of Lord Chesterfield. During that time London streets were without pavement. Once, Lord Chesterfield met a person in the way who said. "I never give the wall to a scoundrel". But Lord Chesterfield replied, "I always do". This victory of Lord Chesterfield was more lasting. He concludes the essay by stating that the lift man also might have followed the foot of Lord Chesterfield instead of punishing the man.

Thus we see that the essay clearly shows the distinction between what is punishable by law and what is desirable though not punishable by law. While the law is very definite about how individuals should act, it does not have much to say about the issues of courtesy and kindness/politeness to others. The law speaks to individuals who have been wronged, whose rights have been taken away at the hands of another. Yet, it cannot legislate manners or civility in acting towards one another. The reality is that while it is not a perfect state, this state of law is a reasonable one because it does not enter the realm of emotions. If the law gave in to this level of emotional subjectivity, then individuals would be carrying out acts of violence each time someone demonstrated rudeness to them.