The seemingly innocuous phrase "no problem" has recently shown up twice in stories in the New York Times. The first was in the enlightening and popular yet horrifically condescending and grouchy "100 Fucking Things You had Better Not Be Doing if You Want to Work at my Restaurant, and then again in the comments section of this week's plea to readers for more "Utterances and Signs That Annoy Me," by Stanley Fish. Apparently, when Times writers and readers say "thank You" to someone who is serving them in any manner, they do not want to hear "No problem," in return. Why?
According to one commenter:
When I am thanking a person for a service rendered because he or she is employed to perform that service, a response of "no problem" indicates to me that I may have had an excessive expectation. If a restaurant server is paid and tipped to bring me a meal, why should I be assured that it wasn't an inconvenience to do so?
That is because you're a jackass. Isn't life is too short to (a) split hairs, semantically, over what a waiter or even a T-Mobile customer support specialist said to you, and (b) be offended by whatever it was? Especially when "it" was the server's (feeble) attempt at what they believe is politeness? And in that case, isn't it actually rude to dwell on "it," and then passive aggressively correct this server, later on, in the comments section of an online article of a newspaper? Isn't that "excessive" fucked-up-edness on the level of whomever does stuff like this should get multiple swirlies in the toilet of a bus occupied by the aging German pop-metal band The Scorpions after they have all had the stomach flu for 72-96 hours and have stubbornly refused to quit eating Thai food?
To me hearing "no problem" from a server means that I am most likely dining at a fine family-style chain restaurant (like the one my friend and former boss Walt Fruttinger owns in Bozeman) within a half mile radius of a state school, and will likely hear the inhabitants of my table addressed as "guys," regardless of our gender(s), on multiple occasions following that. Will I be offended? No. Not for long, at least. Why? Because I am there to eat the living fuck out of some fajitas, not to lay the groundwork for my linguistics dissertation.
I am thankful that someone else will listen to me fumble through the process of ordering food (getting all Type-A about my egg whites), and someone else will cook a meal for me, and then someone else (actually maybe that first someone) will bring that meal to me, on dishes that I will never wash, let alone carry to someone else's industrial dishwasher when I am finished eating. I will wad up my napkin, chew a toothpick into homely little wooden slivers, place them next to my meager tip and then leave without needing counseling because someone said "no problem" to me.
"No problem" tells me that my server will do whatever it is I've asked of them again and again, no matter what obstacles they have to encounter. "No problem" tells me that even though their father is an alcoholic and did not come home until dawn that day, they won't bring their anxiety about it to my meal. "No problem" tells me that even though they had to wake up the cook and hand-scrub the feces out from underneath his fingernails, they will get me my calamari (with some faux-exotic dippin' sauce) tout suite. And with a smile, and, sure... with the awkward bubble of informality cause by "no problem." Big deal.
And again we hear from a Times commenter, one Jane Duber:
"thank some one [sic] and they respond "No problem". is it just me, or does this magnify the importance of what I thanked them for? Or, lots of times, I am the one being polite, as in, it is them doing their job, it better not be a problem."
Okay, well, Ms. Duber, as long as we're getting things off of our chest, could I trouble you to make your comment somewhat grammatically correct? Sure, my grammar here kind of sucks, too, but yours is worse, and your comment is written so carelessly that it tells me (the reader, someone who would have maybe even agreed with you in another universe) you don't give a rat's ass about me, you just want to foist your moronic thoughts into my goddamn computer.
The only time I don't want to hear "no problem" is if a chimp rips my face off and I live but my repaired face still looks like a NERF basketball that German Shepherd puppies have played with, and my surgeon is all nonchalant about getting me on the mend. Sorry, but I am going on Oprah, while she is still on the air, and you are writing a book and possibly appearing on a Bravo or Discovery special, so take your "no problem" and jam it in someone else's soup hole.
And here's from that one guy's story:
41. Saying, "No problem" is a problem. It has a tone of insincerity or sarcasm. "My pleasure" or "You're welcome" will do.
Okay. I actually hate everyone who works in restaurants and has attempted to provide customer service to anyone ever in history. I hate that when I go into Starbucks these days they get unhappy if I don't relegate my first choice into the trash bin and take that shitty, shitty, shitty, terrible VIA crud off their hands. I don't want it. Fuck you. Die now. But, the "no problem" thing? I have no problem with that, guys. And because I have no problem with that, I would stuff anyone who does have a problem with that in a woodchipper. Just like in Fargo. And then I would turn it on. And that is why this column is called the Woodchipper.
Claude Vordell is a former manager of an Applebee's in Bozeman, MT.
As a customer I have no problem with "no problem."
As a food service worker, I make a special effort to just say "thank you," when a customer thanks me--not "no problem", "yup", "sure", or "you bet."
I used to always say "you're welcome," but once I said it, out of habit, to an extremely mean woman who hadn't actually said "thank you," and she yelled at me, saying I hadn't earned her "thank you" and so shouldn't be saying "you're welcome."
Not a problem!
Do Not Disturb I'll be re-reading this and the steak until 10:00 AM EST.
And this is why real America hates New York Times readers.
First of all, you can't just gerrymander 'real america' around everyone you don't think is a tool. Real America is full of Real American douches.
Second of all, you're exactly right. Has anyone else here had a recent born-again hatred of anyone trying to be smart or refined? It's shit like this, it's like, the next person I see with a willingness to publicly-self-identify as a 'foodie', i mean, it makes me ashamed to know anything about anything.
This column has the incoherence and free-floating rage of my brain after 3 or 4 whiskeys. Thank you.
It's so close to Boozeman!
Feces and Applebees go together like Mom and applepie.
You're welcome - oops! - I mean "No problem".
Thank you.
I am so old that I still say, Not at all. Nobody has a problem with that because nobody understands it.
Each person has their own conversational tic and says what he or she always says and can't really change it without getting an acting coach or something. Also, "my pleasure"? Seriously? That's practically dirty talk. They're servers, not Geishas.
Not that that's what Geishas do, just in case someone came to this comment section determined to find something to be horribly offended about.
I thought Geishas just giggled a lot when not playing a shamisen.
BAM.
" And that is why this column is called the Woodchipper"â€"Did not see that one coming.
There is no Stabucks in Bozeman, asshole.
...or comment editing function on The Awl....
There's one in the barnes and noble in the Gallatin Valley mall. I am sitting here now, waiting for the blades in my woodchipper to be sharpened. Also I travel two ways: (1) internationally and (2) nationally, giving lectures, and I happen to visit many Starbucks locations.
Actually, no there it is not; though I suppose you Montana rubes think the Barnes and Noble Cafe that "through an exclusive arrangement with Starbucks is the only bookseller serving America's premier coffee brand" counts as a Starbucks. And just to double check, I called the city's Target as many Target stores feature full-fledged Starbucks. Bozeman's does not.
"no problem" or "not a problem": both are awful. so is the psuedo australian "no worries". the problem is that the phrase implies that had the request or service been somehow a problem, then the server wouldn't have done it. but it's your job, server, to do problematic things. that's why, in this little exchange of capital and commodity, you're the one getting paid and i'm the one paying. the phrase implies that the server is filtering between the problematic and non-problematic, and only deigning to do the latter. i thank you for doing something precisely because it is problematic: mildly annoying, tedious, repetitive, insistent ...everything that i know that service job to be from my own experience on that side of the cash register. maybe aanother "thank YOU" is a better response if "you're welcome" feels too archaic...
To say that "no problem" implies that the server would not have performed a problematic request is false in both the common sense and literal interpretations. Common sense tells you that "no problem" just something many people say when thanked. The common Spanish reply to "gracias" is "de nada," which, literally translated, is "of nothing." Pretty close to "no problem."
If we are being literal, "no problem" actually implies that the task was not a problem, and if it had been the server would not have chosen not to do it, but simply responded with a different reply.
I have the feeling that when the server says "no problem" he is implying that he thinks I as the customer care and have expressed such care about whether it's a problem for him or not. I didn't ask if he was having a problem, I simply thanked him.
Claude, this essay/rant/chide is something that Zombie Bill Safire would be proud of.
Thank you for taking the time to write it.
FWIW I do use "no worries" when a client/customer is being problematic.
This was a single easy piece.
I think this 'no problem' business (soon to go the way of 'no homo' and 'persona non gratis,' ie, sayings that indicate the person saying is someone from whom you want to 'beat a retreat') originated, as with all horrible, horrible faux-moralistic usage advice, with Strunk/White. At least I hope it did.
Doubtful. E.B. is probably spinning in his grave about all this.
This "no problem" thing is being horribly overthought by all parties involved. Whatever mental gymnastics one has to come up with in order to justify their dislike of the phrase, what it boils down to is the word "problem." Merely uttering the word, even in the context of denying its existence, rings a sour note. Imagine if a waiter set a plate in front of you and said, "There is absolutely no fecal material in this dish." While literally true, and reassuring knowledge, it's not something most diners really want to hear.
That's why the best response to "thank you" in a restaurant is "my pleasure." Whether literally true or not (I'm guessing it's generally not -- what would probably most pleasure the waiter is the diners finishing their fucking food and getting out of there, after leaving a gigantic tip), the utterance of the word "pleasure" gives the diner a little frisson of warmth.
These phrases are pleasantries -- not meant to be thought about in any depth, but tossed back and forth and immediately forgotten. The literal meaning of these words doesn't matter so much as their superficial "mouth feel."
this is a wise analysis.
Dear Claude - you, sir, are a jackass. No problem is a poorly expressed communication. It is appropriate in situations such as this:
Q: Is there a problem? Will the atomic reactor explode?
A: No problem. Everything is Okey-dokey.
By any stretch of the imagination, it is not an appropriate response to the phrase: "Thank You." It's almost as if there response "No Problem" is a misunderstanding by the person of the original statement.
"Thank you for for saving my life with the donation of your kidney."
You choose the answer which best communicates to the person giving the thank you, that you 1) heard what they said. 2) understand what they waid 3) are graciously accepting their thanks
Choice 1. "No problem."
Choice 2. "You're welcome."
Which builds a sense of connection and engages one-to-the-other in a social contract and which refutes the other and dismisses their feelings?
It's not about the server it's about the customer. The Customer said "Thank YOU." What will you do, dismiss their thoughtful verbal appreciation or dismiss it?
And all communication is not to be glossed over. Saying what you think, feel and mean - with tempered courtesy and thoughtful manner - is an important plank in a civil discourse.
So now...shall I retract my statement that the author is a jackass? After all he used that term for me - dismissed me before even considering what the bigger issues are involved. A jack-ass is a cross-breed, an animal that is good for one purpose and cannot re-produce. Sterile and disconnected from the bigger fabric and purposes belonging to all things truly living... Nope. He's a jack-ass.
OK - so shoulda proofed that before clicking POST.
Sorry.
No problem.
...none taken! Thank you.
Okey dokey. Howzabout "no sweat?"
With this kind of attitude I wouldn't expect to be thanked at all. After all, they are being PAID to do it. This kind of person make me sick. Sick like The Scorpions.
As a matter of fact, life is nottoo short to split hairs semantically. For some of us that's all there is.