Can't-Win Wedding

Here be yet another example of how weddings transform fun ideas into scarring, never-to-be-forgotten family rifts:

Dear Miss Manners: My husband and I attended a wedding with a 1920s theme, where the guests were encouraged to dress in period costume if they felt so moved.

Many of the gentlemen who arrived in the suggested costume wore hats, to better convey the theme, and we all by unspoken accord wore them the entire evening (perhaps, subconsciously, in imitation of the groom, who did the same).

Later, it developed that the bride’s grandmothers and aunts had been much dismayed by all the gentlemen wearing hats indoors. Obviously, there’s nothing to be done about that now, but for the future what’s correct?

Gentle Reader: Gentlemen who lived during the ’20s were normally great wearers of hats, so they were sure about what to do. If you really want to be in character, you would therefore remove the hat indoors.

Arrrrrrrrrrgh.....of course Miss Manners and the grandmas are technically correct that hats shouldn't be worn indoors, and of course gentlemen of the day would have known this and never worn their hats indoors. But their hats weren't part of a carefully contrived costume, and these were. And if the whole wedding was indoors, they never would have gotten to wear their hats at all.

I think following the groom's example was the right thing to do in this case (the real point of etiquette, after all, is to prevent embarrassment and confusion among as many people as possible). Had he removed his hat, others should have as well--and they most likely would have.

Assuming the guys had the good sense not to wear their hats in the church, I think allowing your memory of your granddaughter's wedding to be overshadowed by your memory of uncouth young men in fedoras is a shame. Let it go.

F-O-B knows best?

Carolyn's column from yesterday felt remarkably familiar to me.......:

Hi, Carolyn:

My brother's daughter is getting married. He called me last night to "get my thoughts" on whether my stepdaughters should be invited to the wedding, because he "didn't want them to feel obligated." I was stunned and my husband was incredulous.

Lots of history here, but I'm going to condense it. I have been happily married to their dad for almost 20 years, and while they didn't live with us, I love my stepdaughters as my own children. When the older daughter married, my brother and all of his adult children attended except one.

We live in a different state and are not close, but have a superficial "friendly" brother/sister relationship that has been contentious at times.

I totally get that wedding guest lists are maddening. But I feel my brother put me on the spot. His "obligation" reasoning sounds more like, "Will you give me permission to not invite them?"

Flustered, I told him I thought my stepdaughters' feelings would be hurt if they weren't invited.

I want to tell him that I thought he was insensitive. Or do I let it lie and not create more wedding stress? I can't help feeling that my brother doesn't see my stepdaughters as true family. Whew. I'm in paralysis here.

S.

Clearly, there's history. But the surest way to keep half-century-old grudges alive is to make them the lens through which you view everything your brother says or does.

Guest lists for weddings are maddening: Inclusion costs are prohibitive; exclusion costs are wrenching. Exploring whether farther-flung relatives care about being invited is one logical, if not quite mannerly, approach. So, Brother calls Sister to feel out her family's interest.

This, at least, is how someone without your history views your brother's question. And flustered as you were, your response was exactly what the situation demanded: honest and clear. "They care." A successful transaction completed.

Your stepdaughters are your real family, regardless of what (you think) your brother thinks. It may not come naturally to drop your dukes and just take people's words at face value, but that kind of stress reduction is worth practicing until you've got it down.

I think Carolyn's right that this woman (though her reaction is certainly understandable), will save everyone (including herself) a lot of grief if she does her best NOT to see this as evidence that her brother doesn't and never has and never will truly consider her stepddaughters "real" family. I seriously doubt that's the case.

I'm working through the "maddening" experience of wedding guest lists myself, and recently went through this exact scenario. Both of my parents included their first cousins on the guest list. I know and love a couple of these folks, and certainly want to include them. Others, I can count the times I've met them in my life on one hand. One, in particular, I don't think I would know if I saw him on the street. When our guest list needed to be cut by 50+ people, I was hesitant to just make cuts and announce that I was making them. I sent the list and the numbers to my parents and sort of assumed they'd come to the same conclusions I came to.

Instead, my dad got on the phone, calling his aunt and uncle to see whether their son (the cousin I haven't seen in 15 years, and hadn't even seriously put on my list) and his girlfriend would be likely to make the trek from out of state to the wedding. They called HIM and he said he'd be DELIGHTED. So now what would have been an understandable decision on my part--I don't know this person from Adam--would now be a snub, and instead of reducing the guest list, we increased it. By two. Not to mention I was mortified that it would look like I sent my dad out to pre-un-invite obscure relatives.

In short, this isn't about the dad trying to exclude the stepdaughters. On the contrary, it's likely about him trying to INCLUDE them in a strange, too-logical-for-comfort-or-etiquette way (is this why women do most wedding and party planning?)

My guess is the bride doesn't feel close to her aunt's stepdaughters. If they never lived with her aunt, and the aunt and FOB aren't close anyway, they likely weren't raised as cousins. If they're adults, they're likely to have serious partners...depending on how many of them there are, this could mean inviting anywhere from 4 to 8 or more extra people. I've found the generational divide to be a fairly reasonable way of limiting the guest list (i.e., inviting my parents' friends, but not their children). Bride probably wanted to cut the stepdaughters not because they're steps, but because she doesn't know them well and because the generational boundary is a natural one. FOB probably didn't feel comfortable with that and wanted to feel it out.

Still uncomfortable for everyone, and the bride, if she knows about the phone call, is probably embarrassed. But I don't think it's a slight from the FOB--instead, it's probably an indicator that he cares and DOESN'T want to slight anyone. Although I don't think this is the best way to handle it, his intentions were most likely good. I agree with Carolyn: the sister gave a straightforward answer, and I think that's the best thing she could do in this situation. Bringing it up again as a bone to pick with the brother doesn't seem useful, and I think reads more into the phone call than was meant to be implied.

(Not) Kissing Cousins

This delightful person was published in Ask Amy this morning:

Dear Amy: Please help me think generous thoughts regarding an invitation to a wedding "reception" I just received from a cousin in another state. All my siblings got an invitation, even the one who lives 1,000 miles away.
We cousins rarely meet up. We all have little kids, and it's a no-kids evening reception, a three-hour drive from our homes, with no indication that a baby-sitter will be provided, though a motel's business card was included with the invitation.
This couple is not young. They've been married for a few months now, so it's just a reception at a VFW, and at that late hour, dinner is probably not even included.
If she really wanted more distant relatives to attend, she would have planned a more hospitable event, right? Or she could have sent an announcement — to let us off the hook.
I probably will send something out of a sense of obligation, but my heart's not in it. At least no registry junk was in the envelope. But honestly, isn't this invitation just a grasp for gifts?
— Hunting for Good Will

JEEBUS! Really? I guess this means I can cut from my list all those people our parents want us to invite--I mean God knows I don't want them to feel obligated. This person is a real pill. "If she really wanted more distant relatives to attend, she would have planned amore hospitable event, right?" Yes. Because the wedding reception is actually designed to be dinner and a show, a free date for you with babysitting for your children. Given the attitude this person is displaying, I find it hard to believe the couple would even want them there. Likely they invited them NOT for the gifts, but to placate either their own parents or the cousins' parents (B&G's aunts and uncles). And most likely they invited the most distant one because they felt it would be rude to include some but not all of one group of cousins.

I have to say the whole thing is even MORE distasteful precisely the because B&G seem to be having a reasonable, well-contained event. This letter doesn't say anything about their personalities or tastes, but for an older (well, not overly young) couple to have a late evening reception at the VFW several months after their wedding (elopment? Destination wedding?) suggests a low-key, informal, fun and festive celebration with friends. They didn't include their registration stuff with the invitation because they're NOT tacky and trolling for gifts. And because you're never ever supposed to. Just because you get together "rarely" doesn't mean you shouldn't make the effort at major events like weddings and funerals...though if I were the B I would be praying this sourpuss didn't show. Or even send a gift, because I know my thank you note would be misconstrued and judged.

Also, this is the second condescending mention of a "VFW wedding" I've come across in less than 24 hours (the other one was in a Carolyn Hax chat transcript from 1999, but still). I didn't know there was such a rage against holding the reception in a VFW. I mean, if you've had lifelong dreams of your princess wedding, it might not be ideal--but then no one's FORCING you to do it there--you could be at a park, a restaurant, someone's home--work it out. If you're a GUEST commenting on the lameness of a VFW wedding....you have no soul.

The cousin has kids and speaks in the royal/married "we," so likely has been through a wedding of her own--perhaps she's harboring bitter memories about it? The gift she didn't get from this cousin? Or the fact that she cut this cousin because she couldn't afford to host her, and now feels like she's being shown up and judged because she HAS been invited to this one? Who knows??

Thanks, Amy, for telling this person off:

Dear Hunting: Please forgive this couple for having the nerve to invite you to a party to celebrate their wedding. Evidently this event is not to your liking, but I have been to many rollicking good parties at the VFW, featuring beer, chicken wings, music and dancing. This modest party might be all the couple can afford, and if so, then they should be commended for adhering to a reasonable budget.
If you don't want to attend this reception, then don't. If you don't want to send a gift, then don't. But don't blame this couple for throwing a party and inviting you to it. That's just rude.

On Thrifty Gifting....

A disgruntled woman (I think) wrote in to Marcie and Kathy Sugar of Annie's Mailbox, "irritated" that her cousin, whose wedding she recently attended, had commented to her parents (Disgruntled's aunt and uncle) that she (bride) and hubby had not received gifts from Disgruntled (alias assigned by me) or Disgruntled's sister. (Her letter here).

Disgruntled hadn't sent/brought a gift, because she "couldn't afford it," and wants to know, "should I have just stayed home because I couldn't afford a gift?"

Marcie and Kathy suggest that while of course, a gift can never be "mandatory," and that often young adults in transition expect to be included in their parents' "family" gift, bringing a gift to a wedding is "customary and appropriate," and if Disgruntled truly couldn't manage it, perhaps she ought to have sent a card instead.

I think it's unfortunate that all the wedding brouhaha that's been brewing the last couple of decades has put everything and everyone so off-kilter that no one can seem to find the right path through a situation that doesn't need to be that difficult.

First of all, it wasn't great form of the bride to mention to her parents that she hadn't received a gift. Unless it was truly under the guise of wondering if it got lost or disconnected from the card, etc., which I doubt.

But it wasn't great form of the cousin to just show up empty-handed, either. I agree with Kathy and Marcie on the "custom" of bringing gifts to a wedding...I'd compare it to Christmas (if, in your family, gifts are traditional at Christmas). At both occasions, gifts are not and can't be technically required, but if you don't give them, there will likely be hurt feelings and misunderstandings.

I think the real problem here is the cousin's perception that she can't "afford" a gift. And that's where the wedding industry, the above mentioned "brouhaha" comes into play. When things get tight at Christmas, we knit scarves, we make scrapbooks, we frame pictures, we provide services for each other, etc. The problem here is that wedding gifts have been portrayed as needing to be so expensive that this woman actually thought it would be better to bring NOTHING than something as a token of goodwill and good wishes.

With some thought and effort, Digruntled could have brought something perfectly lovely and meaningful without spending much money (a throw embroidered with the names of the couple and date of the wedding? ingredients for a relaxing night in? a photo album in the wedding color and style and a promise--with follow-through--to fill with with pictures snapped on the big day?).

And then we have to keep our fingers crossed that the cousin bride would see it that way--though given her raising the gift issue with her parents, perhaps we shouldn't be too optimistic.

If the cousin truly truly truly could afford NOTHING, perhaps she should have talked it over with her parents or sister, planning to go in together, or at least "signing the card" on her parents gift (if they sympathized with her situation and were cool with it) so there would be a some indication of her thought and participation.

And the wedding was only 4 months ago, so while it would have been ideal to handle this before, it's not too late to send a gift with a card wishing them the best.

"I can't afford it" is reasonable justification for many, many things....but in some cases, where part of the event is sharing a spirit of love and generosity for the new couple it really sa cop-out.

Of course, this doesn't apply if the couple has already run any generosity family and friends were feeling into the ground months before the wedding. If the bride has temporarily lost her mind or is actually crazy, evil, and tallying up material and cash gifts at the wedding door, Disgruntled would have been better off not going at all, and not just because she couldn't afford it.

Cracked up Glass Menagerie

This is one of the strangest letters to Abby I've seen. It's a difficult one to answer, because it's hard to give advice on dealing with a person whose actions simply don't make any sense! Many folks write into advice columns for etiquette advice because they feel they've been treated rudely or taken advantage of, and want to know how (or if) to confront the offender. I thought this was going to be one of those times. Instead, the woman just seems to be trying to create a scene. Try to figure this one out:

DEAR ABBY: My husband and I attended the wedding of two dear friends. The groom's mother, "Millie," made party favors for all the guests -- little gift bags containing sugar-coated almonds and, because the bride and groom are animal lovers, a small glass animal. A few days later, a friend brought her teenage daughter to our home. The daughter admired the two glass animals, so I gave them to her.

I was shocked when, the following weekend, Millie called and asked me to return them. She said she planned to take them back because she would prefer to use the money to buy the couple something they could use. Feeling guilty for "regifting," I responded with the first thing that popped into my head, that I hoped I hadn't "misplaced" them. Millie said she hoped not, too -- they had cost $35 apiece, and she would expect us to reimburse her! Further, we should not mention it to the "happy couple" because of the embarrassment it would cause.

I asked the bride's sister where Millie might have bought the glass figurines under the guise of wanting to get some as gifts for my grad students. I was stunned when she responded that she had purchased an entire case of these inexpensive animals as wedding favors, and that I was welcome to them if I wanted to pick them up from her home.

I'm unclear what motivated Millie to ask for the animals to be returned, or why she would inflate the price and expect to be reimbursed. I understand there was an unpleasant power struggle over the wedding arrangements, but I'm not sure what she hopes to gain from this.

How should this be handled? My husband says I should tell Millie the truth, that we gave them away and we know they cost only 80 cents apiece. What do you say? -- STYMIED IN MARYLAND

How bizarre, right? The only thing I can think of is that the woman just wants to embarrass the bride and groom by affronting all of their guests. Instead, of course, she's just embarrassing herself....this is truly just strange.

I love Abby's suggestion, though!

You were off the hook the minute the bride's sister told you she had a case of the little glass animals. Swing by, pick up a couple and give them to Millie. She's as transparent as they are, and her story about returning them to buy anything for the happy couple is another fabrication.

Give her back her own stupid animals! Nice!

***time passes***
Hmmm....upon reading this again, I've figured it out, and it all seems so obvious now. I was confused at first because, while it seemed that Millie was just trying to gather some cash for herself, since the glass animals weren't actually worth much, I couldn't figure out how she planned to make any profit.

But now I see. I just wasn't devious enough at first.

Millie EXPECTED that people would no longer have the animals, and that she'd badger them into giving her cash. The plot is all clear now. And Abby's response to give her back her own animals becomes even better!

A whole new meaning to Breaking the Glass....

Here's some bizarre advice I encountered this morning while browsing theknot.com, which is what I always wind up doing when I should be doing homework. In a helpful article for wedding guests (not sure if that link will work, or try to make you sign in), the author reminds guests that, no matter how clever or insightful they think they are, it's probably better to go ahead and buy a present off of the registry, rather than striking out on their own. OK, fair enough. But then, this:

For a personal touch, pick an item that has some significance for you and the couple (like buying them stemware to replace the glass you broke at their last dinner party), and include a letter that lets them know you put some thought into their wedding gift and got them something they really wanted.

Um.....what? I'm not even really sure how to respond to this...like, is the author of this article bitter because this happened to her? Or could she really not think of a better example of how a registry gift might tie in with your friendship (in which case....this is not a persuasive argument for why you should stick to the registry!) Or was she trying to be sassy?

Well....she failed. This is just....weird.

Wedding Columns Gone Wild

Not even Dan Savage can avoid vital reader questions about wedding etiquette...

Note: when I created this blog, they (um, blogger.com) asked me to indicate whether it should be identified as containing "adult" content....I didn't even think about this until I realized that Dan Savage will probably be making occasional appearances. So I decided, I'll link to him, and talk around him, or maybe use code words when necessary....but I probably won't copy and paste excerpts from his columns here, except for the very tame bits. And then, what's the point really?

This actually works out well because Dan Savage has such a nicely maintained Web site. I'm posting extended quotes from my other columnists, when relevant, because I'm not sure if the links to their columns will go bad as time goes by--but that's no problem with the extensive Savage Love archives at our fingertips. Thank God.