possessed of a dignity in keeping with his position.

 

No applicant will satisfy requirements, whatever his level of accomplishments

otherwise, if seen to fall short in this respect.'

 

For all my lack of enthusiasm for the Hayes Society, it is my belief that this

particular pronouncement at least was founded on a significant truth. If one

looks at these persons we agree are 'great' butlers, if one looks at, say, Mr

Marshall or Mr Lane, it does seem to me that the factor which distinguishes them

from those butlers who are merely extremely competent is most closely captured

by this word 'dignity'.

 

Of course, this merely begs the further question: of what is 'dignity'

comprised?

 

And it was on this point that the likes of Mr Graham and I had some of our most

interesting debates. Mr Graham would always take the view that this 'dignity'

was something like a woman's beauty and it was thus pointless to attempt to

analyse it.

 

I, on the other hand, held the opinion that to draw such a parallel tended to

demean the 'dignity' of the likes of Mr Marshall. Moreover, my main objection to

Mr Graham's analogy was the implication that this 'dignity' was something one

possessed or did not by a fluke of nature; and if one did not self-evidently

have it, to strive after it would be as futile as an ugly woman trying to make