archive
----------
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008

You've got questions, she's got answers. Be among the first to read Elise Mac Adam's new etiquette guide. Pre-order from:
- Simon & Schuster
- Amazon
- Barnes & Noble

Send your etiquette questions to Elise at indieetiquette@yahoo.com

Tuesday, November 25, 2003

INDIE-INVITES

Dear Elise,

My partner and I are planning what we like to think of as an indie-style wedding, and I have a few questions about the invitations. The event will take place at my parent's house with a short, family only ceremony followed by a much larger reception later in the evening. Do we need two different types of invitations: one for family and another for people only invited to the reception? When should we send the reception invitations? Do we send save the date cards just for a reception? And, last but not least, how do we handle the invitations without going bankrupt?

Thanks,
B. & B.

Dear B. & B.,

Congratulations. It sounds as if you've planned a happy and reasonable event for yourselves that won't make you crazy.

Invitations are tricky because they are extremely practical, while they also tend to inspire a lot of creativity, so I hope to answer your questions without treading on your more delicate, less quotidian ideas.

The old-fashioned way of doing things, if you're having a large reception and a family-only wedding, would be to only send out printed invitations to the reception. The wedding invitations would be handled personally: you or your parents would tell the people who are invited to the wedding the details in person or on the telephone.

Frankly, this would make me nervous. I don't know more than five people I could call and tell them where and when to show up for something and actually have them manage to get there without having them call a dozen times first. Unless you and your parents don't mind getting a barrage of calls while you're getting ready to leave for the ceremony, or are very sure that this won't happen, you might feel more comfortable with something written down. You could send all of your ceremony invitees a hand-written note or a post card, or you could also print up a small number of wedding ceremony cards, listing the day, time and place of the ceremony and include them in the invitation to the reception. This plan is more expensive, and would require you to be very cautious: you don't want to mix up your reception-only invitees with the others. You could also email all the people on your list, but again, you know your audience. Do you trust all of your relatives to read and retain their email messages?

The general feeling about wedding and reception invitations is that they should go out no more than eight weeks before the event, and no fewer than four, though this depends on how formal your celebration will be, and how busy you think people may be. If you're getting married at the end of November or the beginning of December, for instance, you may want to have more lead-time. To be absolutely on the safe side, check with your caterer, if you are using one, and find out how many weeks out he or she will need to know the final head count. That way, you will have a good idea of when you need to start tracking people down when they haven't called or written in an R.S.V.P. (this is inevitable).

Save the Date cards are completely optional. It is actually only in recent years that they have seen a surge in popularity. A stationer I once interviewed was surprised they had become so common since until about five years ago, she only really printed them up for New Year's Eve parties. They are useful, however, if a lot of people will be invited from out-of-town so that they can make advance travel plans, but you can also call or write to them with the information if you want to save money.

Finally, I don't know what to tell you about the cost of invitations except the age-old advice to shop around. If you want to get creative, all the extra frills and ribbons, vellums and overlays can get expensive, and you'll have to make all sorts of decisions about paper quality, letterpress versus thermal printing versus engraving versus handwritten. It goes on and on. If you're interested in online resources, there is a whole folder on Kvetch dedicated to Invitations that contains a number of vendor reviews.

Good luck and congratulations again.

Elise

posted by Elise at 2:48 PM    <link>

THE CASE OF THE VANISHING MARRIEDS

Dear Elise,

Recently, two friends of mine who are presently living in Europe were married in the Southern US, near the Bride's family. The Bride and Groom went to university in the Northeast US and recently graduated, so most of their friends are in the Northeast as well. Many people flew south for the wedding, and many- for logistical reasons- arrived early on the morning of the ceremony. The wedding was at noon, the reception lasted an incredibly short time (less than 2 hours) and then the Bride and Groom retired to a suite at the same hotel where most of the guests were staying- and never reappeared. Their departure for the honeymoon was not until the next day. Invitations to relax post-reception with their out-of-town guests at the hotel pool, meet informally for drinks at the hotel bar, and to join the extended group of visitors for dinner or other evening activities were rebuffed.

This left many of the guests who had flown thousands of miles quite angry, since most did not even have a chance to catch up with the bride and groom at the ceremony or reception- and most of these guests had also not seen either bride or groom for about a year prior, since their relocation overseas. The honeymoon was also overseas, and this was the last time they will be in the states until next summer.

Now, I hate to be one of those folks who says "your wedding is not about you, it is about everyone else," but if the whole point of inviting people is because you want them to share in a sacred moment in your life, isn't it also expected that you'll give them more than a polite nod at the reception, scoop up the loot, and take off?

A few folks were really disgruntled, so I think it's a worthwhile caveat to ask if this was poor form on the part of the bride and groom, or are we all really off base?

-Puzzled and Perplexed Primarily in Pennsylvania

Dear PPPP-

A wedding where people don't see enough of the bride and groom? That truly is a novelty. So many weddings I hear about seem to go on for the whole weekend with lots of events that require lots of clothes.

You don't mention in your question how traditional this wedding was, and the relative weirdness or rudeness of the bride and groom's behavior can be interpreted through their relative desires to adhere to formal codes of behavior.

Eyebrows will, no doubt, rise once again when I trot out the specter of traditional etiquette, but here I do it to provide a possible explanation for this couples being so reclusive. If you examine the Blue Book or Miss Manners, you'll see they both list the events of the wedding day in a highly structured manner. The bride and groom, according to these texts, should not be the last to leave the party, rather they should be among the first to go. Even the couple's departure has a method to it. The bride first changes out of her wedding dress and into her "traveling clothes." (The words "traveling clothes" sound so romantic. I have in mind a stylish suit with a pair of delicate slingbacks... never mind the fact that the recommended outfit for traveling today seems to be roomy jeans and those compression socks that supposedly ward off Deep Vein Thrombosis. But I digress.) Then the couple returns to the party, runs through the swarm of revelers to much fanfare and rice / birdseed / confetti tossing and drives off, never to be seen again until after the honeymoon. Miss Manners's comment on the bride and groom showing up to day-after-the-wedding festivities is: "Enough is enough."

So, after that reception, did the bride change into something more comfortable and leave the venue with much fanfare?

That said, you and your friends were all struck by something. Even if the bride and groom were being extremely traditional, they were acting odd. There is nothing really wrong with anything they did and even though you wanted to see them, you would naturally understand that it is very hard to spend any time with the couple during the wedding. They're usually being pulled in dozens of directions by family members, photographers, and people wanting to dance with them and you would have a hard time having a substantive conversation. But there was something strange going on and that is what is bothering you.

Even the most appropriate applications of standard etiquette can feel peculiar if they aren't tempered with a degree of good will and humor. It felt weird that your good friends wouldn't have a drink or dinner or hang out with you: they were staying in the same hotel and asking you to pretend they didn't exist. If they had truly wanted to be mysterious (instead of coy and misanthropic), they would have been better off finding a different hotel for the night. If they had wanted you to realize they were going off for their honeymoon, not to return for another year, they should have given a warm and gracious "farewell" before they ran off like thieves in the night.

The problem you are having is with a collision of traditional behavior and contemporary expectations, and the only way your friends could have made things feel natural would have been for them to prepare you for their firm departure and be warm and friendly and spend some time during the reception visiting, even for just a couple of minutes, with the guests who had traveled so far to see them.

There is nothing for you to say to the couple about this, but your complicated feelings are quite understandable. If you're still feeling burned up, try writing it off as a nice weekend spent with friends in the South with a happy little wedding on the side.

Cheers,

Elise

posted by Elise at 12:44 PM    <link>

WHO'S INVITING?

Hello,
I'm wondering if we have to include our parents on our invitation even though we're both 30 and paying for the wedding ourselves. Can you help?

-On Our Own

Dear On Your Own-

I can indeed help. You don't have to include anything on the invitation that you don't want to have there. That said, you would be unwise to leave off the following: your names, the location, date, and time of the wedding.

Since traditionally the bride's family "hosted" the wedding, it was appropriate to use the format with which you are probably familiar (and which you'd like not to follow):

Bride's Parents
Request the honor of your presence
At the marriage of
Bride
To
Groom
and so on...

It's important to note that in the "old-fashioned" example I gave, I didn't say the bride's parents paid for the wedding, rather they hosted it. Even though those two things often mean the same thing, it is a distinction worth making.

Wedding invitations are not like movie credits. They don't need to highlight everyone who has contributed money, support, or other services to the nuptial process. If you are single-handedly running the show, don't want to involve anyone else, and are the host for your wedding it is absolutely fine for you to use only your names. On the other hand, some people who pay entirely for their weddings like to include the names of both sets of parents, as a way of showing a kind of united welcome to guests. Either way you choose to handle it is perfectly appropriate. Of course, if you decide not to invite any parents to the wedding, as was the case in a recent IndieEtiquette question ("Crashing Dad" - 11.4.2003), it would be wise not to include them on the invitation.

If you are curious about how to word your parent-less invitations, you can follow the "traditional" pattern above, substituting your and your groom's names on the "Bride's Parents" line and making other small syntactical modifications. There is also nothing stopping you from creating utterly original text that you feel represents you best.

Congratulations and best wishes,

Elise

posted by Elise at 9:17 AM    <link>

NO SPOUSE, PLEASE

Dear IndieEtiquette-
My question is, when is it okay, if ever, to exclude someone's partner? I've read Emily Post's guide to wedding etiquette cover to cover and she says fiancees and spouses are a must, 'dates' are optional. Can there be exceptions? Is it easier to exclude a girlfriend than a wife?

Thanks,

- Should I Invite?


Dear Should I,

Whether or not to invite people's significant others to ones's wedding is a tricky path of etiquette, one that has seen all kinds of tears, threats and recriminations.

In general, you are right. Traditional invitation practices say that "recognized" relationships (married couples, engaged couples, people who are living together or who are in long-term committed relationships) must be invited to events together. This makes sense. When people become couples they often share friends. (This is not by any means always the case. I can think of several examples where friends have committed to real finks.) Couples enjoy doing things together and attending a wedding can be a significant event for the friends and family of the bride and groom-- one they would presumably like to experience together. Informal relationships do not require that degree of recognition. So, yes, in the case of a "new" or short-term girlfriend or boyfriend, it would be easier to be polite about not inviting her or him than it would be to exclude a spouse, which is pretty much impossible to do nicely.

I am wondering, though, if your question is more personal. Are you hoping not to have to invite one person in particular? That is truly difficult, and leads you into a dark realm where feelings can get badly hurt. Unless you are completely consistent and don't invite anyone's spouse, partner, or significant other (a gesture that is utterly unrealistic, since it would no doubt exclude family members and halves of couples with whom you are close -- not to mention, how weird would it be to have a wedding with no couples in attendance?), it will be apparent that you have deliberately excluded one person's wife or husband because you don't like him or her. This will make for so much discomfort that you may end up wishing you had just bitten the bullet and included the person in question.

I fear this wasn't the answer you hoped for, but I can promise this: you will hardly notice the offending party on your wedding day. So much is going on that you will be beyond distracted. Not inviting the spouse in question will, in all likelihood, doom you to months if not a lifetime of sour feelings, and that can only be exhausting and unfortunate.

Take the high road.

Elise

posted by Elise at 9:22 AM    <link>

DANCING WITH MULTIPLE DADS

Hello-

I have two Dads, and I don't know how to handle the father-daughter dance. I get along okay with my biological father, but my legal father (step dad that adopted me) is the one I've grown up with. My relationship with my "legal" dad has been a bit rocky, and so has the one with my biological dad. I feel obligated to dance with both, but who first? FYI, they don't get along, and both feel they should be the "primary" father.
Thanks in advance.

Jessica


Dear Jessica,

You have a thorny and unfortunately not uncommon problem in this "two dads" scenario, and it is sad you feel so torn between them.

One thing you don't mention that I am curious about is what you want to do about the wedding dancing. Do you have a preference at all? In your heart of hearts, would you rather not dance with either of them? Always keep in mind that you can settle this problem by opting out. This would be an extreme response to the pressure you feel they are placing on you, but you should give yourself the luxury of this option. If you really believe that your father and stepfather are asking you to choose between them publicly, then maybe the most graceful way for you to avoid this controversy is sit it out. Bullies really shouldn't be rewarded.

If you aren't comfortable taking the path of passive resistance, and it understandably sounds like it would be very hard for you, a quick glance at so-called "traditional" etiquette may provide some inspiration. In Emily Post's fantastically elaborate protocol for wedding dancing, the first dance belongs to the bride and groom. The bride then dances with her new father-in-law and then her father. While this is going on, the groom dances with his new mother-in-law and then his mother. Then the bride's father dances with the groom's mother and vice-versa and so on through the wedding party until everyone is dancing or too exhausted to stand. If you were to follow this suggested pattern, you would already be two dances in before you would be called upon to accept the arm of your father or step-father and by then the novelty of "first dances" would have worn off, and there would be no chance of being alone on the dance floor, so your "two dads" might relax about how much time in the "spotlight" each is getting. Needless to say, you don't need to apply Ms. Post's rigorous plans. You could make up a scheme of your own that excuses you from the demands of these two men in your life, neither of whom are making you happy right now.

A possible way to ease hard feelings would be for you to sit down with each man, and ask him to pick a song that will be your dance with him. In this way, you will give each one a bit of personalized ego stroking while avoiding, again, the entire notion of having to give one man "better treatment" than the other. As to which one goes first, I think you can assert your own slight preference there: maybe you will have made peace with one or both of them by that time, maybe you tell them you are going to be arbitrary and dance with them in alphabetical order, or tell them that you will dance with the one who asks you first and make them decide. The solution is really what makes you feel most comfortable.

You don't mention the whole issue of being "given away," which makes me think you have perhaps made a delicate decision to avoid this paternal "tradition," and you may want to continue in this vein. There is no reason for you not to be kind and happy with these men, and you don't have to deny them anything, but keep in mind that what they are demanding is something much more than a waltz. It should be up to you to set the terms of these dances in a way that is comfortable to you, and there are ways of making each one feel good that do not involve hurting the other's feelings. It is sad that they would try to manipulate you in this way and you shouldn't have to feel compelled to testify to your feelings for them at your wedding.

Good luck, and again I'm sorry you have to face this on such a happy occasion, and please write if other questions come up.

Cheers,

Elise




posted by Elise at 9:03 AM    <link>

PAYING FOR PLATES

Dear Elise,

A friend of mine insists--INSISTS--that the standard amount to spend on a wedding gift is one that covers one's plate; that is, a gift (cash or otherwise) should equal the amount that the host(s) paid, per head, for the wedding. Have you ever heard of such a thing?

If it is "standard" how come I've never heard of it? (I've been to many weddings, and I'm sure my mother would like to think that I was raised right--she's never heard of this either.) And even if it is standard, aren't there endless variables that would make it anything but (the most obvious--how would one know how much was spent per head; does this so-called rule apply whether or not I attend a particular wedding).

I have my own personal guideline for what I think is an appropriate gift (my standard is approximately $100 ($200 if I am invited with and bring a guest); more if it is a very close friend getting married; less if I don't attend the wedding). What do you think?

- Present Problem


Dear Present,

You have a legitimate query, but before I answer it, I'd like to address a larger issue: your friend's attitude. More and more today, people like to feel that they are "in the know" and are entitled to instruct their friends and family as to the "correct" way to give a present or attend a wedding or eat or have a child or even live. The world is full of bossy nosybodies and the only way to endure them is to ignore them or accept the risk of living with a constant migraine. This poses a larger etiquette problem than how much to spend on a wedding present.

Your friend is wrong, but I wouldn't suggest confronting him or her since it is generally useless to argue with such an obvious zealot. While I have heard of the practice of giving presents equal to the amount spent on your food, but it has never made sense to me. How does your friend propose to find out how much was spent on your meal--by asking the mother of the bride? Should you corner the caterer while he or she is plating dessert and demand an itemized list of what was served? If the event is pot luck, does the happy couple deserve a cheap present? Are you supposed to factor in the tip that the hosts will no doubt give to the caterers? Is the cake to be included in the equation? Should your present be more expensive if you got stinking drunk on good champagne (and not the ordinary wine)?

So, this proposal is silly from top to bottom. There is no real rule of thumb for how much to spend on a wedding present because you are not even required to give one. A present is something that is supposed to be freely given, an expression of your pleasure at your friends' happiness. In reality, you are, no doubt happy for them, but also feel obligated, so it is a good idea to give a present of some kind to assuage any such guilt.

Your own private present policy is absolutely appropriate and extremely generous. In general, you should look for something that you think the couple would like and that you can afford. One should never be in a situation where giving a wedding present places one in a bad financial situation. If you can't think of anything, take a look at the bride and groom's wedding registry and see if there's something that suits your taste and price range. (On the subject of registries, if you're still speaking, tell your friend that guests are also not restricted to giving presents from the list.)

Call your mother and reassure her about your upbringing.

Good hunting,

Elise

This topic has come up on Kvetch. Would you like to weigh in?


posted by Elise at 8:54 AM    <link>

CRASHING DAD

Dear Elise,

My fiance and I have a zillion divorces and marriages in our family, and step-siblings coming out of our ears. We finally decided not to invite any family members to our wedding. (Thank god!) It was a tough decision, but everyone-- including our parents-- understands that the family is just too complicated to invite. We've made it clear that no surprise appearances are allowed, but I fear that my fiance's father may show up anyway. He says he understands that it wouldn't be fair to the other parents, but he thinks he's special and has a goofy, prankster streak in him. I've expressed to my fiance that we need to think of a plan in case his daffy dad appears, but he isn't worried about it. If dad does show up, what do you think we should do? Can we simply send him away? I have a feeling my fiance would be too afraid of hurting his feelings to shut the door in his face. If we let him in, the other parents will be devastated, not to mention furious. Most importantly, neither of us wants him there.

Please advise.

Yours truly,

Desperate daughter-in-law


Dear Desperate,

You've made a brave decision on how to deal with what sounds like a fire-breathing dragon of a family situation, and your choice not to include parents in your celebration is one many people, after the fact, wish they had had the fortitude to make.

Your good intentions and will to self-preservation aside, you now need an emergency plan. I take it you were unable to do the one thing that would ensure your father-in-law-to-be's absence from your wedding: not divulging the location of your nuptials to anyone who might leak it to him. The easiest way to dodge him would be -- and this depends on how much inconvenience you can tolerate -- simply to change your wedding plans, and get married somewhere else. This might not be possible or desirable for you, of course, and is taking the most passive-aggressive action imaginable.

The most "mature" approach to take (and I realize from the description of your fiance's father that mature isn't the word the springs to mind with this guy) would be to talk to him about it. The opportunity is there, since you've already informed him that he isn't invited. To do this, I think you need to be involved. Ideally, you and your fiance, but possibly even you alone, should speak to him. His son may crumple or waffle, but you will be able to plead your case and offer up examples of how upset your own parents and step-parents would be if he crashed. Explain that this delicate event can only come across successfully with the full participation of all the lunatics.

Then, you will probably need to bite the bullet and make a goofball-appeasing offer. You could suggest that he throw a party or a dinner or meet you for drinks where he can humiliate you to his heart's content.

If the worst happens and he does crash, you would be within your rights to kick him out, and if you really want to do this, you can appoint someone to handle it, so that you don't have to strong arm him out of there. It's a tough thing to do, and it could be impossible for you. Should it come to this, I would say, include him, make him aware of your displeasure and unhappiness and keep him out of as many pictures as possible, so that when word gets around that he was there, you will have very little evidence of him kicking up his heels while the more considerate part of your family was languishing at home.

Good luck, and if you think of it, let us know how it all turns out.

Yours on tenterhooks,

Elise

posted by Elise at 1:32 PM    <link>

TRICKY TOAST

Dear Elise,

I'm having a very small wedding in a few weeks. We'd like to ask a married friend to give a toast at the dinner. The problem is that we are very good friends with both partners in the couple, yet have a preference as to which one should do the toasting. We can't decide if we should ask the partner of choice or ask the couple together and leave it to them to decide which one speaks (if not both). We don't want to offend either of them, but we also don't want them to get in a fight about it.

Please help, or we may go without any toast at all!

Sincerely,

Baffled Bride-to-Be


Dear Baffled,

The fact is, no matter how game you are or how easily you and your fiance are embarrassed, you're likely to discover -- after the fact -- that no toast would have been preferable. I have seen some remarkable toasts, the most egregious one perhaps being the one where the father of the bride used his moment in the sun as an opportunity to give the groom a present of a dog collar and leash (in red) to keep his bride in check.

But surely your friends won't subject you to anything like that. Nevertheless, bear in mind, it will be virtually impossible to escape your wedding, whatever its size, with just a single toast in your honor. Once the clink on the glass is heard, the floodgates will open and every frustrated performer, yearning for a sliver of the spotlight will pop up, champagne in hand. This solves your problem. Even if you only want one of your friends to talk, both (and a few more) surely will.

You obviously know this couple very well and can gauge each member's sensitivity, but it would certainly make sense for you to approach the person you would like to have speak and ask if he or she would like to give the "first toast." On the other hand, if you're worried, you can speak generally and leave your request open to interpretation, which means you might get them both, but even if only one gets up, it doesn't preclude his or her spouse from speaking. You can always frame your request as a favor: "We would love it if you could give the first toast. We'll need someone to keep Aunt Francie from getting up and monopolizing the evening." You don't mention your parents, which suggests that you have already negotiated either for them not to be at the wedding or not to speak at the dinner, but as long as they are not put out, your friends should be fine.

Cheers,

Elise

posted by Elise at 10:44 AM    <link>

Home | IndieEtiquette | Kvetch | Links | IndieMom | Books | Essays | Interviews | Columns
Our Vow | Trousseau | Indieblog

Contact us | Press | Submissions | Email updates

Copyright 2008 Indiebride.com
Reproduction of material from any Indiebride pages without written permission is strictly prohibited.