Calling cards

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Since Esq. is the accepted designation for attorneys here, I would think that in this country it would be perfectly acceptable for them to use that.

On a business card, yes. On a social card, no.

The professional exceptions for social cards are Reverend, Father, & Rabbi preceding the name. Using Esq. after one's name (despite it's professional use by lawyers) implies one is an armiger (ie: possesses a personal coat of arms). While it is accepted practice in the United States that a lawyer will append Esq. after his name on a business card, it is gauche, in the extreme, to advertise, or put forward, one's trade, profession, or academic standing on a social card.

[Dall_Piobaire]

I think it is a great idea! In this age of "networking" with everyone having a facebook page, or my space, or even their own website it has probably become more common.

I think, for me, unless I represented a larger entity, I would go with a combo of personal/business, but that's just me.

A question, probably nit-picky. Is it, technically speaking, legitimate to use the clan crest on a business or personal card?
Not that one would get docked for it, but just curious.

[Leprechaun 91]

I have had "calling cards" since I began college. I too have "Business Cards" but I use my calling cards for personal contacts. I too find it better than finding a pen. It is also lee lokely to be misplaced by the recipient. Simply because it is not the norm to receive a professionally printed card from a personal contact.

[Galician]

On a business card, yes. On a social card, no.

The professional exceptions for social cards are Reverend, Father, & Rabbi preceding the name. Using Esq. after one's name (despite it's professional use by lawyers) implies one is an armiger (ie: possesses a personal coat of arms). While it is accepted practice in the United States that a lawyer will append Esq. after his name on a business card, it is gauche, in the extreme, to advertise, or put forward, one's trade, profession, or academic standing on a social card.

I shall grant that use of a professional designation for a personal card might not be the best form. I have noticed over the years, though, that the English frequently list their academic degrees in ways we here would never do.

As regards the Esquire, however, this nation is a Republic, so no one here legitimately has a personal coat of arms. Thus there can be no such implication.

[Old Hippie]

I have both formal and informal business cards. The informal ones serve the purpose of calling cards for me (though we can discuss whether that is appropriate to the use or not).

My two main informal card designs are quite simple, created in Word and printed on the Avery laser printer forms available for business cards. I print them as I need them.

One says, "Dr. Charles A. Hays. Gentleman, Swordsman, Philosopher. Will Think for Food."

The other says, "Old Hippie Tractor Repair. Chuck Hays (and my phone number). Peace, Love and Old Tractors."

As I tend to be somewhat sardonic in the best of times, I occasionally print a limited run of cards for a special occasion or just because I'm feeling like it. There are people I know who are trying to collect the set.

Clearly my life's not too formal, but still it's nice to have a card to hand out or leave wedged in a door if I've been by. I don't carry a cell phone, neither do I text nor tweet. I can be reached (seriously) by telegraph, either at home or office where I have working hookups.

:ootd:

[macwilkin]

I shall grant that use of a professional designation for a personal card might not be the best form. I have noticed over the years, though, that the English frequently list their academic degrees in ways we here would never do.

As regards the Esquire, however, this nation is a Republic, so no one here legitimately has a personal coat of arms. Thus there can be no such implication.

Your second statement is incorrect; there are many American citizens who are armigers. The majority of them have received a grant of arms via a foreign heraldic body, such as the Lyon Court, the College of Arms (England), etc. Their arms are very much legimate and they have the patents to prove it.

T.

[Galician]

Hmmm, how do I phrase this? What standing do these arms have for public display within the U.S.?

[macwilkin]

Hmmm, how do I phrase this? What standing do this arms have for public display within the U.S.?

There is nothing contradictory in being a citizen of the United States and being an armiger. You might want to read the primer on the American Heraldry Society's web site:

http://americanheraldry.org/pages/in...n=Primer.Page1

It clears up a number of myths and misconceptions about the use of heraldry in the United States.

While the US does not have a heraldic authority such as Scotland, England or Ireland, the arms granted to Americans via those bodies are legitimate arms.

T.

[JSFMACLJR]

I most certainly do have--and use-- social calling cards!

I have two:
1. "Mr. John Sandford Fleming MacLean, junior"
2. "Mr. and Mrs. John Sandford Fleming MacLean, Jr."

Contrary to what my learned friend MacMillan of Rathdown wrote, I use the title "Mr." on my card, as this is the form dictated by Emily Post and Amy Vanderbilt in ages past! It is also an accepted British usage, as well (viz. Manners and Rules of Good Society, or Solecisms to be Avoided, written by "A Member of the Aristocracy" in 1913! I cannot locate my Debretts Correct Usage book at the moment to see a more current British opinion!

M o R is correct, though, from a purely Scottish point of view. Chiefs and lairds most certainly would NOT use Mr.! As an armiger, perhaps I should get a card engraved as simply "Sandford MacLean." Since good engraved cards are not cheap, I can hold off on this little extravagence.

[RB51]

A very interesting link...thanks, Todd, for passing it along. And thanks to all for sharing your thoughts and info; I'm going to have to hie on over to Staples, get some card stock and start printing.

Laurie