By david.nathan.cox
After you become engaged, one of the earliest decisions you’ll make concerns who you’ll ask to be bridesmaids or wedding attendants. Usually, being selected to join the bride and groom as they recite their vows is seen as an honor bestowed upon special family members and close friends. This is a decision you’ll want to take seriously because your choices can impact your future relationships with people.
Try not to allow others to choose your attendants for you. Ideally, the people you decide to stand up with you on your wedding day should be close to you and your future husband. You should not base your decision on other friend’s or family member’s desires. Believe it or not, some people have been coerced into including people in their wedding party whom they would not have included otherwise. Yet, with that said, I highly recommend including family members in your wedding party.
Some people expect to be included in your wedding party and will be offended if you don’t ask them to be in your wedding. Many relationships have been strained or severed because a bride-to-be didn’t ask a college friend, for instance, to join her. Sometimes you will not know about these hurt feelings until the wedding is over, and you don’t hear from your friend anymore or your friend seems distant.
Ultimately, your wedding day should be a joyous day for you and your husband. You want to be able to look back at this day without regrets, so select bridesmaids and wedding attendants whom you’ll be able to say, “I’m glad they were by my side on my wedding day.”
June 29th, 2009 by Yolanda D. Young | Posted in Ceremony and Vows, Tips, Wedding Planning | Comments (1)
Should you write your own wedding vows?
These days, more and more couples are writing their own wedding vows. However, I think there’s something to be said about going for the traditional wedding vows. After all, they’re the traditional vows for a reason, right?
My fiance and I will be getting married in July. He wants us to write our own vows. However, I love the traditional vows. I think it’s more meaningful to use the same vows that my parents, grandparents, sister and brother-in-law and other relatives used in their weddings.
I’m hoping we’ll find a solution that works well for both of us. Does anyone out there know of any traditional vows that aren’t so traditional?
(photo credit: gradin)
April 16th, 2009 by admin | Posted in Ceremony and Vows | Comments (0)
I recently remembered a scene from “Father of the Bride,” one of my favorite wedding movies. Steve Martin’s character, George Banks, has a problem. His daughter’s wedding is costing a fortune, so he decides they’ll invite whomever they want to the ceremony. “Pack ‘em in,” he says. But then he limits the number of guests attending the reception. I always thought this was a reasonable option until I brought it up among friends who’ve had weddings. Their responses quite surprised me.
My friend Katherine did just the opposite–opting for a small ceremony with just family and close friends. But she had always dreamed her reception would be a huge party with tons of people. So that’s exactly what she had. “I think people had more fun,” she explained to me when I wondered whether her guests felt miffed at being excluded from the ceremony. “A lot of my guests seemed relieved. Most people don’t want to sit through a whole wedding. They come for the party.”
Katherine made a good case. I was beginning to see the beauty in an intimate ceremony followed by a packed and raucous party. But I wondered whether all guests would feel comfortable with this arrangement.
Just then Erica chimed in (all of whose guests attended both her ceremony and reception). “I like the idea but I wouldn’t do it,” she confirmed, “If you’re important enough to go to the reception, you’re important enough to witness the wedding.”
I am inclined to agree. I’d have a hard time picking which guests would get the whole shebang and which would get only half. While Katherine’s guests seemed to like the arrangement, others might not. “As a guest, if I had to choose, I’d rather go to the reception, but I’d feel insulted if had not been invited to both,” Erica pointed out. “But I definitely think it’s ruder to invite someone to the ceremony and then not allow them to join in the festivities afterward.” Erica’s last comment stayed with me. Had George Banks, best dad in the world, gotten it wrong? Was it colossally rude to invite guests to the ceremony and not the reception? Or is it a common practice? I left the debate completely confused. Does modern etiquette dictate that either of these solutions is acceptable? And, if so, is one more polite than the other? Is it nicer to include guests in the fun-filled celebration or the enchanting moment you become husband and wife?
How many of you, dear readers, have been in this situation as a bride or guest? What are your thoughts?
Carla Gonzalez-Hart
(photo credit: benjhaisch)
April 11th, 2009 by admin | Posted in Ceremony and Vows | Comments (0)
Chris, a friend of mine whose brother is getting married soon, mentioned a schism emerging in his family. While tradition dictates that the bride’s family pays for the wedding, there are certain things for which the groom’s family is responsible–namely, the rehearsal dinner.
The parents in question have offered a certain amount of money toward it. The groom seems miffed, as he had envisioned a much larger rehearsal dinner. What to do?
The tradition of the bride’s parents paying for the wedding–from what I understand, please correct me if I’m wrong–comes from same mindset as a family giving a dowry. As time wore on, and dowries became extinct, it seemed fair that the groom’s family would pitch in for their own portion. Perhaps not exactly historically accurate, I assume this is round-about how it went.
Generations of overbearing mothers, frustrated brides and 20-something couples earning more money than their parents have shifted the tradition a bit. More couples are opting to pay for their own weddings–if only so they can have it their way.
While many couples planning a wedding are still in favor of the parent-paid arrangement, they often forget one major implication. That historically, and indeed in modern times, whoever foots the bill gets their say in planning. Fair enough? If one is paying, they should be able to at least put a cap on the size of the event. In the days of parents paying for and planning weddings, weddings were quite small. Events costing $20,000 or $100,000 were unheard of among the middle class. It was commonplace for a couple to be married in their church and have a modest reception at home–just what the parents could afford.
My opinion is this: If this couple wishes to stick to tradition and have their parents pay for the whole ordeal, their parents should be able to plan it on a scale they can afford. Anything beyond that is sheer frivolity–perhaps a welcome and pleasing frivolity–but should be paid for on the part of the marrying couple.
Readers, would you agree?
Carla Gonzalez-Hart
(photo credit: collonade)
April 10th, 2009 by admin | Posted in Ceremony and Vows | Comments (1)
Loading ...
