Wedding Blues
What not to do.
That sounds more dire than it should, I guess. It wasn't that bad. Today was the H wedding. Ben H. is the son of friends of the family (and fellow members of Zion), and he and his new wife, Heather, will be settling here in town. Ben is a teacher with a job at FZ, and his new wife is an accountant, so I guess we'll be seeing a lot of them going forward.
And to be fair, their wedding was really nice. A simple ceremony, elegant dresses and tuxedos, followed by a luncheon reception in the church basement. Aside from the fact that we made the mistake of bringing our kids, we thought the wedding itself was really nice, and we appreciated that they chose to do something we also did at our wedding: rather than hold up the guests in an endless receiving line, the bride and groom left the sanctuary during the recessional, then came around through the side doors and personally excused each row of attendees. This allowed everyone to sit comfortably (rather than standing in a line waiting), to greet and congratulate the Bride and Groom personally, and then to leave the church comfortably rather than crushed between strangers as everyone tried to get out. Three snaps in a circle for that one.
But two things bugged me at the reception. One was the couple's choice, the other was not.
For one thing, apparently it has become the fashion to NOT give out wedding favors. Actually, that in and of itself is perfectly fine with me. Tulle-wrapped bags of candied almonds or mints or whatever are perfectly fine, and appreciated, but I can do without them without feeling slighted. They're nice to receive, but by no means crucial to my enjoyment of the wedding, especially in a church-basement reception, which sort of suggests that the couple is trying to spend conservatively. We understand that, no problem.
But in place of favors, at each place was a card marked 'In Lieu of a Favor'. Inside was a note explaining that in lieu of favors, Ben and Heather had donated money to cancer and heart disease research charities, as they felt that this gesture would assist many people both near and abroad. That's very thoughtful of them, I'm sure, except that it rather misses the whole point of the favor.
I seem to recall from back in my wedding-planning days that i was told that 'The Wedding is about the Couple, the Reception is about the Guests.' In other words, your wedding is the point, and people have given up their time to travel to where you are and watch, witness and support you as you exchanged vows. The party afterwards is your way of thanking those people for doing that with a celebration. Therein may lay my problem, because in actual practice receptions tend not to celebrate those who came to support the couple, but rather to further honor the couple. After all, if the reception was truly about the guests, the Head Table would eat LAST, not first.
But even if the wedding reception *entire* is not so much a 'thank you' to guests for attending, the wedding FAVOR is. And admittedly, some favors are pretty trite and crappy, but that's still what they're for. Therefore, even though many of your guests probably don't care that much about candied almonds in a little tulle sack, the fact that you provided one is still a nice gesture, and eschewing favors is sort of tacky.
However, if your wedding budget just cannot accommodate a favor for each guest, then I think it's almost BETTER just to do NOTHING than to do what Ben and Heather did. While I am absolutely in favor of donating to charity, put this gesture up against the purpose of the favor and consider the message that is being sent here. It's a little like going to someone's birthday party and saying, "Happy birthday. I was going to buy you a gift, but then I thought my money would be better spent on a charity, so I donated it instead. Wasn't that nice of me? What, did I donate it in your name? No no... I just donated it in my own name. But still, isn't that nice of me?"
No, frankly.. it wasn't. I came to your wedding, I brought you a gift. I took time out of my day and my life to be with you on this day, and you've just effectively said, "I couldn't be bothered to say thank you because I spent the money I meant to spend on you on a donation to charity instead." I mean, if charity is a drive, by all means donate some of your wedding funds to it, but if your goal is philanthropy, either donate a certain amount in each guest's name and provide them with a certificate to that effect, or donate the money you would have spent on yourself in some way instead. Go cheap on the flowers, forego the expensive dress and/or tuxedos, etc. The best gesture would be to ask your guests to donate in your name IN LIEU OF GIFTS TO YOU. THAT is a nice gesture. But spending thank-you money on a charity is not okay, espcially since doing so ultimately benefits the thanker in ways that buying favors wouldn't. After all, you can get a really nice tax break by donating and writing off the donation on your taxes. You can't do that with candied almonds or tulle.
So... thanks for the favor. Next time, just don't do anything for me and that will be just as nice. Or better yet, give me $1.35 in a donation envelope and let ME send it in.
I mention all of this NOT because I intend to sit and pout about it, or treat Ben and Heather any differently because of it. I 'm sure it was a suggestion made in some Bridal magazine and Heather, being the forward-thinking and liberal person she is, thought it was A Nice Thing. And for the charity and for Ben and Heather, it certainly IS a nice thing. But I hope that that practice does NOT take off, because it's ultimately sort of crass.
That said, I suppose one can argue that the meal provided is the other perk guests get, but this segues into the second thing that bugged me.
There were about 35 tables of guests at the reception. We were table 24. By the time we got up to get our meal, the salad was gone. Anna, who was ahead of me, politely asked whether there was more salad. She was told that no, there was not. Hrm.
Now, the tables were dismissed in numerical order, which means that as many as eleven or twelve tables of guests (and many of the later tables were long tables that sat ten or twelve rather than the eight seated at the round tables near the front) were not given any opportunity to have any salad. That's NEARLY HALF of those who attended.
At first I thought (again, as this was a church basement reception) that the Ladies' Aid of Zion had been enlisted to the cause here, and in that case one could hardly quibble about running out of something. The Ladies' Aid largely donates their time and their cooking skills at no cost, so if they want to run out, no one really has the right to complain. However, no.. it turns out the meal was catered by Auntie Em's catering, so in that case, I'm disgusted. Were we the last table to eat, you know, that'd sort of be one thing.. but come on.. how hard is it to bring enough SALAD, of all things? I mean, just bring twice as much as you need of the ingredients and throw it together in the kitchen when you run out. It takes...what, one peson and three minutes? Give me a break.
That was obviously not something over which Ben and Heather had any control, and really, I think it's pretty crappy for any caterer to run the risk of disgruntling guests at a wedding, of all things.
But anyway... I will say that the cake was interesting. It was a three-foot-tall wedding dress. When we came downstairs it was placed at the center of the table with the guest register on it, and a bunch of us stood around trying to figure out if it was, in fact, the cake. ;) It was sort of like this:
except that it was an exact replica of Heather's dress (which did not look exactly like that one). It was very pretty, very Ace of Cakes, but it was hard to tell if it was, in fact, a cake or not. ;)
Anyway... believe it or not, I did think the wedding was really nice otherwise. We had to leave before the real festivities took off, like the bouquet-throwing and whatnot, because the wedding was at noon and by the time we ate it was after 3:00. Luke was in DESPERATE need of a nap by that point, so we elected not to push it.
That sounds more dire than it should, I guess. It wasn't that bad. Today was the H wedding. Ben H. is the son of friends of the family (and fellow members of Zion), and he and his new wife, Heather, will be settling here in town. Ben is a teacher with a job at FZ, and his new wife is an accountant, so I guess we'll be seeing a lot of them going forward.
And to be fair, their wedding was really nice. A simple ceremony, elegant dresses and tuxedos, followed by a luncheon reception in the church basement. Aside from the fact that we made the mistake of bringing our kids, we thought the wedding itself was really nice, and we appreciated that they chose to do something we also did at our wedding: rather than hold up the guests in an endless receiving line, the bride and groom left the sanctuary during the recessional, then came around through the side doors and personally excused each row of attendees. This allowed everyone to sit comfortably (rather than standing in a line waiting), to greet and congratulate the Bride and Groom personally, and then to leave the church comfortably rather than crushed between strangers as everyone tried to get out. Three snaps in a circle for that one.
But two things bugged me at the reception. One was the couple's choice, the other was not.
For one thing, apparently it has become the fashion to NOT give out wedding favors. Actually, that in and of itself is perfectly fine with me. Tulle-wrapped bags of candied almonds or mints or whatever are perfectly fine, and appreciated, but I can do without them without feeling slighted. They're nice to receive, but by no means crucial to my enjoyment of the wedding, especially in a church-basement reception, which sort of suggests that the couple is trying to spend conservatively. We understand that, no problem.
But in place of favors, at each place was a card marked 'In Lieu of a Favor'. Inside was a note explaining that in lieu of favors, Ben and Heather had donated money to cancer and heart disease research charities, as they felt that this gesture would assist many people both near and abroad. That's very thoughtful of them, I'm sure, except that it rather misses the whole point of the favor.
I seem to recall from back in my wedding-planning days that i was told that 'The Wedding is about the Couple, the Reception is about the Guests.' In other words, your wedding is the point, and people have given up their time to travel to where you are and watch, witness and support you as you exchanged vows. The party afterwards is your way of thanking those people for doing that with a celebration. Therein may lay my problem, because in actual practice receptions tend not to celebrate those who came to support the couple, but rather to further honor the couple. After all, if the reception was truly about the guests, the Head Table would eat LAST, not first.
But even if the wedding reception *entire* is not so much a 'thank you' to guests for attending, the wedding FAVOR is. And admittedly, some favors are pretty trite and crappy, but that's still what they're for. Therefore, even though many of your guests probably don't care that much about candied almonds in a little tulle sack, the fact that you provided one is still a nice gesture, and eschewing favors is sort of tacky.
However, if your wedding budget just cannot accommodate a favor for each guest, then I think it's almost BETTER just to do NOTHING than to do what Ben and Heather did. While I am absolutely in favor of donating to charity, put this gesture up against the purpose of the favor and consider the message that is being sent here. It's a little like going to someone's birthday party and saying, "Happy birthday. I was going to buy you a gift, but then I thought my money would be better spent on a charity, so I donated it instead. Wasn't that nice of me? What, did I donate it in your name? No no... I just donated it in my own name. But still, isn't that nice of me?"
No, frankly.. it wasn't. I came to your wedding, I brought you a gift. I took time out of my day and my life to be with you on this day, and you've just effectively said, "I couldn't be bothered to say thank you because I spent the money I meant to spend on you on a donation to charity instead." I mean, if charity is a drive, by all means donate some of your wedding funds to it, but if your goal is philanthropy, either donate a certain amount in each guest's name and provide them with a certificate to that effect, or donate the money you would have spent on yourself in some way instead. Go cheap on the flowers, forego the expensive dress and/or tuxedos, etc. The best gesture would be to ask your guests to donate in your name IN LIEU OF GIFTS TO YOU. THAT is a nice gesture. But spending thank-you money on a charity is not okay, espcially since doing so ultimately benefits the thanker in ways that buying favors wouldn't. After all, you can get a really nice tax break by donating and writing off the donation on your taxes. You can't do that with candied almonds or tulle.
So... thanks for the favor. Next time, just don't do anything for me and that will be just as nice. Or better yet, give me $1.35 in a donation envelope and let ME send it in.
I mention all of this NOT because I intend to sit and pout about it, or treat Ben and Heather any differently because of it. I 'm sure it was a suggestion made in some Bridal magazine and Heather, being the forward-thinking and liberal person she is, thought it was A Nice Thing. And for the charity and for Ben and Heather, it certainly IS a nice thing. But I hope that that practice does NOT take off, because it's ultimately sort of crass.
That said, I suppose one can argue that the meal provided is the other perk guests get, but this segues into the second thing that bugged me.
There were about 35 tables of guests at the reception. We were table 24. By the time we got up to get our meal, the salad was gone. Anna, who was ahead of me, politely asked whether there was more salad. She was told that no, there was not. Hrm.
Now, the tables were dismissed in numerical order, which means that as many as eleven or twelve tables of guests (and many of the later tables were long tables that sat ten or twelve rather than the eight seated at the round tables near the front) were not given any opportunity to have any salad. That's NEARLY HALF of those who attended.
At first I thought (again, as this was a church basement reception) that the Ladies' Aid of Zion had been enlisted to the cause here, and in that case one could hardly quibble about running out of something. The Ladies' Aid largely donates their time and their cooking skills at no cost, so if they want to run out, no one really has the right to complain. However, no.. it turns out the meal was catered by Auntie Em's catering, so in that case, I'm disgusted. Were we the last table to eat, you know, that'd sort of be one thing.. but come on.. how hard is it to bring enough SALAD, of all things? I mean, just bring twice as much as you need of the ingredients and throw it together in the kitchen when you run out. It takes...what, one peson and three minutes? Give me a break.
That was obviously not something over which Ben and Heather had any control, and really, I think it's pretty crappy for any caterer to run the risk of disgruntling guests at a wedding, of all things.
But anyway... I will say that the cake was interesting. It was a three-foot-tall wedding dress. When we came downstairs it was placed at the center of the table with the guest register on it, and a bunch of us stood around trying to figure out if it was, in fact, the cake. ;) It was sort of like this:
except that it was an exact replica of Heather's dress (which did not look exactly like that one). It was very pretty, very Ace of Cakes, but it was hard to tell if it was, in fact, a cake or not. ;)
Anyway... believe it or not, I did think the wedding was really nice otherwise. We had to leave before the real festivities took off, like the bouquet-throwing and whatnot, because the wedding was at noon and by the time we ate it was after 3:00. Luke was in DESPERATE need of a nap by that point, so we elected not to push it.