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

Sunday, May 30, 2004

INTRODUCTIONS: HOW TO

Dear Elise,

My boyfriend and I have been living together for a year. His parents live in another state and are coming to visit us. My boyfriend would like for our parents to meet and I am not sure how I should introduce our parents to one another. Is it best to simply say, "Mom and Dad, meet Mr. and Mrs. Boyfriend's Parents?"

This is only the third time I have been able to spend time with my boyfriend's parents, so I am not too comfortable. They are still new to me.

Thank you,

Awkward Introduction

Dear Awkward,

Introducing the sets of parents is a barely endurable relationship rite of passage. It is unavoidable; the small talk is inevitably dull and anxiety provoking, one is helpless before the embarrassing things one's parents say, and inevitably one feels very much like a child again.

Your feelings aside, however, the actual introductions are relatively easy because there is a standard format (you will need to modify it depending on whether your parents have the same last name or not): "Mr. and Mrs. Boyfriend's Parents, these are my parents, Mother's FirstName and Father's FirstName LastName." With any luck, your parents and his will dive in to conversation, shake hands warmly and fill up the dead air.

It is a peculiar and subtle policy in the world of Traditional Etiquette that you should not present an introduction as a command. So to say: "Mom and Dad, meet..." is problematic because it sounds harsh, unsocial, and rather like an order.

Even if you don't care about tradition, though, it would be unwise to introduce your parents as "Mom and Dad" in this context. You'll leave your boyfriend's parents at a disadvantage. Remember, the entire point of introductions letting people know what to call other people. If you refer to your folks as "Mom and Dad" your boyfriend's parents will be at a loss for what to call them. You will be safest if you introduce a little bit of formality in this delicate moment, and use your parents' full names.

I know you're uncomfortable, but this is a single jump off the high-dive. Smile sweetly, have a couple of emergency conversation topics handy, and be happy you only have to do this once.

Cheers,

Elise


posted by Elise at 7:29 PM    <link>

NO GAMES

Dear Elise,

My sister is an avid member of IndieBride and as the only attendant in her wedding, I find myself up against a dilemma. Who better to turn to in this time of need? She even moved out to CA and moved in with an IndieBride friend until she and her fiance could find their own place! That said, I KNOW that she trusts the opinions and attitudes of your site and that's why I've come to you for advice.

As I already said, my sister lives in CA. I live in NH and she is getting married in MA. She and her fiance will be coming out once in August before the wedding that will take place in October. They will be out to get their marriage certificate and tie up any loose ends. She has told me that she DOES NOT want a bridal shower with "stupid games". Does that mean she would also not like a Jack and Jill that didn't include any games? How does a Jack and Jill work? What other alternatives are there for a gathering before the wedding? Something that will be as unconventional as her red wedding dress!

Sincerely,

Jack 'n Jill vs. Alternatives

Dear Jack 'n Jill,

Wedding showers are not for everyone. Some people love everything about them: the games, the themes, the present show and tell, and the girly nature of the parties… and for others, those things represent a rare and exquisite torture. There's no need to take sides, everyone is right, but the trick for you is to figure out how to have a good party without planning something that will irk your sister.

Fortunately, your sister has made her wishes known. Do not mistake her ban on "stupid games" to mean that she wants games, just not stupid ones. She doesn't want games at all, and she shouldn't have to have them. For people over the age of, say, eight, it is not a requirement to have games at parties.

Try not to even conjure the word "shower" when you contemplate this event. Since showers are really just parties with presents, once you get over the daunting baggage of tradition, you are free to throw any kind of bash you like. It can include men if you like, it could be a cocktail party, a tea party, a trip to a spa, a brunch, or a night out at a burlesque club (though that might be hard to find in New Hampshire), the party is your oyster and you only need to consider what would make both your sister and you happy. Free yourself from the constraints of what you think a "shower" should be, and concern yourself with having fun.

Congratulations and have a blast,

Elise

posted by Elise at 8:11 AM    <link>

FEARFUL SYMMETRY

Dear Elise,

We are getting married in less then 2 weeks. We have 3 attendants each, with the women wearing matching dresses in different colours of their choosing, and the men wearing matching suits with ties that we had made to match the bridesmaid's dresses. I have just been informed by one of our groomsmen that he is unable to attend our wedding. This is quite unexpected! He is travelling from out of town and can suddenly not afford it, although he has known of the wedding date and his role for over a year, and my groom to be has been in frequent contact with him. Both my groom to be and I are hurt and upset by this. Regardless, he will definitely not be at our wedding.

My reaction is that we should ask someone else to step in to his place. My groom to be has 2 people who sprung to his mind--my father, as they are very close, and a female friend of the groom whom he has known since childhood, and who I am quite fond of. At this point I am just feeling confused. Is it too late to ask someone, who would obviously be a replacement? Would it be too much for the father of the bride to also be a groomsman? Or will it look odd to have the groom and groomsmen in matching suits, with bridesmaids in matching dresses, and one woman on the groom's side in whatever dress she has? I know it is silly to want the sides to be even, but I kind of do, and if we do not add another groomsman I don't want to be looking at my grooms side feeling resentful about this last minute absence. I'm feeling confused, and this has made me question why I wanted a 3 person per side bridal party, as well as why I has my bridesmaids in matching dresses at all!

Any thoughts are appreciated--I have found your responses to other questions have helped restore some perspective on my choices!
Thanks,

Not Sure What To Do

Dear Not Sure-

Is it a fact of human nature that people are unreliable? I couldn't say it is a certainty, but I can empathize with how annoying and painful flakiness can be – especially at moments as charged as this one. Your errant groomsman may have a perfectly good reason for not being able to attend your wedding at the last minute, but that doesn't take away from how much it must hurt your and your fiance's feelings. You have my sympathies.

Now, what should you do with your wedding party? First off, it really won't look bad if you are minus one groomsman. You know that, of course. I don't think you will even have the wherewithal to seethe with resentment, as you fear you might, when you're up at the altar. You'll be getting married, after all. You'll be thinking about other things. Recognize that you are very angry; your friend has been a jerk. I think some of your resistance to letting the situation resolve itself in the most natural way (by doing nothing and accepting the absence) comes from feeling that this is a problem you need to correct. It isn't really. At bottom, the issue is that you are justifiably mad and hurt. You may be better off venting your ire than you would be making last minute wedding party changes.

That said, there is nothing wrong with calling in a substitute. I think anyone who was already going to be a guest, and who is a close friend, would be honored to join the wedding party- as long as he or she didn't suddenly find him or herself having to take on enormous responsibilities and expenses. Your choices in particular for a replacement groomsman (or woman), are quite sensitive and I imagine either your father or your husband's friend would be happy to step in.

Dress-wise, there are a couple of things you could do to make the groom's side match. You could have the errant groomsman send his tie back to you and have your father wear it. (This may or may not work. I have no idea what colors and patterns these suits and ties are.) You could also, if your husband's friend joins the groomsmen, have her incorporate the tie, or fabric from the tie, into her outfit somehow. I must say, however, that this may be pushing things too far. Attempting to manufacture wedding party symmetry in this way may make you feel less comfortable with the whole situation than if you had left it alone.

Regardless of your choice, you don't have to panic. Anything you do will be absolutely fine. Just keep in mind that having the wedding party match is just a detail, a small part of a bigger, more significant event. I'll leave you with a quote from Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray." It is a completely unreassuring novel, but Wilde's aphorisms are not always so frivolous as they sound.

"One should absorb the colour of life, but one should never remember its details. Details are always vulgar."

You might not agree with Mr. Wilde's words as a rule, but consider how apt they are in this moment. Congratulations, and have a wonderful wedding.

Elise

posted by Elise at 10:14 AM    <link>

ALL PLANNED OUT

Dear Elise,

I'm not sure this is an etiquette question. We have been engaged for nearly 14 months now. Our wedding is next month. The closer it gets, the more my fiance seems to resent the time I spend planning for our wedding weekend.

The wedding changed in enormous ways since we first discussed it a year ago. What was going to be a small, barefoot beach wedding is now a formal beach wedding - with a hotel ballroom reception - for 200!

My fiance and I fight more while we're engaged than we ever did before, and we've been friends over 12 years. Any advice?

- Almost Married

Dear Almost,

Your question isn't about etiquette, but it is worrisome. I want to make sure, as I see you out there bobbing on the ocean of wedding planning that you are just waving at me, not drowning.

Wedding planning is almost always insanely complicated and overwhelming. Only the lucky few who can do things on the QT or who have extremely accommodating families seem to be able to achieve tear-free nuptials. If you have taken care of most of the organizing, your fiance might not be so aware of the work you've had to do, and you might be sensitive to his little quibbles. He may also be clinging to your original plan. Perhaps he is cranky about how that everything exploded in size and formality. It is too late for superficial (and that's what these changes are, even if they seem huge) regrets. At bottom, nothing matters except how you feel about each other and that you do everything legally required to get hitched.

So, how can you ease the discomfort? Push every single wedding issue under the bed. If you stopped planning this instant, I bet you could still have a gorgeous wedding. Delegate details if you can, and remember: this is a happy occasion. If something devilish happens with the flowers or music gets played out of order or anything happens that isn't in your plan, you'll still be fine. Take a break from the wedding, go to the movies, frolic, and ignore the Wedding Imps that threaten to rob you of your peace of mind.

You're in the home stretch, I promise. You're going to get married and only a gigantic and unlikely change of heart, not details will change that. Relax, try not to fight it and let the current of your nuptials pull you to shore.

Good luck and congratulations,

Elise

posted by Elise at 12:26 PM    <link>

HONORS FOR NON-BRIDESMAIDS

Dear Elise,

My fiance and I have decided to only have one attendant on each side (a best man and a matron of honor). I have two close friends who have never been in a wedding before and have jumped on planning a shower and a bachelorette party. I am happy that they are so excited about this wedding, but I do not want them to be disappointed about not being bridesmaids (a topic that has not come up yet). I was thinking of asking them to do readings at the wedding. Do you have any ideas for other "VIP" roles they can play at the wedding?

Thanks,

Grateful

Dear Grateful,

Wonderful friends, no strife - how lucky can you get? Ask around and you'll hear tales of weddings littered with the corpses of friendships, broken on the rocky shores of Bridesmaidland. In choosing not to have bridesmaids, you may have taken the best route to happiness. Do not feel guilty for not giving them additional responsibilities or expenses.

This is not to say that you shouldn't let your friends know how happy they make you. As far as honors go, you could certainly have them both do readings, but I think the best way to ensure VIP status, is to thank them publicly, with a nice big toast. Seriously, even the most upright weddings have little moments in which one can gush, and while the most notorious toasts are given by fathers-of-brides and best men, there is nothing keeping you from jumping up, glass in hand and saluting your friends. Who knows, perhaps by taking matters into your own hands, you might be able to interrupt those hideously embarrassing speeches that sometimes erupt from the most innocent of mouths. (It is springtime and I'm feeling temperate, but someday I'll trot out a couple of nasty toast stories that would curdle the cream in your cappuccino.)

Generally, I don't go for bridal party extra jobs (like guestbook watcher). Nothing about them violates the principles of etiquette, really, but they aren't that much fun, and do create a responsibility when the person could be having fun. Having your friends do readings or pose for special photographs with you are good solid ways to honor your friends, but for my money, a few words expressing your happiness will get you farthest.

Congratulations,

Elise

posted by Elise at 4:09 PM    <link>

NON-TRADITIONAL BUT NO KIDS

Dear Elise,

We are in our 30's, paying for most of our wedding ourselves, and planning a non-traditional event. He's Baptist, I'm Catholic; he's into late 80's music, I like C&W. I'm Hispanic, he's Anglo. He's from East Texas, I'm from the Gulf Coast. We're trying to plan a fusion wedding - a Western themed Day of the Dead type of party. We're talking a cowboy hat on a skeleton wearing a serape.

We've also decided not to invite children. Can you offer some advice on wording and where on the invite the "no kids" request should go? We have a graphic designer friend who is going to help us with the layout and printing so if I have an idea, it'll give me some direction

Thank you,

Bucking Tradition

Dear Bucking Tradition,

This has come up before (on 12.16.2003 "THE QUESTION OF KIDS," 2.11.2004 "NO KIDS IN THE HARBOR," and 3.11.2004 "ONGOING KID CONCERNS"), and again, I have to say that there is no way one can politely issue an invitation that is simultaneously a rejection. The approved method for kid control is to write the names of the people you do want at your wedding on the invitation and leave off the names of the children you don't want to see. R.s.v.p. cards (which, themselves, are not approved by the doyennes of traditional etiquette, but have rightly become the norm because they help spare everyone some of the headache of getting people to respond) can help you. If people write in write in their children's' names, you will know their intentions and then you will have to call them and explain that you can't accommodate children.

From the description of your wedding, I suspect you will have to be a little extra cautious. You must take care not to create the sense that your wedding is "child friendly." Nighttime weddings or formal affairs naturally seem to be the kinds of parties that children will either find boring or would rather sleep through, but a daytime wedding or one with incredible skeletons and costumes might seem quite appealing, and parents might misunderstand what your plans are. I would take a little care in your invitation design not to include too many elements that beacon to children (images of balloons, roly-poly animals, ice cream, those sorts of things). I make that suggestion only in hopes of sparing you a few "no kids, please" calls.

Congratulations and good luck,

Elise



posted by Elise at 11:02 AM    <link>

MUSICAL CHAIRS or SEATING STROPPINESS

Dear Elise:

I am getting married this Saturday, and am having a difficult time with the seating arrangements. There are several groups of people I would like to seat together. To do so, however, I must have a range of 7 to 13 people per table. (Some tables will be noticeably under-populated and others noticeably crowded). The groupings I have so far also leave some pretty "random" groups at other tables.

All of this is to the dismay of my family who think it is more appropriate to have even tables and do the best we can to make tables where everyone will have a good time and not be offended. BUT IT'S MY WEDDING! What is the proper etiquette in this situation? Please help.

--Distressed Bride

Dear Distressed,

This came in at the last minute, and I'm glad I could accommodate an eleventh-hour issue.

It is astonishing how many ways people can find to feel slighted. If treated poorly, wedding reception seating plans are Petri dishes for anxiety and insult. Don't be daunted, though, while seating arrangements are minefields, I am a sincere advocate of assigned seating at wedding receptions, even if it is delicate and (almost) thankless work. This is one of those jobs you will only hear about if you do it badly.

Seating plans have a bad rap. Far from being uptight and fusty, they ensure that everyone will have someone to talk to. This is especially helpful for shy guests, people who are single, or folks who don't know anyone else. Infiltrating insular crowds of pals who went to camp or high school or graduate school or what have you can be uncomfortable or impossible. It is such a relief when the work of introductions is built in with the appetizers.

Traditional suggestions for seating at weddings apply primarily to the so-called "Head Table" or "Bride's Table." The bride sits on the groom's right, and the best man sits next to her. The maid of honor takes the groom's left side. The bride's father is seated to the right of the groom's mother, and the bride's mother sits on the right of the groom's father. Any additional spots at this table should go to the officiant and other "honored guests."

But you are asking about all the other tables. While I agree that it is your wedding, you also have to take into account, at least a little bit, the feelings and reactions of your guests. I think it will look and feel weird to have such enormous imbalances in the number of people at the tables. You can be certain that people will wonder why they have been relegated to the sparsely populated "dud" or "random" tables. While it may be impossible to have the same number of people at every table, it would be more comfortable for everyone if you evened out the imbalances a little more.

Why do you feel so attached to the uneven seating plan? Do you like it because it allows large groups of friends to sit together? If so, it might be time to experiment with splitting up the groups entirely. In a column from December 14th, 2003 ("TABLE TROUBLE"), I suggested that the writer plan her seating by using certain lively friends and relatives as "anchors," around whom a good table can be built. You could use members from these tight groups as table anchors, and fill the rest of the table with people you think would get along with them. Big groups of friends that cling tightly together are difficult for outsiders to penetrate. Even if you scatter them, they can always meet up on the dance floor or gather between courses.

This creates some additional work for you, I realize, but I think it will work well for you in the long run if you strategize a little more. I promise, if you spread out your groups a little more you will save yourself having to see glum tables and hearing about the seating long after the wedding cake has been devoured.

Congratulations,

Elise

Postscript: To GUESTS who think they can just switch around place cards to suit their fancies- don't do it. Someone has developed a seriously furrowed brow while creating a good seating plan. Don't mess it up. There may be invisible reasons as to why you are all seated where you are. Accept your plight. It is only for the duration of a meal. Only for the bride and groom is it supposed to be forever.


posted by Elise at 11:38 AM    <link>

LAZY GROOMSMEN

Dear Elise,

My wedding is less than a month away, and the groomsmen my fiance chose haven't been fitted for their tuxedos. I'm thinking about not having groomsmen at all. Is this proper etiquette?

- Where's the Tailor?

Dear Tailor,

Nowhere is it written that a bride and groom require bridesmaids, ushers, groomsmen, flower girls, ring bearers, junior bridesmaids, maids (or matrons) of honor, or best men. If you decided to march up to your officiant on your own, you'd be in the clear.

But that isn't really your question. You want to know if you can fire the groomsmen because they haven't gotten themselves to a tailor. It is most difficult to fire people once they have been given a place of honor in a wedding. Barring situations of great hostility or abuse, if you want to preserve the relationships, you should find a way to negotiate some kind of peace.

In your case, it sounds as if these guys have been a little sluggish, but they have yet to be criminally negligent. Many stores that rent and sell formalwear have same-day tailoring services, so even if the lazy groomsmen wait until the very last minute, they should be fine. You can, of course, ask your fiance to put a little heat on his friends, and perhaps he should, but this is nothing you need to fret about.

Surely, with mere weeks to go before your wedding, you have plenty of other things to think about, and I fear you're feeling oversensitive and fraught because you are Planned Out. Your wedding looms on the horizon, and it seems that entropy might set in and all you want is a little control over all these elements that feel so unsettled. You are fine. Everything will resolve itself, and the most dangerous thing you can do is let your panic get the best of you. What is the worst that could happen? The groomsmen look a little less sharp than would be ideal. That's fine. No one should be looking at them anyway.

It is almost over. Take some deep breaths, have a bath, nibble some chocolate, and when you get to the other side, you'll be relieved you didn't do anything rash.

Congratulations,

Elise

posted by Elise at 9:39 AM    <link>

REHEARSAL FRACAS - 2 QUESTIONS, EVERYONE'S RIGHT

Hi Elise,

My question is about our rehearsal dinner. About 90 of our 120 guests are from out-of-town. My fiance's parents have graciously offered us a fixed amount for the rehearsal dinner that we can spend as we please.

Given the budget and the guest list, we could serve informal appetizers for 90 people, or a sit-down dinner for 30-40 people. My mom says we must serve dinner to the wedding party and all out-of-town guests. I disagree. I think this is an outdated tradition that made sense when a smaller fraction of guests were from out-of-town and traveling to weddings was not as common.

Many of my friends have bent the rule; I didn't mind not being invited, so I don't think they will. Also, giving people appetizers might not save them from having to buy dinner elsewhere. My fiance and I could pony up more money in order to host a sit-down dinner for everyone, but we are already contributing quite a bit. Finally, I really love the idea of an intimate rehearsal dinner with just family and close friends. My mom is adamant. What are my options and how can I convince my mom to go along with me?

Thanks!

- Little Dinner

Dear Elise,

My daughter is getting married in a few months. The wedding will be an outside wedding with a barbecued meal, all of which I am paying for, which is fine.

The only thing she expected the groom's parents to pay for was the rehearsal dinner. We believed this is the tradition. The groom's mother wants to invite all the out-of-town relatives (and there are a fair amount) and she wants to have a barbecue at her house. The bride and groom would like to have the dinner at a nice restaurant, since the wedding itself will be outdoors and somewhat casual. The groom's mother says they can't afford that, so she will give them the money that would have been their wedding present to do what they want about the dinner.

The rehearsal dinner is only unaffordable for the groom's parents because they say they have to invite all the out-of-town guests. Is it rude and wrong to only have the bridal party, attendants, and the close family at the rehearsal dinner? Is it incorrect to expect other out-of-town guests to entertain themselves the evening before the wedding? Is it weird for the groom's family to do this?

- Not Another Barbecue

Dear Little Dinner and Not Another Barbecue,

I won't even brush the dog fur (he isn't much of a shedder, but it is springtime, after all) off my etiquette tomes to trot out the history and tradition for rehearsal dinners. Those laudable texts won't be helpful: both scenarios are perfectly correct. The length of rehearsal dinner guest lists depends on the limitations of the three Fates of wedding planning: Time, Space, and Money.

If you really want a small affair, stick to your guns. It wouldn't be rude or wrong or bad. The only way you can stray into dangerous territory is if you're inconsistent. A dinner with just the wedding party and immediate family should be just that; if you make exceptions, word will get around and you'll catch it from everyone who feels left out. If you do want to include everyone, consider Rehearsal Cocktails. It doesn't have to be a shabby snacks affair at all. I am becoming intimate with this type of party, and it has its advantages. It's sophisticated, brief, reasonably inexpensive, everyone can cut loose afterwards, and you can bounce away from the "Are you nervous yet?" question instead of being trapped answering it 1,000 times throughout multiple courses.

Little Dinner, I can't tell you what angles to work with your mother, but demonstrating how much you care about the out-of-town guests might convince her that you're not being cold-hearted. Consider making a list of restaurants and local amusements. Providing a bit of guidance for the people you won't be seeing may be all she needs to feel comfortable with your decision.

In your case, Not Another Barbecue, your daughter's future in-laws have made their wishes known, but seem willing to cede control. As you point out, the groom's family does traditionally throw the rehearsal dinner. But, if you take that to be the case, it follows logically that the groom's family would be entitled to make most of the decisions regarding the size and style of the affair. Clearly, your situation is not so rigid, but your daughter needs to decide whether or not she wants to fight the battle for an intimate rehearsal dinner. She may find that her future in-laws feel more strongly about including everyone than she does about the fanciness of the meal, and given the financial contribution they are making, their interests may weigh more in the equation.

The technical rules of etiquette will help neither of you here, so you must look at the larger picture: what will make everyone most comfortable, and how much will you really lose by compromising?

Good luck, good hunting and congratulations.

Elise

posted by Elise at 3:58 PM    <link>

FEAR OF A RED DRESS

Dear Elise,

I have never been a traditionalist, nor do I intend to be one at my wedding. I have found the perfect wedding gown, but it is red. I know that my family, particularly my grandmothers, will be shocked at the fact that my gown is the color traditionally reserved for harlots. I have already told my mother that it is red and she has agreed to see the gown both on and off of me before she makes a decision.

My dilemma is this: if I tell my family in advance, they will more than likely hold a few very important things over my head if I decide to wear this gown, but if I do not tell them and leave it as a surprise, I am sure there will be at least one heart attack, and many more gasps (as well as other undesirable actions). Which approach should I take? This dress looks fantastic on me and white wedding gowns leave me feeling fat and washed out. I would also feel like a huge sell out if I decided to go with the traditional white instead of with my awesome gown.

Thank you in advance,

Red-dy to wed

Dear Red,

The puddle of factors that contribute to wedding dress selection acts more like quicksand than water. The more one tries to struggle out of the welter of body image complaints, color worries, parental preferences, superstitions, and classic indecision, the more suffocating they become.

You don't need me to tell you that you can wear anything you like. People get married in all kinds of outfits. Marilyn Monroe, after all, wore a terrific cocktail suit (brown wool, white mink collar, rhinestone buttons) when she married Joe DiMaggio. But your family's feelings and interests are important to you, and no one wants to deliberately create wedding strife.

Here is one of my personal golden rules: Choose Your Battles. In weddings, especially, you will never be able to make everyone happy, so split the difference. What elements of the wedding are most important to you? If you pick two or three things that you absolutely want and make them non-negotiable, then you can feel comfortable compromising on other things and letting your relatives have the pleasure of asserting their sensibilities. It is a way of secretly getting what you want while letting other people think they are in control. (This strategy works on children, adults, and dogs, by the way.)

As far as dispelling the shock of the red, start at home. Don't think of your color choice as shocking or lurid, and don't treat it as such. Bette Davis's character caused a scandal in Jezebel (1938) because she wore a red dress deliberately to embarrass her date and enrage her hosts. With your dress, you're merely expressing yourself, and not breaking any laws. As long as you aren't trying to provoke, your family will have little to complain about. To this end, I would set aside words like "harlot" or "Jezebel" and instead of surprising anyone, just confidently and casually mention your dress and how happy the color makes you, and not even give your relatives the opportunity to be childish, priggish, or apoplectic.

White wedding dresses have not always been the norm, anyway. There are endless traditions and philosophies of what to wear at one's wedding, and for a quick accounting of various superstitions, I suggest you turn to the kind people at Snopes. But be warned: I'm providing the link, but I won't describe what they say here because if you are at all superstitious, I'm giving you the option not to be influenced by what anyone has to say about ancient traditions, folklore, and wedding dress colors. Read at your own risk.

Good luck and congratulations,

Elise

posted by Elise at 9:06 AM    <link>

GUESTS IN SHIFTS?

Dear Elise,

My fiance and I are planning to get married at our home and also have the reception there after the wedding (we live in the country and have plenty of space). We are paying for the wedding ourselves and have a tight budget. We have many friends and coworkers that we would love to invite, but when planning out the cost of renting a big enough tent, tables, chairs, catering, etc., we found we simply cannot afford to provide this for everyone.

We came up with a tentative solution, and would like to know what your take is. We will invite a small number of people (close friends and family - no more than 50) to the actual ceremony. We will also provide an informal meal for them after the wedding. We plan to invite other friends and coworkers to the reception, starting later. We will provide snacks at the reception, but not a meal. Since the wedding and the reception will be at the same location, is it tacky for me not to invite everyone to the whole thing? And is it wrong to serve a meal only to those invited to the wedding, and not at the reception?

Thanks!

-Wanting to Have My Cake and Eat It Too

Dear Cake,

I would actually prefer to be able to eat my cake and not continue to have it, since all cake I consume really will hang around and threaten to make all my clothing annoyingly unflattering. That said, I think the solution you've found to your problem may give you more trouble than you want.

Are you planning on keeping the first party a secret from your second shift? Abandon all hope of that. People are whimsical, arriving early or late to parties, and your two lists will end up combining in ways you didn't intend and most important, your second-shift guests could feel slighted about not being invited to the wedding and first reception, mere hours before.

No one wants to be considered a "B-list" guest. This is especially likely if you anticipate having 50 people at the first party. A group that size is too large to pass off as "immediate family and intimate friends," which is the customary distinction one would make in selecting a group that gets to attend the wedding ceremony vs. the reception alone. Just this week, the stodgy Wall Street Journal weighed in on this style of entertaining. While it found that you can carry this off with low-ley events and a certain amount of bravado, it ultimately drew the conclusion that, unless you are comfortable with everyone being aware of the "A" and "B" lists (since your guests are certain to blab and brag about their status to one another), and prepared to handle hurt feelings, you'd be better off not having your party in shifts.

Something you might consider is having everyone at once and not serving a full meal. If you get married in the after lunch / before dinner window, you can serve cocktails, light snacks and (if you like) cake to everyone. You may want to make a note on the invitation, indicating gently that there will be no full meal ("cocktails to follow," for instance). Emily Post and Amy Vanderbilt, both writing quite a number of decades ago, made it very clear that receptions do not have to be lavish multi-course affairs. Here is what Ms. Post quaintly said in 1946 regarding the food at "the prettiest wedding at least expense": "The essential item is wedding cake and something in which to drink the health of the bride and bridegroom." So, you see, you are absolutely in clear if you decide not to offer a banquet.

True Confessions time: I have been a "B-list" guest at a wedding-in-shifts. As hard as I tried not to be, I was offended that my friendship had been found insubstantial, worthy only of the later reception, not the ceremony. Why do anything risky with your wedding? I recommend using the money you would spend on the full meal for 50 on a larger tent, a few more snacks, and enjoying an affair that includes everyone all at once. Imagine how much happier you'll be if you don't have to field snippy laments from guests who weren't invited to the Main Event.

Congratulations,

Elise


posted by Elise at 8:50 AM    <link>

BRIDESMAIDLAND... THE SAGA CONTINUES

Dear Elise,

I am getting married in August and I have seven bridesmaids! Five of them live in the same city as the wedding, and the other two live abroad. Having never been a bridesmaid, I am not completely familiar with the etiquette regarding who pays for what.

In my dream world, I would love to pay for every last thing, down to lingerie and lashes. But, coming back to the reality of seven bridesmaids and a budget, I don't know what to do. Do I pay for the shoes? Do I pay for hair? The dresses? Another issue regarding the frocks is that the two bridesmaids who have to travel are students who have been saving for months to purchase plane tickets to come to the wedding. How can I ask them to fork out even more money when they have already gone into debt for me?

I know it is an honor to a bridesmaid, but sometimes the way I see it is me saying: "Will you be my bridesmaid?...Yes? That will be $1,000!"

Sincerely,

Big Bucks for Bridesmaids

Dear BBB-

Brava! Yours is a voice of conscience crying out from the din of the bridal maelstrom. Bridesmaids everywhere would rejoice to hear your concerns.

As many have lamented, bridesmaids are at the mercy of their brides, subject to shifting whims and demands that seem to spring out of a warped imagination. (In truth, brides are themselves vulnerable, wildly susceptible to the suggestions of friends, family, popular magazines, all of which hope to promote niceties masquerading as "needs.") Traditionally, in the United States, bridesmaids are responsible for buying their dresses and sometimes their shoes (depending on what is required). Beyond that, as you point out, the expenses are a frightening free-for-all.

Who sets the standards? What are the rules? There are none. Everything comes down to you, as if you needed more pressure. Some brides feel they can saddle their friends with costs including: a wedding shower, bachelorette party, bridesmaid dress, shoes, special undergarments, hair appointments, manicures, makeup, and plane tickets. On the other side of the spectrum, a close friend of mine bought her maids black dresses, with the understanding that they had shoes to wear, and only expected them to arrange for their own transportation. You may not be able to afford seven dresses, but perhaps you can pick something reasonably priced that wouldn't require special shoes to match. You could give them the option of having their hair done, but assure them that you are just happy to have them standing up with you, regardless of whether or not they had professional assistance.

I agree. Being a bridesmaid is an expensive honor. The best way for you to protect your friends is to make choices and set your expectations according to what you feel they can afford, and not subscribe to a costly ideal that may look pretty, but will turn out to be an attractive veneer covering resentment or sadness.

Congratulations and cheers, in being reasonable you make yourself remarkable.

Elise



posted by Elise at 5:10 PM    <link>

FINGER ON THE TRIGGER

Dear Elise,

I am getting married this October and have a huge dilemma. Over the course of the last 6 months, one of the future groomsmen and I (the bride) have not been getting along well. He has been verbally inappropriate toward me and very disrespectful. Is it OK to "disinvite" him as one of the groomsman, and replace him with a man who respects me and my future husband's life together? My fiance is tired of his friend's juvenile behavior as well, and is ready to call off the friendship.

Thank you for your time and great advice. I really appreciate any and all help you can offer!

Best regards!

- Offended Bride

Dear Offended,

There is some novelty here. Usually it is the bad behavior of bridesmaids that dredges up these questions of "firing" people in the wedding party, perhaps because bridesmaid duties tend to be more elaborate. Perhaps. That said, this dilemma is more your fiance's than it is yours. The offending party is his groomsman and, presumably, his friend.

Retracting any invitation once made, and in this case, an honor once bestowed, is something to be avoided at all costs. Don't you feel cringy just imagining the conversation your future husband would have to have with his unpleasant friend in order to get rid of him? Before you and your fiance wade too far out into the waters of resentment and retribution, take counsel with yourselves. Surely your fiance was not have been cavalier when he first selected his wedding party. I would hold off on the firing until after your fiance has tried to clear the air. Of course, if this questionable groomsman has been threatening or abusive, as opposed to merely stupid and thoughtless, then you have a safety problem, not a social one, and you can absolutely exclude him.

You mention wanting to replace this guy with someone else you like better. If it is merely the case that you want to honor another friend, consider expanding the wedding party. An additional groomsman will dilute the bad qualities of the man you don't care for, and your fiance will not be in a position of having to do something very difficult.

Even though a wedding is a huge and important event, it is really not the best time to make big gestures that damage or terminate relationships. As sweet as revenge sounds and as thrilling as it may be at the wedding, remember that you have to live with the aftermath.

Good luck and congratulations,

Elise

posted by Elise at 7:57 AM    <link>

DRESSING FOR TWO

Dear Elise,

I know I can't possibly be the only pregnant woman to ever get married, but I'll be damned if I can find a nice maternity wedding dress that doesn't look like a potato sack. Do you know of any stores that sell maternity dresses or nice alternatives that won't require me to take out a loan in order to purchase one?

Thanks a million,
Pregnant Bride

Dear Pregnant,

If the status of Kill Bill, Volume 2 at the box office has influence on trends, you will be far from the only pregnant woman at the altar. For a good half hour, a distinctly knocked-up Uma Thurman swans around in a very nice unembellished wedding dress, veil and (less attractive) flip-flops. Unfortunately, beyond the fashion the movie only has dopey things to say about motherhood.

But there I go getting carried away. You don't say how pregnant you will be when you get married, nor do you mention where you are, but if you're up for some detective work, here's a plan of action. Try calling the maternity stores in your area and ask them for suggestions in your price range. There are also stores (mostly in larger cities) that have fancy dress rental services. One of them may have higher-end maternity wedding dresses. Finally, you could also find a pattern for a dress you like and work with a seamstress (or tailor). This would allow you lots of flexibility in fabric, pattern, and fit. Finally, consider asking the extremely knowledgeable IndieMOMs for suggestions about stores in your area.

While yours isn't really an etiquette question, per se, I was delighted to see it because it is the first pregnancy question to arrive in the IndieEtiquette mailbox. The amount of rudeness to which pregnant women are subject is astonishing. Among the fistful of laments I have heard repeatedly are: unwanted touching, snide comments about age, depressing comments about weight, worrisome relatives, unhelpful people on crowded subways, and general nosiness. If you are afflicted with any of these prenatal plagues and crave help navigating this minefield, write in. Etiquette isn't just for weddings, thank God.

Congratulations twice over are in order for your wedding and your baby.

Elise


posted by Elise at 12:39 PM    <link>

TAKING CREDIT

Dear Elise:

So, I have a sister-in-law (a woman I have only met once) who is way more into my wedding than I am.

I'm flattered that she volunteered to host my engagement party. However, my maid of honor and best friend since I was seven, as well as another close friend and member of the bridal party wanted to participate as well. So the three are acting as equal hostesses.

Everything was fine until I got the invite in the mail and the only hosts named on the invitation are my sister- and brother-in-law to be. I'm absolutely mortified that my two closest girlfriends are paying for a party where they are not receiving any of the credit for their time and money. Even my mother questioned whether or not my two girlfriends had decided to back out of the party.

My fiance spoke to his sister, and her only explanation was "I thought the invitation looked better without all the names on it." I'm mortified, and at the beginning of a life long relationship with this crazy woman. What do I do?

- Mortified to be Marrying

Dear Mortified,

You have a live one on your hands, and sadly there is nothing you can do to cure her condition. I'm sure she is a generous and kind person, but weddings act like powerful hallucinogens on susceptible people, bringing on strange visions, delusions of grandeur, and self-destructive gestures. Forgive them, they can't control themselves.

But as interesting as it is to analyze these phenomena, there is a more pressing civility issue. Your future sister-in-law has taken sole credit for a party your friends are throwing with her. While your friends surely understand what's going on (perhaps as intimately as you do), you probably still want to do something to correct this injustice. Your future sister-in-law is apparently not someone who can listen to reason, so I would no longer involve her in any decisions or even try to approach her with complaints.

The best way to give credit where it is due (and it really baffles me that some people think wedding events are resume builders) is though being unassailably, impeccably gracious. Consider giving a big toast at the engagement party. Tell everyone loudly how happy you are to have such fabulous friends and family, and be sure to point out everything your two friends did for the party. You won't be able to make a perfect correction, but a public, heartfelt announcement should go a long way. (You'll need to thank your sister-in-law-to-be, of course, so take a moment to craft a speech that is at makes your point while being graceful.)

Consider this incident a warning. Surely your future sister-in-law has the best intentions, but you can't trust her. This problem can be patched over, but if you give her enough rope, she could (unwittingly) hang you.

Congratulations and good luck.

Elise

posted by Elise at 3:40 PM    <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.