Ultimate Wedding: The Wedding as Show Business

TERRIBLE IDEA III

The Wedding as Show Business

Miss Ultimate Wedding banners may be the only person who remembers when people got married by putting on the best clothes they already had, and going with a few similarly attired friends and relatives to their regular place of worship, where they followed a solemn and traditional ritual set by their religion.

Queen Victoria herself started the practice of costuming the bride in white (although we do not hold the dear lady responsible for the vulgar notion that this advertised that the body inside was untouched). From then on, it was all downhill, from solemnity and tradition to the flash and gimmicks of show business. There have always been similarities, theater having originated by copying the pageantry of religion, but now the direction has been reversed and the process accelerated.
Since the Academy Awards ceremony has been televised, it has been the quintessential modern ritual, setting the pattern for all others. The ingredients are: Outrageous clothing mixing all degrees of formality and informality, a pathway cleared for grand entrances, on-the-spot opinions solicited by bystanders, a patter of jokes and teasing from one or more masters of ceremonies, introductions of participants summarizing their biographies, time out and other inconveniences to accommodate the requirements of filming, choreographed chorus lines, rehearsed outpourings of gratitude and sentiment, standing ovations, sly references to the love lives of those present, presentations of trophies, acknowledgment of sponsors, and at least one impassioned plea on behalf of someone's favorite cause.

This has produced significant innovations in the wedding ritual:
Everyone is costumed, but none of it matches. The wedding party may be in formal clothes, but not even of the same degree of formality—for example, the bridegroom in white tie (or more likely, an "original" variation thereof) while the groomsmen are in black tie; and the guests dressed at an even less formal level, from business suits to jeans, on the grounds that they are audience, not performers.
Direction, jokes, and background anecdotes are offered at the reception by a professional master of ceremonies, while during the ceremony, the officiant tries valiantly to be equally entertaining and revealing.

The stars, seeing this as their moment in the spotlight, subordinate the form to showcase themselves by "personalizing" it with references to their love life and their philosophical beliefs. Being such, they are of course given the leeway of high temperament and indulged in whatever whims and selfishness they may care to exercise.
Family members and friends are cast into set roles, regardless of whom this includes or excludes: a man to give the bride away, even if there is no father—the mother not being considered for the part—and attendants chosen for the right look and number, rather than solely for being close friends.

The bride's mother's entrance has become a staged event, as a prelude to the bride's entrance, which pulls people to their feet. Applause and ovations are common, especially for the first marital kiss (which also draws laughter, as if it were a love scene viewed by an audience of early adolescents) and the pronouncement of the marriage (or maybe that round of clapping is because the show is ending).
Presents are regarded as admission tickets, and there is a lot of anger at those who try to get in without them. These are brought to the event and handed over, regardless of the logistical difficulties this creates, because paying admission has become so important a part of the occasion.

Finally, capturing the event on film for another audience is treated as superseding any need to accommodate those actually present. Guests may be shoved aside or made to endure long blank waits, or cast without warning as extras, if the film script calls for candid reaction interviews.

Miss Ultimate Wedding is only too aware of the unpopularity of the position she is taking. Nobody loves a critic. Why shouldn't a wedding be entertainment and draw on the experience of professionals in the business?

Her first reason is that this is often bad theater, and she is not the only critic. Not every amateur, no matter how in love, can produce a good original script. It is one thing to have friends murmuring "I thought the church needed more flowers," and quite another to hand them your courtship and philosophy to critique.
The second is that a wedding should be a joyous but serious occasion, rather than lighthearted entertainment. It's marriage itself, not the ceremony, that is supposed to be a scream.

The Program
Q. It has come to my attention that I must have a program at my wedding, because "everyone" has a program at their weddings. Quite frankly, I cannot recall one at the weddings I have attended, but most likely I would not have kept it. The examples I have been given not only have the wedding ceremony, but a "list of characters" from the bride and groom down to the hostesses (not necessarily the parents, but rather a wedding consultant or caterer) and "acknowledgments," listing the florist, travel agent, facility, etc. I've been told that they help guests identify who's in the wedding and they can refer back to them should they forget a name, but the idea of having a program is not sitting quite well with me.

A. Where else would you put the plot summary? And the synopsis of what happened to lead up to this event? And the preview of what may happen next? How else could you credit the sponsors? Introduce the actors ("Sherrie is a newlywed herself and a new mother," "Mike especially enjoys water sports")? The only excuse for a program is to give the order of the service, which is not necessary at a wedding. Here we have yet another show business touch, treating the wedding ceremony as entertainment, and supplying the accessories associated with it. Miss Ultimate Wedding congratulates you on resisting.

The Cast
Q. My son by a previous marriage is to marry soon. His mother died while he was a minor, and two older sisters became surrogate mothers in her stead. He wishes to acknowledge this at the reception by announcing them together with myself as a part of that ceremony. My present wife feels slighted by this, and feels emphatically that a provision should be made to present her as my wife, as well. She refuses to attend otherwise.

A. Announcing? Presenting? Does Miss Ultimate Wedding understand you to ask who gets the public credit for being the bridegroom's surrogate mother? See the trouble people get into by treating their weddings as show business award ceremonies? A wedding is a family gathering, not a contest. There is no need to announce, "And in the role of mother . . ." Why shouldn't the four of you occupy the front pew, sit at a family table at the reception, and receive his toasts of thanks?

The Extras
Q. My fiance and I are trying to find a mature and nice way of requesting on our invitation that there be no crying children at the wedding, due to the professional videotaping. What is the best way of telling guests without offending them?

A. What makes you think that your younger guests are more likely than the older ones to be overcome with sentiment on the occasion of your marriage, and to weep through the service? Anyway, wouldn't this add a tender note to your professional videotape, bound to touch the hearts of audiences everywhere when the tape is released in neighborhood theaters?

Or is it, Miss Ultimate Wedding finally understands, that you assume that all children cry, simply as recreation, especially when asked to sit still for an hour? In that case, don't invite any children to your wedding. Should their parents inquire whether this was an inadvertent omission, you must say, with a tone of regret so as not to seem a monster, "Oh, I'm so sorry, but we're not having any children there. I know yours would behave perfectly, but others might find it tedious." This is more acceptable than "I'm not using children in my show." (See The Guest List)

The Costumes
Q. Within hours of their engagement, my nephew's betrothed joined the congregation of a very picturesque church to provide a suitable venue for her special event. The wedding is almost upon us, and the bride has announced that hats are NOT to be worn.
Other than the fact that my two young daughters and I have already purchased lovely bonnets to complement the chosen setting, how can we enter a house of worship for an afternoon wedding, bareheaded? Is it no longer customary to cover one's head in a church? Would a lace handkerchief or designer tissue do?

A. If your prospective niece has changed her church merely in order to acquire the background scenery she wants, nothing is going to persuade her that she cannot costume the extras. That, Miss Ultimate Wedding regrets to say, is what she seems to think her wedding guests are.
As you have noticed, the bride's idea about hats is wrong, in addition to being impertinent. It is proper, although no longer mandatory, for ladies to wear hats both for any church service and for any afternoon wedding. So perhaps you are entitled to wear two hats.

It would be even worse to appear with patterned nose-wipes on your head, if Miss Ultimate Wedding understands you correctly, or with lace handkerchiefs (although many a lady made do with such when the Catholic Church barred bareheaded ladies from the door).
Nor do you want to start a family feud with a new relative who is unpleasant enough without provocation. Miss Ultimate Wedding would therefore suggest either sending back the message about your already purchased hats through your nephew (who supposedly knows how to deal with this person), or simply wearing flowers or ribbons in your hair.

Facing the Audience
Q. My daughter faced the audience during her wedding vows, as did the rest of the wedding party. It was a treat to see the ceremony, facing the expressions, and the beautiful bridesmaids and the men. I realize that some ceremonies must be conducted with certain rites that must have the wedding party's backs to the viewers. However, some ministers or pastors would not object to having their backs to the audience. Perhaps you could suggest this?

A. The "audience"? Is that what you think the people are who gather in a house of worship to witness a sacred ritual? Miss Ultimate Wedding has been increasingly aware that, weddings now being regarded as a popular amateur branch of show business, not only spirituality but also ties and duties to family and friends have become secondary to the production values. Your suggestion, however, is original enough to manage to shock her. As you are dabbling in theater, she suggests that you analyze the symbolism you plan to convey: In facing their audience, to Whom would these star-for-a-day performers be turning their backs?

Playing to an Empty House

Q. This is a worst-case scenario:
A wedding is planned and the bridesmaids, having bought their expensive dresses, are thrilled at being asked to participate in such a socially prestigious event. But then the invitations arrive and the wedding is to be held in the bride's home town, 200 miles away. The groom's relatives live in the opposite direction. Arrangements have been made to accommodate out-of-town guests (and the wedding party) in a nearby city; the rates are reasonable as weekend rates go, but the guests pay their own way. Times being hard and distance and expense outweighing fond sentiment, the regrets are 100 percent.

Then what happens? Can the bridesmaids and ushers bow out? The mother of the groom certainly would, if given half a chance, and she is not at all certain her dress will arrive in time. Do the bride's parents send out cancellation notices and let the couple marry in their own city and among their close friends?

At least the hosts will be spared the problem of what to do about the wedding presents people bring along to the reception, and the problem of the uninvited guests people bring along because there won't be anyone they know to talk to—supposing one could talk in the ear-shattering din of loud dance music. Wouldn't it be a welcome end to all the show-biz extravaganza? And might not a return to the small, intimate, and meaningful ceremony result in lower divorce statistics?

A. Miss Ultimate Wedding is no fonder of the show business mentality toward weddings than you are, but she finds herself unable to gloat at the picture of people who discover that no one cares enough about them to attend their wedding. The idea that even their intimates are tempted to bail out now is pathetic.

However pretentious the bridal couple may be, surely it is their invited guests who have a distasteful attitude. As you point out, convenience and price have outweighed sentiment. Had they cared, they might have hopped a bus and inquired about staying with the couple's local friends and relatives. One does not absolutely require an "audience," as it were, for a wedding of any style. If they were planning this wedding to dazzle others, yes, it should be canceled if those others won't be there. If they were doing it for their own satisfaction, Miss Ultimate Wedding does not see why they should not go ahead with it.