Today’s “Simon in the Morning” show focused primarily on the upcoming wedding of Scott Simon’s daughter. Scott said he wants his daughter to have the wedding she wants; however, he wished there was a more inexpensive way to do it. He didn’t understand why there had to be a full, sit-down dinner at the reception, instead of just cake and punch.
Jake, on the other hand, saw no reason why there shouldn’t be a full dinner served. He said that people come to weddings to eat.
Maybe it’s like Jolynn said, it seems those of us in the older generation have no problem with just cake, or a potluck; while the younger generation seems to want more. I have no problem going to a wedding and just having cake and punch. Then again, I don’t go to that many weddings, and when I do, it’s not for the food; it’s to see the couple getting married.
Honestly, isn’t that why it’s called a “wedding”? People have weddings to share their special moment with friends and family. The reception comes later, as a courtesy, (in my opinion), of the couple. It’s a way of thanking everyone for coming to the wedding. If it was called a “reception”, THEN you could have the big, fancy, sit-down dinner, open bar, the works; and for extra entertainment for the guests, throw in a wedding.
A suggestion I had was that having a wedding is all in the timing. Schedule the wedding after lunch, but early enough before dinner; it would eliminate the whole, “feeding everyone”, problem. People would be full from lunch; feed them punch and cake at the reception; they’re good to go until they get home for dinner.
Another topic that came up in the discussion this morning was where did all these traditions come from? Some were easy to explain, like the parents paying for the wedding. It probably evolved from when brides used to have a dowry. To honor a suitor wanting to marry a man’s daughter, the man’s family would throw in a “bonus”; usually a goat, or something useful like that.
Things aren’t like that now however. It seems as the times have changed, so have the traditions. Nowadays, the family of the bride is expected to pay for the wedding; while the groom’s family is responsible for the rehearsal dinner. Well, at least that’s how it was when *I* got married. Not sure it’s even that way anymore.
Then again, when I got married, my husband to be and I paid for it ourselves. We felt that if *we* were the ones getting married, then *we* should be the ones to pay for it. And we had a nice wedding, with everything the way we wanted it. Okay, we got a little crazy; we didn’t have just cake and punch at our reception. We upped the ante a bit by also having coffee, cashews and M&M’s. Doesn’t sound like much, but there was a reason for it. If there were leftovers, we didn’t want to be stuck with a bunch of stuff we didn’t like. It was our wedding, and his favorite thing was cashews, and mine was M&M’s; so that’s what we had.
I don’t know, it seems as time goes on, people want everything bigger and better than the last person. Not just weddings, but everything in general. Back on the subject of weddings though, I had a thought. Since traditions have evolved with the times, maybe they should evolve some more. It seems nowadays that the younger generation is more educated; getting married later in life, and generally establishing themselves before settling down. Not everyone maybe, but it does seem a majority of younger people are trending this way.
If that’s the case, here’s my suggestion for whom pays for a wedding: The couple getting married. Why not? If they’re ready to get married, settle down, and be responsible, what better way than starting with paying for their own wedding? Yes, it’s the bride’s special day, and she’s going to want everything to be perfect and special. If she can’t afford what she wants for a wedding though, maybe it’s not time for marriage. Or maybe she could lower her expectations, or find a way to work her budget around what she’s planning for the wedding.
I’m pretty sure a lot of people will disagree with me on this, and that’s okay. This is just my opinion. I’m sure if I were in Scott’s shoes, I’d feel the same way he does. Every parent wants to do whatever they can for their child, me included. I do feel though that it’s a viable solution to the high cost of a wedding.
One thing I feel shouldn’t happen at a wedding, or reception, is asking guests to pay. These are friends and family that have been invited to the event; if they’re invited, why are they being asked to pay for it? It seems totally tacky to me to do that. Then again, if the couple who is marrying happens to be starving actors, this might be an opportunity. Hmmm…I can see it now…
It could be a real life “Tony & Tina’s Wedding”, just change the names to the names of the couple, and go from there. In this case, it *could* be a dinner theater, with each guest paying for their meal, and watching the wedding take place.
If dinner is too expensive, even with guests paying, it could always be staged as a matinee. Instead of dinner, guests would pay a lower price for the “show”, and have cake and punch instead. VIP guests could upgrade to coffee, nuts and mints.
Then again, with all the things that happen at Tony & Tina’s fictional wedding, maybe trying to do that in real life isn’t such a great idea.
I guess what it boils down to is, however a wedding and reception is paid for, it should be the best it can be for the couple.
No comments:
Post a Comment