Chief Duties of the Wedding Guests
1. Answer the invitation immediately and definitely, in the style (third person or informal letter) in which it was written, and only on behalf of those to whom it was addressed—and then fulfill the pledge to show up (having made their own travel arrangements) or (even if that better offer fell through) not to show up.
2. Be moved to send (but never bring) wedding presents, bearing in mind that it is nice, but not strictly necessary, to give a second wedding present for the same person's second marriage, nor more than a note of congratulation to an acquaintance whose wedding they do not care to attend; and also bearing in mind that while it is desirable to please the couple, it is not necessary to comply with any rude attempts to direct what the guests are to buy, donate, or contribute.
3. Dress according to the formality of the occasion (neither in white nor, except for gentleman's evening clothes, black), rather than defy it in the name of comfort or personal style.
4. Head for the receiving line immediately upon arriving at the reception (telling the bride's and bridegroom's mothers and any fathers present that it was a beautiful wedding; the bride, that she is beautiful and that they wish her the best; the bridegroom, that they congratulate him and that he is a lucky man; and the bridesmaids, that they look beautiful), after which they may get a drink and socialize with other guests, provided they do not use the occasion to inquire into these people's prospects of being married.
Accepting a Wedding Invitation
Q. Back in the olden days, one replied to a wedding invitation by writing an abbreviated copy of it, starting with one's own name:
Mr. and Mrs. John Jones accept with pleasure the kind invitation of Mr. and Mrs. Roberts for Saturday, the tenth of June at half after seven o'clock City Club
Is this form of reply passe? What is currently the proper method of replying?
A. Passe in what sense? There is no need to update this form, as it is succinct and correct. It is not for guests to treat the style of the occasion with less formality than the hosts do.
Miss Ultimate Wedding does not deny that an awful lot of people have declared the necessity of answering invitations at all to be out of fashion. Since they are not the hosts, they have kindly taken it upon themselves to declare that hosts "don't care any more" to know who is attending their events.
This is a shameless falsehood. Ask anyone connected with giving a wedding. The timid will declare that they themselves don't care, but that the caterer does, which isn't true, either—they do care, and the caterer is satisfied if all the meals ordered are paid for, whether or not they are eaten. Therefore, the olden days, as you call them, are still upon us and will be forever, or at least until such time as people get fed up entertaining ingrates and stop issuing invitations.
Declining a Wedding Invitation
Q. Here is my plight: I am a single, middle-aged man with no intent of marriage. I have celebrated many weddings of friends, relatives and colleagues, as either guest or groomsman. Now I'm receiving invitations to the many more weddings for the children of these couples. Though they have my best wishes, I have no desire to participate either with my attendance or by providing gifts. How may I politely express my position?
A. You are in luck. Etiquette has taken the precaution of supplying the exact words you need; you have only to fill in your name at the top, neatly centered. It is:
Mr. Algernon Asquith regrets exceedingly that he is unable to accept the very kind invitation of Mr. and Mrs. Quiverful for Saturday, the eleventh of June
Miss Ultimate Wedding only asks that you do not fool with this wording, in the disastrous hope of personalizing it to your situation. There is no polite way to say that a gentleman thinks he has gone quite far enough in enduring the nuptial festivities of his friends without boring himself senseless at those of their children.
Response Cards
Q. In a wedding invitation from a very influential family, I looked for a response card, but there was none. On the invitation itself, on the lower left-hand corner, were the initials "R.s.v.p." with no date to return a response by.
Since I thought this was odd, I asked my sister, who replied that this is now the proper way and that we were supposed to buy our own response cards to send back. I disagree and think the party involved should send response cards. Who is right?
A. Has it come to this? That people who refrain from doing something incorrect are now being thought rude by the very people who violate the rule themselves? Allow Miss Ultimate Wedding a minute to sit down and search for her vinaigrette.
She suggests that you also take a minute to think. What you are saying is that people who offer you hospitality must also be responsible for seeing to it that you answer their invitation. Response cards were never correct. They are a desperate, and not particularly successful, way to make up for the extreme rudeness of people who think it too much trouble to inform their hosts whether or not they will attend an occasion to which they have been kindly bidden. Wedding invitations are properly answered on your very own paper, with your very own hand. Following the form of the invitation, they say either that "Mr. and Mrs. Phiffle accept with pleasure" or "regret exceedingly that they are unable to accept" the kind invitation of their hosts.
Using Response Cards Anyway
Q. How can one decline an invitation including an engraved response card that has a blank space indicating the number of guests attending? Placing a zero on the blank with no explanation seems ridiculous.
A. Writing a zero on the card provided is, Miss Ultimate Wedding agrees, unspeakable. But you could put a dash there, and write a brief statement of regret ("So sorry I can't be there—very best wishes") after it.
Consequences
Q. My husband and I spent our own money to treat ourselves and others with a grand celebration of our decision to marry. We spent six months of our life, and thousands of dollars, planning a big wedding. Many families we invited R.s.v.p.'d for the entire family, or for the husband and wife. Unfortunately, we discovered that many husbands and children "do not like to go to weddings." Out of the 150 guests expected at the wedding, only 40 showed up.
Miss Ultimate Wedding, I do not care about the money we wasted. What hurt was the emotional devastation we felt when we stood to walk down the aisle of a church filled with loved ones, and discovered that the church was empty, save for two rows. It was the same feeling when we entered a large reception hall with place settings for 150 people, and found only 30 people. This was supposed to be our wedding day, one of the best days of our life, and it was horrible. I wanted to write this letter to let people know what happens when they decide not to go to a wedding, or think that sending one representative of the family is sufficient to satisfy any social obligations they may feel.
A. Miss Ultimate Wedding knew this is where we would end up once people started regarding social invitations as negotiable, transferable, and nonbinding. Going to the pseudo-parties given by businesses and patronizing restaurants has given people the incredibly rude idea that among their friends, as well, they may send representatives, drop by or not as their moods dictate, bring extra people, demand special foods and so on.
Wedding invitations are particularly sacred, but all social invitations must be treated with respect or there will be no order, pleasure, or point in extending hospitality. Miss Ultimate Wedding hopes people will learn from your experience and is sorry you had to be the victim of such callousness. But please don't remember this as just a horrible day. You had each other, didn't you?
Conflicting Events
Q. The planned dates of my high school reunion and my brother-in-law's wedding are the same. Do I have to attend the wedding? GENTLE READER—Yes. Only if your brother-in-law starts getting married every five years, in synchronization with your reunions, will Miss Ultimate Wedding allow you to consider neglecting such a major family occasion in favor of an alumni event.
Not Bills
Q. You have not mentioned the fact that a wedding invitation is really a wedding announcement. So many people have decidedly fluttery guilt feelings about being invited to weddings of people they really don't know. Is it proper to send these newlyweds a card wishing them happiness? Isn't a person obliged to send a gift when invited to the reception? If this were not the case, wouldn't you have to send a gift to every couple whose announcement is printed in the newspaper?
A. Miss Ultimate Wedding begs your pardon, but kindly requests you not to add to the confusion. A wedding invitation is a wedding invitation, not a wedding announcement. A wedding announcement is a wedding announcement. The former asks you in advance to attend a wedding, and the latter informs you afterward that one has taken place.
Your problem is that you think that one or both of them is actually a bill. Why do so many people have trouble believing that there is no way at all that bridal couples, or anyone else, can send a social communication that informs people that they must ante up? It is true that when the matter is voluntary, nice people are supposed to want to give their marrying friends some tangible evidence of their delight. Thus attending a wedding is associated with the giving of a present.
If one doesn't actually much care about the marriage, one need only decline the invitation and send good wishes to the couple. Wishes for happiness are the proper response to a wedding announcement, although those, too, occasionally inspire people to send presents.
Not Theater Tickets
Q. A girlfriend of mine and her husband were invited to a wedding. Her husband cannot attend, due to a prior commitment. My friend has asked me to attend with her. The bride is an acquaintance of mine, but more friendly with my girlfriend. Because I was not formally invited to the wedding by the bride, but will attend as a guest of my friend, am I required to give a separate wedding gift?
A. No, you are not required to send a wedding present because you are not going to attend the wedding. Miss Ultimate Wedding will go so far as to say that you are required not to attend the wedding.
A wedding invitation addressed to a married couple is not like a pair of theater tickets that may be transferred to others. It is not fair to bridal couples to populate their weddings with guests-once-removed—people to whom they are not close but who are the guests of their guests. Had the bride wished to invite you to the wedding, she would have done so.
Not a Referendum
Q. We are a couple in our sixties. The twenty-eight-year-old daughter of good friends of ours has invited us to a commitment ceremony for herself and her female lover. They lived together for several years and now are throwing a big bash, with vows, many guests, and a reception.
We do not approve of this lifestyle, but of course would not make a big show of refusing the invitation. We are wondering, however, if we can refuse and, if so, if we should say why, or if we should invent a prior engagement. There really seems to be no happy solution. We don't want to lie and we don't want to butt in with our opinion of homosexuality, nor do we want to attend an event that would make us uncomfortable.
A. An invitation is not a referendum, in which guests are asked to give their opinions of the arrangement being celebrated. It is a mere inquiry as to whether you would like to be present, and in this case, the answer is no.
Miss Ultimate Wedding assures you that you do not need to lie in order to avoid explaining your objections. You need merely decline politely. Although no specific excuse is necessary, it is customary to accompany this with a congratulatory wish, which Miss Ultimate Wedding trusts you can supply in good conscience. Wishing someone happiness does not involve you in debating how happiness is best achieved.
No comments:
Post a Comment