Double Wedding?
Joy-Writer
Anyone planning one?
SallyRat&Sweetie
sister. It was a disaster. One couple always outshines the other. My
"friend" is the consumate extrovert. Nobody even noticed her more
introverted sister getting married as well. I remember it as the-event-
that-would -have-worked-much-better-if-the-sister-had-her-15min-of-fame.
My advice. Don't do this to yourself. You deserve better
K
"Joy-Writer" <joyw...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:a4ebkg$g2v$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Pea
expect people to give great gifts to both of you at once. It hurts
too much in the wallet, unless all of your family and friends are very
wealthy.
Pea
"SallyRat&Sweetie" <kd....@fakehost.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<stGa8.20064$Hv5.2...@news20.bellglobal.com>...
Rachel
Pea <tara...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f4bfa101.02021...@posting.google.com...
> I echo that - don't do it. You will not get good gifts. You can't
> expect people to give great gifts to both of you at once. It hurts
> too much in the wallet, unless all of your family and friends are very
> wealthy.
>
> Pea
Are you for real?
Ron Ng
>sister. It was a disaster. One couple always outshines the other.
Liar.
Ron Ng Knows!
Ron Ng
>expect people to give great gifts to both of you at once. It hurts
>too much in the wallet, unless all of your family and friends are very
>wealthy.
How VULGAR!
Ron Ng Knows!
rangitotogirl
"SallyRat&Sweetie" <kd....@fakehost.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:stGa8.20064$Hv5.2...@news20.bellglobal.com...
her
> sister. It was a disaster. One couple always outshines the other. My
> "friend" is the consumate extrovert. Nobody even noticed her more
> introverted sister getting married as well. I remember it as the-event-
> that-would -have-worked-much-better-if-the-sister-had-her-15min-of-fame.
Actually I think it would be kind of cool if you were very close to the
other person. There would have to be a lot of care taken though to ensure
that things were pretty even on both sides. I've always thought a double
wedding would look great in one of those churches with two aisles, but apart
from that how it's done beats me.
Joe Pucillo
> Pea wrote...
> > I echo that - don't do it. You will not get good gifts. You can't
> > expect people to give great gifts to both of you at once. It hurts
> > too much in the wallet, unless all of your family and friends are very
> > wealthy.
> Are you for real?
That's nothing...
Wait 'til the next reply, which will include the words,
"Marcia....Marcia....Marcia...!"
:-)
--
Joe Pucillo
Baltimore, Maryland USA
To reply by email, please remove the .xx from the address.
Pea
Uh, YEAH! If you are invited to a double wedding and can only afford
to give $100 as a gift, $50 each. The two couples get less as they
deserve for having such a stupid thing as a double wedding. Besides,
how can you have a special day like that while sharing it with another
couple?
Ron NG - are you for real?
Noe Spaemme
The majority of guests, except family, will know just
Ron Ng
>to give $100 as a gift, $50 each.
And if the weddings are a week apart, it's still $50. So what? If gifts are
that important to you, only invite rich people to your wedding.
Ron Ng Knows!
Pea
Anyone who says that gifts aren't important to them is a liar.
Pea
T Flynn
> Anyone who says that gifts aren't important to them is a liar.
How do you mean "important"? Gifts were important to us in that we needed
to keep an accurate record of who sent what so we could promptly mail out
thoughtful and happy thank you notes and so we could think of the gifter
when we used the present, but I'd be surprised if anyone goes through the
guest list and matches up who sends something and who doesn't, or keeps
tabs based on what has been given in the past or something weird like
that.
The cash value of the gift is not important. The guest's sentiments are
the important part, and the quick acknowledgement with a thank you is the
most important part of all.
If anyone said gifts were more important than, say, the vows, or
memories, or hopes and dreams, or fellowship during the party, I *hope*
they're lying.
Crystal Dreamer
--
~Crystal Dreamer~
http://www.mydreamcake.com
"Pea" <tara...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f4bfa101.02021...@posting.google.com...
Puester
> Anyone who says that gifts aren't important to them is a liar.
>
> Pea
While gifts are fun, anyone who thinks they are "important" in a
financial way is too young and financially insecure to be married.
gloria p
Lesliekaye
for each separate wedding? (meaning $200)
If a guest can afford $100 for a gift then that's what he will spend ...
regardless of when the wedding is. If one is in June and one is in December,
he will be spending the same amount of money than he will if the weddings
are on the same day!
What a stupid argument you are giving here ... there's still two weddings
going on, and most guests are smart enough to know this.
Only a moron would bring one gift to a double wedding.
Leslie
Pea <tara...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
JMH
Lesliekaye wrote:
> What a stupid argument you are giving here ... there's still two weddings
> going on, and most guests are smart enough to know this.
>
> Only a moron would bring one gift to a double wedding.
>
> Leslie
My brother was married in a double wedding (two sisters marrying the same day,
same ceremony, same reception) and there were certianly guests of the other
couple (co-workers, college friends) attending who had never met my brother and
his wife and vice versa. None of them were morons for giving a gift to the
couple they knew getting married only.
Miss Manners addresses this on page 330 of "Miss Manners' Guide toExcruciatingly
Correct Behavior" regarding double weddings: "Miss Manners hopes people will
have the sense to send presents only to the bridal couple they know."
nikid
weddings, and I would advise against it.
you are talking about two couples. 4 different tastes.
you might know that sometimes its hard to compromise
with just your hubby or fiancee, this is sometimes hard enough. Add another
couple and you will run into some
problems somewhere.
Also i personally think that when it is your wedding day
you want to shine and be in the center of attention. (otherwise we wouldn't
be calling it the most important day of our lives and we wouldnt make such a
big deal about centerpieces etc :-)
Its great to want to share your day with somebody else
but instead of sharing your day with another couple, i
would advise make them part of your wedding (maid/matron of honor, best man)
that way you can celebrate Their wedding and yours.
If you do plan to go on with the double wedding,
good luck! lol j/k, i guess it depends on how well you
work with the other couple, and wether or not you
mind sharing the spotlight. (this also goes for the other couple)
Niki,
"Joy-Writer" <joyw...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:a4ebkg$g2v$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Pea
No way are gifts more important than the vows or memories or the
sacred institution of the marriage itself. But I think most people
feel the gifts they receive are important, otherwise why would we give
and receive at all?
-Pea
Fred
the past. Let me point out too, that the pictures will now take
twices as long! One double wedding that I photographed on a yacht
with a four hour cruise for the entire event was a real disaster from
my perspective, the brides were permitted to board early, but neither
was ready for prewedding before the ceremony. One of the grooms was
on time so I did manage to get him and his parents and groomsmen done
prior to the start of the wedding and cruise. The other groom showed
up too late! <we were actually wondering if he would come at all for a
while>. After the double ceremony the coordinator informed me I had
15 minutes for photos. I just looked at her with amazement and stated
I think we will require a bit more time than that and started working
fast. I even had a second photographer on hand and still we moved as
quickly as possible. I also had two assistants so there were 4 of us.
We still did not get all the photos we wanted, but did the main ones!
Both brides ultimately were happy with the picturres, I was not though
since I was hurried all night and forced to eliminate some of the
shots we normally would have taken. Everything was hurried, the cake
cutting, dinner, dancing etc. My advice to you, if you do have a
double wedding. Hire two photographers, both with assistants. Be
sure to be ready ontime to get those typical pre wedding shots done.
Keep your wedding parties small if possible. Best of luck!
Jeanne Hastings
Picturesque Photography
RICK5347
with a four hour cruise for the entire event was a real disaster from
my perspective, the brides were permitted to board early, but neither
was ready for prewedding before the ceremony. One of the grooms was
on time so I did manage to get him and his parents and groomsmen done
prior to the start of the wedding and cruise. The other groom showed
up too late! <we were actually wondering if he would come at all for a
while>. After the double ceremony the coordinator informed me I had
15 minutes for photos. I just looked at her with amazement and stated
I think we will require a bit more time than that and started working
fast. I even had a second photographer on hand and still we moved as
quickly as possible. I also had two assistants so there were 4 of us.
We still did not get all the photos we wanted, but did the main ones!
Both brides ultimately were happy with the picturres, I was not though
since I was hurried all night and forced to eliminate some of the
shots we normally would have taken. Everything was hurried, the cake
cutting, dinner, dancing etc. >>
Yacht weddings are a very special circumstance. I have photographed hundreds
of them as my office is right on the harbor. You have a four or five hour
event and the upper deck must perform triple duty as the ceremony site, the
dining room and the dance floor. It is imperative that the photographer be
prepared to take a very minimal amount of time for posed photos after the
ceremony, 15 minutes is the norm. After that the crew needs to rearrange the
deck, the ceremony chairs must be stacked and the dining tables set up.
Yacht weddings always run on a very tight schedule. It is extremely important
that couples looking for a photographer for such a scheduled event find one
with experience in yacht weddings. This is in no way meant to comment on the
photographer making the post but I have seen too many yacht weddings disrupted
by the photography to not comment.
Best regards,
Rick Rosen
Newport Beach, CA
www.rickrosen.com
Lesliekaye
> Miss Manners addresses this on page 330 of "Miss Manners' Guide
toExcruciatingly
> Correct Behavior" regarding double weddings: "Miss Manners hopes people
will
> have the sense to send presents only to the bridal couple they know."
Whatever Miss Manners says about sending gifts to the home is fine ...
however, the OP was talking about bringing gifts to the reception. I
definitely would feel stupid showing up at a double wedding with only one
gift in hand. In this case, I would at least give a card, to wish the couple
well ... after all... I am witnessing their wedding. I'm not some random
person off the street.
Sending gifts to the home is a totally different story.
Leslie
bunny20
the middle of the reception, after she and her husband had opened gifts she
was telling a small group of us on "how much money she had made by getting
married." Talk about being too young and financially insecure. Personally
I don't think she would have been old enough to marry at any age, but
there's nothing I can do but wish her luck. LOL
nikid
of a wedding?
I hope the brides-to-be take this in considderation.
also for those who insist of having a wedding coordinator,
make sure that they do not expect the impossible from the
people who work the wedding.
Niki,
"RICK5347" <rick...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020217120233...@mb-mq.aol.com...
JMH
Lesliekaye wrote:
Um, no it's not. The only proper way to give wedding gifts is to send them to
the intended recipient well before the wedding. Per Miss Manners' etiquette, it
just goes without saying that guests know this fundamental etiquette rule when
she advises guests to a double wedding that they are only need give a gift (sent
to the home as per proper etiquette) for the bridal couple they know, not to
both. If you followed this basic etiquette, you have no need of feeling stupid
at the reception because you had sent your gift well before the wedding occured.
>
> Leslie
T Flynn
> Um, no it's not. The only proper way to give wedding gifts is to send them to
> the intended recipient well before the wedding. Per Miss Manners' etiquette, it
> just goes without saying that guests know this fundamental etiquette rule when
> she advises guests to a double wedding that they are only need give a gift (sent
> to the home as per proper etiquette) for the bridal couple they know, not to
> both. If you followed this basic etiquette, you have no need of feeling stupid
> at the reception because you had sent your gift well before the wedding occured.
Of course, since many areas traditionally still have gifts at the
reception, you weren't addressing the etiquette involved in that
tradition, but that would be because you only have rules for one specific
group's traditions. How very restricted.
I like the idea of bringing a card for the other couple!
AlanBu...@webtv.net
In fact, I have had friends ask me to forego standing up in their
wedding party so that I could be "Stage Manager" for the wedding,
because I have experience in live theatre.
Now, imaging a big theater, with two stages, with two entirely different
plays being acted at the same time for the same audience.
That is a double wedding.
There are cases where it may be appropriate. Two sisters marrying two
brothers, for example, or a brother and sister marrying a sister and
brother. But even then, it has the potential for disaster, since neither
couple will really be able to look upon it as "...their very own special
day."
Approach double weddings with caution.
T Flynn
> But even then, it has the potential for disaster, since neither
> couple will really be able to look upon it as "...their very own special
> day."
Of course, some brides and grooms are mature enough to realize that a
wedding isn't a play or a production or a spotlight for the day. It is the
public act of committing to one another, and if four people feel close
enough and share enough preferences and faith foundations, and if they are
mature enough to realize getting married doesn't make them BOSS OF THE
WORLD for a day, I'm sure a double wedding would be incredibly special.
rangitotogirl
> just goes without saying that guests know this fundamental etiquette rule
Um, actually it doesn't go without saying that guests know this rule though
it would be wonderful if it was common knowledge. We received the majority
of our gifts at the wedding when there wasn't enough time to thank the giver
personally. In many instances there was plenty of opportunity beforehand.
For example one of my bridesmaids gave an exquisite stained glass lampshade
that she had made herself. Because she was coming with us she actually
passed it on to someone else to bring to the wedding so we could open it
there. She was staying with me at my parents house and we had lots of time
together with them before the wedding.
It is very true that you are more likely to remember the gifts given prior
to the wedding and who the giver was than gifts given at the wedding, simply
because you are not receiving them en masse. Even when you spend a while
going through the cards and matching them up to the giver, writing the thank
yous etc it's much easier to forget who gave what.
JMH
T Flynn wrote:
You can blame that "restriction" on Miss Manners, Letitia Baldrige, Emily Post and a
host of other etiquette experts.
Puester
>
> Weddings are a lot like live theatre.
>
> In fact, I have had friends ask me to forego standing up in their
> wedding party so that I could be "Stage Manager" for the wedding,
> because I have experience in live theatre.
>
> Now, imaging a big theater, with two stages, with two entirely different
> plays being acted at the same time for the same audience.
>
> That is a double wedding.
Nope. Seems to me it would be better characterized by saying two
sets of actors (double cast) are performing the SAME play on the
SAME stage at the SAME time in a theater built for one play.
I do heartily agree with your "approach with caution" advice.
gloria p
T Flynn
And they discuss a variety of traditions? No, they discuss a specific set
of traditions from a specific group of people. And that's fine and good,
but it's certainly not the be-all-and-end-all of every occasion that
occurs within the US territorial boundaries. If we didn't plan for a
place to put gifts at the reception, it would have been an awkward,
confusing mess; would that have been the most delightful thing to do to
our guests? No, I don't think so. On the other hand, we also received
quite a few gifts mailed to us. Of the mailed gifts, many accompanied
regrets. But that's just a cross-section of Catholics, Lutherans, Irish,
Lithuanians, Germans, Italians, Polish and English people from the
American Midwest, Southwest, West and Europe.
Ron Ng
And sometimes those tastes tend to be very much in tune with one another
>Also i personally think that when it is your wedding day
>you want to shine and be in the center of attention.
As both brides and both grooms would be
>Its great to want to share your day with somebody else
>but instead of sharing your day with another couple, i
>would advise make them part of your wedding (maid/matron of honor, best man)
>that way you can celebrate Their wedding and yours.
Both brides and grooms would be celebrating each others weddings.
And don't forget how much money you save by only hiring one band/dj, one
reception hall, etc. Only a few extra flowers would be needed and assuming that
at least two of the participants are already related, you can also assume that
many of the guests would have been invited to both weddings had they been
separate events - you save on the cost per plate for each of those guests since
you only have to provide one meal instead of two. You might want to hire an
extra photographer and/or videographer.
A double wedding can be a wonderful way to economize and get more for your
money instead of having two separate events within a few months time.
Ron Ng Knows!
Mrs. D
feel the gifts they receive are important, otherwise why would we give
and receive at all?<<
*of course* people feel that gifts are "important", in that it's a very nice
thing to receive a gift. However, the value of that gift is what is
unimportant. If someone gave me $50 instead of $100 because they had another
wedding to attend the week after mine, the amount of cash I actually received
as a gift was completely unimportant to me.
Mary
6/23/01
rangitotogirl
aMAZon
JMH wrote:
Although one would hope that they'd express their best wishes to the
other bridal couple -- that would be gracious, and it wouldn't
necessarily cost anything.
--
aMAZon
zesz...@worldnet.att.net
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."
AlanBu...@webtv.net
bride and groom, and most especially the bride, ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE
CENTER OF ATTENTION FOR THEIR WEDDING DAY!
YES, they are "boss of the world" for that day, and they DO get to say
what they do or do not want in terms of their wedding and reception.
And yes, a wedding is very similar to a play or a pageant. Perhaps
everyone does some of it in a traditional manner, but a large part of it
is done in a style customized to fit the couple.
Colours, flowers, decorations, location, food, and decorum are all at
the pleasure of the couple making the plans.
A barefoot wedding on the beach is no less Godly and sincere than a
formal Wedding Mass in St. Peter's Basilica by the Pope himself.
What IS different is how the couple wants to express themselves to
each-other, and to their guests. But no matter how it is done, the bride
and groom, for just one day, get to call the shots and have things done
THEIR WAY, which I regard that as a completely fair arrangement.
So unless BOTH couples at a double wedding are so in tune that
everything lines up perfectly, which will be exceedingly rare, somebody
has to yield their own ideals for a perfect wedding to the other couple.
That will always make them feel like the Bronze Medalist, the also ran,
the hitchhiker. Like they didn't really HAVE a wedding, they just piggy-
backed on the other couple. That is not a good feeling, and it can cause
enough resentment to strain future relationships.
Double weddings should be approached with caution.
JMH
T Flynn wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, JMH wrote:
> > > Of course, since many areas traditionally still have gifts at the
> > > reception, you weren't addressing the etiquette involved in that
> > > tradition, but that would be because you only have rules for one specific
> > > group's traditions. How very restricted.
> >
> > You can blame that "restriction" on Miss Manners, Letitia Baldrige, Emily Post and a
> > host of other etiquette experts.
>
> And they discuss a variety of traditions? No, they discuss a specific set
> of traditions from a specific group of people. And that's fine and good,
> but it's certainly not the be-all-and-end-all of every occasion that
> occurs within the US territorial boundaries. If we didn't plan for a
> place to put gifts at the reception, it would have been an awkward,
> confusing mess; would that have been the most delightful thing to do to
> our guests? No, I don't think so.
I've concluded that what you champion is the etiquette equivalent of moral relativism. The
reason why it is poor etiquette to bring your gift to the wedding is that it burdens the
hosts to have to haul them home (and if you've ever done this after a long day of wedding
activities, you learn to bless and encourage those that do presend the gift) plus it
focusses undue emphasis on the gift as a required part of being a guest. What you advocate
is that it would be an etiquette blunder for hosts to not cater to their guests' etiquette
faux pas thus making the host the uncivil etiquette breaker rather than the guest who
should have had a little more consideration for the poor family members who have to load
and transport those gifts. Gift tables are there as a courtesy to guests who don't know
any better and it would be wrong to assign the hosts with the responsibilty of having to
supply one since it presumes one's guests are at best ignorant and at worst, deliberately
obtuse about being delightful guests who do not burden their hosts on such a busy day.
JMH
AlanBu...@webtv.net wrote:
> I'm not sure what planet Terri Flynn is from, but here on Earth, the
> bride and groom, and most especially the bride, ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE
> CENTER OF ATTENTION FOR THEIR WEDDING DAY!
>
> YES, they are "boss of the world" for that day, and they DO get to say
> what they do or do not want in terms of their wedding and reception.
Crack that whip! Torture those bridesmaids! Bow to your mistress you
subservient slugs! Don't you know I am Queen of the Wedding Day!
JMH
JMH wrote:
A common courtesy of guests, btw, which transcends all racial, ethnic, cultural and religious
lines since placing the needs of others above yourself is a basic element of good etiquette.
Izzysmydog
happen to show up at the wedding ( and yes, there are always a few that do show
up), where do the guests put the gifts... Handing them to the bride or groom in
the receiving line isn't a good thing... Putting it on the floor somewhere,
isn't good either, it could get stepped on... What is so wrong about having an
empty table somewhere so the few guests who do make that mistake, for whatever
reason, have a place to put the gift... It doesn't have to be a decorated table
but there should be somewhere... I hadn't planned on a gift table for my
daughter's wedding but the hotel coordinator informed me that in Cincinnati a
lot of people bring the gifts to the wedding and that I should have a table
available.. I'm glad I did since they filled that one and another one...I was
glad that she told be about the custom in that city, because I wouldn't have
thought of it since my daughter had already received many gifts at her home...
Melissa
being planned, what often happens is that one ceremony is finished just
before sunset and the other is done just after so, according to Jewish
tradition, each is done on a different day. Traditionally, a bride is
supposed to have 'her day'. Of course, that doesn't mean that she gets to be
a bridezilla, but she is supposed to have special attention focused on just
her for at least a while.
--
Melissa (03/18/01) [who's concerned that this sounds worse than it is and
that it sounds like bridezilla'ism is encouraged]
<AlanBu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:2205-3C7...@storefull-116.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Sherry
Izzysmydog wrote:
> I have a question... If there is no table that is empty to put any gifts that
> happen to show up at the wedding
I didn't plan a gift table either. I had a simple garden wedding at my in-laws home
overlooking the valley where I live. We ended up putting gifts in the spare
bedroom. I hadn't even entertained the thought that I would be receiving gifts that
day.
After our honeymoon it took three trips up to my mother in laws to bring all of the
gifts home. I was grateful for everyone's thoughtfulness, but it would have been
nice to have received the gifts before the wedding.
Sherry
Branden Morris
: AlanBu...@webtv.net wrote:
Isn't there some middle ground in there, somewhere?
If a bride and groom are assembling a group of their family and friends
to witness their wedding and help the celebrate it, the bride and groom
certainly have a responsibility to make sure that their guests are
comfortable, taken care of, and happy. They, or them and their families,
need to be gracious hosts.
On the other hand, the bride and groom are creating and participating in
a very personal and meaningful event. I find it difficult to understand
a mindset that believes that a bride and groom shouldn't 'get what they
want' when chosing the various elements of their wedding ceremony and
reception.
I don't think that "getting what you want for a wedding" and "being a
good host" are necessarily mutually-exclusive, are they?
--
Branden Morris bmo...@lynx.dac.neu.edu
rangitotogirl
> a very personal and meaningful event. I find it difficult to understand
> a mindset that believes that a bride and groom shouldn't 'get what they
> want' when chosing the various elements of their wedding ceremony and
> reception.
>
> I don't think that "getting what you want for a wedding" and "being a
> good host" are necessarily mutually-exclusive, are they?
I agree. I think it is more than possible that you can create a day which
is entirely you and also provide a wonderful day for your guests. If they
are your friends they probably enjoy similar things to you. Just because
you are King and Queen of the day doesn't necessarily make you a slave
master.
I recall one bride who's only wish was for everybody else to be happy, so
instead of making decisions she left things up to other people to decide.
The result was many delayed decisions, one very stressed bride, two very
stressed bridesmaids wondering whether what they wanted was really what the
bride wanted, and I think even one very frustrated groom. The decisions had
to be made and it should have been the bride (and groom) making them, not
others making them on their behalf
I think being king or queen for the day also depends very much on the people
surrounding the bridal couple and I also think it is one of the saddest
things when family dictates how the wedding should be run leaving the bride
and groom feeling like they are attending someone else's wedding. My mum
was wonderful. She helped me so much in the wedding planning, she did offer
ideas but she never forced any thing on me, and she was there for me every
step of the way. It takes so much pressure off when people are in unison
with you and I think when the stress is relieved it means you can
concentrate on having a wonderful day with you and your guests. I guess
what I'm trying to say is if you are close to the bridal couple, help them
along the way, don't try to shut the door in their faces over every idea
they suggest. If you don't agree with some of the things they are doing try
to lead (don't push) them to ideas which you think might work better. There
is a difference
Just my 2c
nikid
LoL
ok i do agree with that the bride is the "boss" for one day but not
to the extent of giving her a whip instead of a bouquet hehe
(maybe an idea for wedding vendors? lol)
but still we all must agree that a wedding is a special day for the
bride and groom, they want everything to be perfect.
otherwise we wouldnt all be in here argueing about the perfect
font for weddings, the entrees, the color and hight of shoes etc.
Niki
nikid
Not that you expect to receive gifts, but because alot of people
just bring the gifts to the reception to many people its a custom.
If you dont like the idea of a big empty table for gifts, so you might
seem like you are expecting them, you can always put your box/basket/etc for
cards in the middle and people can put gifts arround them.
If you have fun decorating your hall you can always spruce that
table up also.
Niki
"Sherry" <sgla...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:3C7127FA...@pacbell.net...
JMH
Izzysmydog wrote:
The pertinent issue is whether it is a faux pas for the host to not provide a gift
table. It's not .
Lesliekaye
Izzy -
I've been wondering this myself ... in that all the etiquette manuals we see
and all the discussions on here... we keep hearing that it is the job of the
hosts to make arrangements for their guests to feel as comfortable as
possible. Therefore, if someone is brought up in a family or area where
folks traditionally take gifts to the reception, would the hosts *not* be
making their guests feel awkward by deliberately not providing that person
with a place to put their gift?.
It's really confusing to me ... and I wish someone could shed some light as
to why, in this case, it is inappropriate to provide for the guests.
Thanks in advance,
Leslie
Noe Spaemme
<lesli...@stargate.net> wrote:
>I've been wondering this myself ... in that all the etiquette manuals we see
>and all the discussions on here... we keep hearing that it is the job of the
>hosts to make arrangements for their guests to feel as comfortable as
>possible. Therefore, if someone is brought up in a family or area where
>folks traditionally take gifts to the reception, would the hosts *not* be
>making their guests feel awkward by deliberately not providing that person
>with a place to put their gift?.
>
>It's really confusing to me ... and I wish someone could shed some light as
>to why, in this case, it is inappropriate to provide for the guests.
It's not necessary to have a table, just a plan for contingent
situations.
In areas where it's just not done to bring gifts at the reception,
there is a person (usually designated by the reception coordinator or
by the hosts) to be in charge of gifts. They politely and discretely
relieve the guest of the gift upon arrival and lock the gift away in a
safe place also making sure to mark the donor's name on the gift in
case there is no card contained within. All quite appropriate and
convenient to the guest.
It would do well for more receptions to have such a designated person.
Then there would be less hassle at the end of the reception and less
chance of theft or breakage.
Hope this helps,
Noe
T Flynn
>
> If you dont like the idea of a big empty table for gifts, so you might
> seem like you are expecting them, you can always put your box/basket/etc for
> cards in the middle and people can put gifts arround them.
> If you have fun decorating your hall you can always spruce that
> table up also.
A great option to a gift table -- especially when one side of the wedding
is like "OF COURSE you mail gifts, you'd be VULGAR to carry them" could be
to have an arrangement with the site where the guest could give the gift
to the HC member or bridal party member or whatever and then the gift is
*put into a lockable or watched room* out of the way, where there isn't a
security problem, and people don't feel like, "wow, I've got the ugliest
wrapping paper here."
T Flynn
> I'm not sure what planet Terri Flynn is from, but here on Earth, the
> bride and groom, and most especially the bride, ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE
> CENTER OF ATTENTION FOR THEIR WEDDING DAY!
Hi. I'm on planet Earth, where a wedding doesn't mean you get to control
everything around you and wave it off as "oh, I get to be the center of
the world because I'm getting married." It's a wedding, it isn't a
Cinderella reinactment. This isn't a Disney production, this isn't your
chance to make other people squirm or look funny, and you have to be nice
to everyone.
> YES, they are "boss of the world" for that day, and they DO get to say
> what they do or do not want in terms of their wedding and reception.
No, they are not "boss of the world." Yes, they do get to determine some
elements of their reception, or even if they're having one, but it makes a
lot more sense that if they really want people to come to their party,
they should make the party accessible, either physically, by not expecting
people to hike to a base camp at 20,000 feet, or logistically, by not
demanding that your whole family who all have kids all drop everything and
not bring the kids. Obviously, if you want a "formal" affair -- and
there's the element of making the party fiscally accessible -- as hosts of
the party, you can go right ahead and do that, just as you can have a
party with no kids or have a party at 20,000 feet, but in real life, here
on Earth, it means the greater the inconvenience, the more regrets you'll
receive. Again, why bother inviting people if you don't want them to
come, and why set up a party where lots of people you want at the party
won't be able to be there?
> And yes, a wedding is very similar to a play or a pageant.
In that any gathering or ceremony has a focal point and an audience, that
may be, but the idea of comparing a wedding to a pageant -- implying that
of COURSE a wedding should be some overblown, foo foo, couplezilla affair
-- is a serious miscommunication. A wedding is a celebration of the
beginning of a new life together. It is not a display or a promenade or a
Las Vegas lounge show.
> A barefoot wedding on the beach is no less Godly and sincere than a
> formal Wedding Mass in St. Peter's Basilica by the Pope himself.
I don't think anyone is arguing any differently. The point is, however, 1.
If you think the wedding is all YOU YOU YOU ONLY YOU, you can focus wholly
on yourself by eloping. 2. If you're throwing a party to celebrate your
union, you become a host and by being a host, you must concern yourselves
with your guests' comfort.
> But no matter how it is done, the bride
> and groom, for just one day, get to call the shots and have things done
> THEIR WAY, which I regard that as a completely fair arrangement.
If a happy couple decides to have everything THEIR WAY with absolutely no
consideration for their guests, they should plan for a lot of regret
responses.
> So unless BOTH couples at a double wedding are so in tune that
> everything lines up perfectly, which will be exceedingly rare, somebody
> has to yield their own ideals for a perfect wedding to the other couple.
Why would it be rare? Don't people have close friendships? Are there no
marriages among similar groups, communities and cultures? Are couples so
despirate to play control freaks for the day that they cannot compromise
for the additional happiness of sharing their big day? I realize on your
planet "sharing" might be a *bad world*, but here on Earth, some people
really like sharing with people they care about.
> That will always make them feel like the Bronze Medalist, the also ran,
> the hitchhiker. Like they didn't really HAVE a wedding, they just piggy-
> backed on the other couple. That is not a good feeling, and it can cause
> enough resentment to strain future relationships.
> Double weddings should be approached with caution.
There's a difference between "double weddings should be approached with
caution" -- and it could easily be pointed out that ALL WEDDINGS should be
approached with caution -- versus how you imply, if not state, that all
couples must control all aspects of THEIR DAY and anything less is
pathetic.
T Flynn
> I've concluded that what you champion is the etiquette equivalent of moral relativism.
That we should make our party a comfortable, gracious experience for our
guests is a relativism? I suppose it may be if the alternative is that
every social function in the US and territories must subscribe only to the
explicit instruction of etiquette books regardless of how awkward or
uncomfortable or confusing or downright mean it might be to guests.
> The
> reason why it is poor etiquette to bring your gift to the wedding is that it burdens the
> hosts to have to haul them home (and if you've ever done this after a long day of wedding
> activities, you learn to bless and encourage those that do presend the gift) plus it
> focusses undue emphasis on the gift as a required part of being a guest. What you advocate
> is that it would be an etiquette blunder for hosts to not cater to their guests' etiquette
> faux pas thus making the host the uncivil etiquette breaker rather than the guest who
> should have had a little more consideration for the poor family members who have to load
> and transport those gifts. Gift tables are there as a courtesy to guests who don't know
> any better and it would be wrong to assign the hosts with the responsibilty of having to
> supply one since it presumes one's guests are at best ignorant and at worst, deliberately
> obtuse about being delightful guests who do not burden their hosts on such a busy day.
Or, again, being remotely acquainted with what your guests have always
done would be a pretty strong quality for a host. That there be a gift
display table isn't a requirement, but because bringing gifts to a
reception is a very widespread practice -- or it wouldn't come up so
regularly -- means that a solution should be provided, be it setting a
room with a convoy of helpers to shuttle boxes, or having a gift table
where people can set the package down without assistance or whatever.
Izzysmydog
reception, there just wasn't any such place that was near the banquet room...
There wasn't a coat room or anything similar... As it wasn't winter, I didn't
even think of a coatroom... I just did the next best thing and had a table at
the side of the room that the people from Cincy sat since they were the ones
bringing the gifts...
T Flynn
>
> A common courtesy of guests, btw, which transcends all racial, ethnic, cultural and religious
> lines since placing the needs of others above yourself is a basic element of good etiquette.
>
Oh, heavens, yes, it would have been MUCH more relaxing to take the bus to
the post office after work or on saturday morning and carry them home on
the bus, then walking a few blocks. Or it would have been incredibly
sweet and thoughtful for the delivery guy to leave the box on the porch
and it would magically get up and walk away. Perhaps I should have taken
a leave of absence from my new job for the month before the wedding to
receive mailed or couriered gifts because it's so convenient?
Mailed packages were very convenient when someone was home to receive
them. Even now, there are some arrangements that building managers or
neighbors can help with, but mailed packages, while a nice idea on paper,
don't always provide convenience or thoughtfulness for the happy couple.
Melissa
> Mailed packages were very convenient when someone was home to receive
> them. Even now, there are some arrangements that building managers or
> neighbors can help with, but mailed packages, while a nice idea on paper,
> don't always provide convenience or thoughtfulness for the happy couple.
>
Sorry, I don't buy this. We had our registry items sent to my husband's
office so that someone would always be there to receive them. A few packages
were sent to the house and we had to go to the post office to get them, but
it wasn't a big deal. Maybe it's just LA, but the postman never left a large
package on our porch ever. Now that we're in a house, he occasionally leaves
a small package on the porch (like checks or a small box), but the box isn't
visible from the street so it seems to be ok. It's not that difficult to
make arrangements to get packages sent to you. UPS and FedEx will re-route
packages sent to your home to another address if you ask them to.
--
Melissa (03/18/01)
Amy and Dave
"Melissa" <mhta...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Hwuc8.8802$zl4.3...@typhoon3.we.ipsvc.net...
What if you don't have another address that they can be sent to? I have
never had a job where I was allowed to receive packages. any time i knew I
was getting a package I had to take off of work and wait for it all day at
home. I almost lost one job due to this.
Noe Spaemme
<dna...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>What if you don't have another address that they can be sent to? I have
>never had a job where I was allowed to receive packages. any time i knew I
>was getting a package I had to take off of work and wait for it all day at
>home. I almost lost one job due to this.
This is a contingency that one must consider before sending
invitations.
Properly gifts are to be sent prior to the wedding. The gifts are
usually sent to the return address on the invitation. If the return
address is not one that cannot accept gifts, then consider using a
mail box service as a temporary address. Then one would probably want
to include an "at home" card in the invitation so guests would know
where the couple will be after the wedding rather than putting the
mail box address in their address book.
This is not an insurmountable or difficult problem. There are many
options one can explore.
Hope this helps,
Noe
Lesliekaye
> office so that someone would always be there to receive them.
Well, your wedding was obviously prior to the life-changing events of Sept.
11, but since that date many companies (including mine) have begun
prohibiting employees from receiving personal deliveries at work. The whole
"suspicious package" and "anthrax" panic has caused this. I think I saw
something printed that said the FBI was recommending companies do this to
protect their employees and their infrastructure.
For brides who are considering having registry items sent to your workplace,
I'd check with your security department first just to be safe.
Leslie
Lesliekaye
> Or, again, being remotely acquainted with what your guests have always
> done would be a pretty strong quality for a host. That there be a gift
> display table isn't a requirement, but because bringing gifts to a
> reception is a very widespread practice -- or it wouldn't come up so
> regularly -- means that a solution should be provided, be it setting a
> room with a convoy of helpers to shuttle boxes, or having a gift table
> where people can set the package down without assistance or whatever.
I'm with you, T. If a host knows that the majority of their guests will
behave in a certain way, it is narrow-minded, if not downright rude for the
host to make arrangements that will cause the guests to be uncomfortable if
they behave in that very way.
It's not like gift tables are some bizarre hick practice that only happens
in the mountains of West Virginia or something. At every wedding I have
attended since I was young enough to remember, family or not, people brought
gifts to the reception. When looking for a reception location for our
wedding, all facilities, even the most upscale in the area, included a table
marked "gift table" on their ballroom layout diagram, along with "cake
table" and "DJ table," etc.
Now they will all say ... "it doesn't make it right just because everyone
else does it," which is true, but, again, if the hosts know darn well that
guests will bring gifts to the reception, pretending that it will *not*
happen is pretty stupid, and inconsiderate of the guests. I would favor
"local custom" in this case, instead of running the risk of alienating all
my guests.
Believe me, I would have much preferred if guests had sent their gifts to
the home prior to the wedding! But I know that people in my family don't
traditionally do this, so we were prepared. As a host should be.
I still never did receive a clear answer as to why the hosts are required to
accommodate for their guests, except in this case only. Noe responded with
what is proper according to etiquette mavens ... but never with a clear
rationale for completely discarding what would make the guests most
comfortable.
Leslie
Noe Spaemme
<lesli...@stargate.net> wrote:
>I still never did receive a clear answer as to why the hosts are required to
>accommodate for their guests, except in this case only. Noe responded with
>what is proper according to etiquette mavens ... but never with a clear
>rationale for completely discarding what would make the guests most
>comfortable.
I'm confused, then. Do you think that having an assigned person to
relieve the person of their gift at the door and taken to a safe place
would make the guest uncomfortable?
Would this not be accommodating the guests? It is a clear solution
which solves a variety of problems when gifts are taken to the
reception.
Best,
Noe
Lesliekaye
> I'm confused, then. Do you think that having an assigned person to
> relieve the person of their gift at the door and taken to a safe place
> would make the guest uncomfortable?
>
> Would this not be accommodating the guests? It is a clear solution
> which solves a variety of problems when gifts are taken to the
> reception.
>
> Best,
> Noe
Having never been to a wedding where I was met at the door by a person who
was there for the sole reason of taking my gift, yes, I would definitely be
uncomfortable, and so would other members of my family who have never seen
this.
I'm just pretending to be walking into a wedding reception with a gift in
hand, and being met by some person who I don't know, who wants to take my
gift from me. I bet the couple we walked in with would feel strange for
having not brought a gift with them so they, too, could give a package to
the "gift attendant." They might be left feeling unprepared.
And what about cards? Most people at our wedding gave us cards. If I have my
card in my purse ... how does the "gift attendant" know this? Surely he
doesn't ask. Maybe I get up later during the reception and look for a place
to put my card and I can't find anywhere ... am I supposed to give it to the
groom? You see, nobody in my family would know how to behave in a situation
like this. I guarantee it. Hence the discomfort.
I thought we weren't supposed to look like we expected gifts, yet, having a
"gift attendant" at the door sure seems a lot more gift grubbing than simply
having a table in the back of the room for folks to place their gift at
their convenience. It's like you can't get in without passing by the "gift
attendant" for admission first.
Perhaps this is because I have never seen this practice in action.
Leslie
Noe Spaemme
<lesli...@stargate.net> wrote:
>Noe Spaemme <rita...@usa.net> wrote in message
>> I'm confused, then. Do you think that having an assigned person to
>> relieve the person of their gift at the door and taken to a safe place
>> would make the guest uncomfortable?
>>
>> Would this not be accommodating the guests? It is a clear solution
>> which solves a variety of problems when gifts are taken to the
>> reception.
>>
>> Best,
>> Noe
>
>Having never been to a wedding where I was met at the door by a person who
>was there for the sole reason of taking my gift, yes, I would definitely be
>uncomfortable, and so would other members of my family who have never seen
>this.
Really? This surprises me. It's quite simple. Like saying, "Welcome...
may I take your coat?" Usually at the point, the guest says, "Where
can I put this gift?" The greeter/attenant/designatef person would
say, "I'd be happy to take care of that for you."
>I'm just pretending to be walking into a wedding reception with a gift in
>hand, and being met by some person who I don't know, who wants to take my
>gift from me. I bet the couple we walked in with would feel strange for
>having not brought a gift with them so they, too, could give a package to
>the "gift attendant." They might be left feeling unprepared.
Typically, the guest asks where to put the gift. If the guest is
looking around quizzically, the attendant is to say, "May I help you
find something?" Then the guest volunteers he's looking for a place to
put the gift.
>And what about cards? Most people at our wedding gave us cards. If I have my
>card in my purse ... how does the "gift attendant" know this? Surely he
>doesn't ask. Maybe I get up later during the reception and look for a place
>to put my card and I can't find anywhere ... am I supposed to give it to the
>groom? You see, nobody in my family would know how to behave in a situation
>like this. I guarantee it. Hence the discomfort.
Yes. The card is supposed to be given to the groom. But I can't
imagine you sweating bullets over what to do with a greetings card.
There is always the option of mail.
>I thought we weren't supposed to look like we expected gifts, yet, having a
>"gift attendant" at the door sure seems a lot more gift grubbing than simply
>having a table in the back of the room for folks to place their gift at
>their convenience. It's like you can't get in without passing by the "gift
>attendant" for admission first.
Or walk past the gift table without feeling you're supposed to have
brought another gift even though you might have sent a gift ahead of
time?
>Perhaps this is because I have never seen this practice in action.
I think that's probably the case. New ideas or ideas that go against
what you've been exposed to can seem quite foreign. But I can assure
you that in practice, it works to everyone's benefit and I've never
heard a complaint about it. Most guests are relieved to know that the
gift is going to a safe place rather than left out in the open where
goodness knows anything can (and occasionally does) happen.
Hope this helps,
Noe
T Flynn
> Sorry, I don't buy this. We had our registry items sent to my husband's
> office so that someone would always be there to receive them.
And then I'd have to lug presents home on the bus? That would be awkward.
Or we could have them sent to where my husband teaches, but since that's
just full of teenagers, heaven only knows what would happen there.
>A few packages
> were sent to the house and we had to go to the post office to get them, but
> it wasn't a big deal. Maybe it's just LA, but the postman never left a large
> package on our porch ever. Now that we're in a house, he occasionally leaves
> a small package on the porch (like checks or a small box), but the box isn't
> visible from the street so it seems to be ok.
And that's great, but we have had large boxes left on the porch. Fwoomp,
there it is. It could be that the third class stuff -- I vaguely think it
was a bulky but light object -- might get delivered whether you're home or
not, but the heavy stuff goes back to the PO?
> It's not that difficult to
> make arrangements to get packages sent to you. UPS and FedEx will re-route
> packages sent to your home to another address if you ask them to.
But the fact is, last July, I didn't have a reasonable place to do that.
Places of business do often frown on personal mail, especially in volume,
and since I do most of the errands, it would be awkward to drag stuff on
the bus. I realize there are offices that are very liberal about
accepting packages, as I was in one through 2000, but packages through
mail is *not* the most convenient way to go in all instances, which makes
that "convenient for the host" argument go out the window. At least
with packages at the wedding, there was a car (or three) that I didn't
have to come with a shopping cart on the bus. I know that's what it says
in the etiquette books, but that doesn't mean it's the most thoughtful,
nicest thing to do.
Mrs. D
was there for the sole reason of taking my gift, yes, I would definitely be
uncomfortable, and so would other members of my family who have never seen
this.<<
Do you think, maybe, that you *have* been greeted at the door by a person who
was there solely for the reason of accepting gifts but this person was so good
at their "job" that you weren;t even aware that that was his job???
In my experience, the person who does this is very unobtrusive and, if you
don't have a gift, you wouldn't even know why he's there.
Mary
6/23/01
nikid
well knowing myself, if I go out and buy a gift for someone
i would like to give it personally.
I dont really go out to the postoffice to mail a gift that I could give
to them in person.
in these days of email, fax etc.. I love it when someone makes an effort to
give me a card or a gift personally and my friends and relatives feel the
same way.
Also I also have the fear of having the thing be broken when it arrives.
Sure there is such a thing as fragile stickers and insurance. But still its
not the same.
your advice for making a card with a mailbox make you seem
greedy.
as if you are saying "YO I rented a mailbox so just keep the gifts comming!"
Just my opinion
Niki,
"Noe Spaemme" <rita...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:er857u02qbhue84n1...@4ax.com...
nikid
and i have never seen the practice of someone taking the gifts from
the guests.
also since alot of times I am the only person in the room with a tux on (i
wish there were more feminine tuxes out there but thats a diff topic ;-P) I
automatically get asked the main questions "where are the rest rooms, where
are the place cards, etc" and *drumroll*
the number one question is ..... Where is the gift table?
you can not deny the fact that people always have and probably
always will be bringing gifts to a reception.
Several times when there wasnt a gift table, I overheard the early guests
argue with eachother "I feel like such a fool to bring this gift here <enter
name> now we are stuck with this thing all night" ; "But <enter other
persons name> look that couple over there brought their gift too.. maybe
they know what to do..."
Now THAT is feeling uncomfortable.
as for the cards, i dont know how it is where you guys live but
where I live and DJ, alot of times there are little baskets or mailboxes or
cardboard "wishing" wells (which can be bought or hand made) that are
designed for people to drop in their cards.
just my experience.
Niki
"Lesliekaye" <lesli...@stargate.net> wrote in message
news:u75s5nf...@corp.supernews.com...
Noe Spaemme
>umm properly?
Yes, properly. Taking the gifts to the reception creates a burden on
those who have to transport them away afterward. It creates a burden
trying to insure that any semi-attached card stays attached to the
correct gift. It creates a burden in insuring that the gifts are
secured so as to prevent theft. It creates a burden to the couple who
will be spending their first two weeks home from the honeymoon writing
thank you notes for gifts which should have been sent prior.
>well knowing myself, if I go out and buy a gift for someone
>i would like to give it personally.
>I dont really go out to the postoffice to mail a gift that I could give
>to them in person.
Whoa... do you really expect the bride and groom to stop what they're
doing at the reception so they can receive and open your gift on the
spot? Do you expect the bride and groom do to this for every gift that
might be taken to the reception?
>in these days of email, fax etc.. I love it when someone makes an effort to
>give me a card or a gift personally and my friends and relatives feel the
>same way.
Soooo, if someone were to send you a card, a letter, a gift through
the mail you'd not be as happy as if they personally appeared on your
doorstep with it?
>
>Also I also have the fear of having the thing be broken when it arrives.
>Sure there is such a thing as fragile stickers and insurance. But still its
>not the same.
The chances of the gift being broken when taken to the reception are
far greater. And there's no insurance for the brother-in-law who
tripped and dropped it on the way to the car.
>
>your advice for making a card with a mailbox make you seem
>greedy.
>as if you are saying "YO I rented a mailbox so just keep the gifts comming!"
What are you talking about? I suggested if someone has problem with
mail delivery that they get a box at a mail service which is equipped
to handle such things. That's not at all unreasonable or greedy. In
this age of mailbox and identity theft, it's even far more practical,
not only for receiving gifts which surely will arrive, RSVPs and other
wedding correspondence. We recommend that brides take out a mail box
when planning their weddings to handle the hug influx of junk mail
that comes when word gets around they're planning a wedding. One
subscription to a bridal magazine can realize an amazing amount of
junk mail. Once the wedding is past, the box can be closed out and the
bride's home is free of continuing junk. It's imminently practical and
not at all greedy. I would be very interested in how you arrived at
the conclusion that it is greedy.
Hope this helps,
Noe
Noe Spaemme
>hmm ive done a couple of hundred weddings,
>and i have never seen the practice of someone taking the gifts from
>the guests.
>also since alot of times I am the only person in the room with a tux on (i
>wish there were more feminine tuxes out there but thats a diff topic ;-P) I
>automatically get asked the main questions "where are the rest rooms, where
>are the place cards, etc" and *drumroll*
>the number one question is ..... Where is the gift table?
To which if handled correctly, someone like you could point to the
proper person and say, "He'd be happy to take care of that for you."
Then the designated person would relieve the person of the gift and
put it away.
>you can not deny the fact that people always have and probably
>always will be bringing gifts to a reception.
I do not deny it. That doesn't make it a good practice. And there are
ways to make it easier for all concerned.
>Several times when there wasnt a gift table, I overheard the early guests
>argue with eachother "I feel like such a fool to bring this gift here <enter
>name> now we are stuck with this thing all night" ;
And the bride and groom bear the responsibility for the actions of
their guests which make them feel foolish? Hardly. But I remain
convinced that having a person who takes care of the gifts is far more
preferable than a table with a mountain of gifts for a plethora of
reasons which I've previously stated. It relieves the guest of their
foolish burden without making non-gift bearing guests feel foolish for
having done the correct thing by sending the gift to the couple prior
to the wedding.
"But <enter other
>persons name> look that couple over there brought their gift too.. maybe
>they know what to do..."
>Now THAT is feeling uncomfortable.
>as for the cards, i dont know how it is where you guys live but
>where I live and DJ, alot of times there are little baskets or mailboxes or
>cardboard "wishing" wells (which can be bought or hand made) that are
>designed for people to drop in their cards.
I'm really trying to understand this: getting a mail box to handle
wedding-related mail is greedy, but setting up a box at the reception
designed for the same isn't? Sorry, but this doesn't make a bit of
sense. Perhaps you can explain more in detail why it's not greedy to
set up "wishing wells" specifically for the purpose of cards and
perhaps you can explain why it's necessary for such cards to be taken
to the wedding rather then sent to the home where it is far more safe.
>
>just my experience.
In your experience, you've surely seen frazzled parents wondering how
the heck they're going to get all those gifts in the car and to the
HC's new home. You being witness to this so many times, I'm honestly
surprised that you advocate taking gifts to the reception. It really
is quite inconsiderate.
Hope this helps,
Noe
Lesliekaye
> may I take your coat?" Usually at the point, the guest says, "Where
> can I put this gift?" The greeter/attenant/designatef person would
> say, "I'd be happy to take care of that for you."
I am just curious ... but is this designated greeter person a family member
/ friend or member of the hotel / hall staff? I've never encountered anyone
like this at anything but a business luncheon or charity-type function ...
and if I needed to hang my coat, I would look for a coat rack or check. I
wouldn't hand it off to some stranger.
My husband and I were talking about this ... and he mentioned that he would
feel uncomfortable giving the gift to a stranger. I agree with him.
> Typically, the guest asks where to put the gift. If the guest is
> looking around quizzically, the attendant is to say, "May I help you
> find something?" Then the guest volunteers he's looking for a place to
> put the gift.
Ok, I get this part, but I'm picturing my reception hall, which had an
entry-way where things like the guest book and place cards were ... and the
reception area was adjacent to the entry way. Does the greeter stand in the
entry-way or in the reception area? Because I wouldn't look for a place to
put my gift until I got inside the reception area.
> Yes. The card is supposed to be given to the groom. But I can't
> imagine you sweating bullets over what to do with a greetings card.
> There is always the option of mail.
When I say we received a lot of cards, I do mean A LOT. Like, at least 50. I
can't imagine what would be more inconvenient ... having a card box that was
locked with a key that guests could put their card in at their convenience,
or having to carry 50 cards (most with money inside) around in my jacket all
night.
Not to mention the awkwardness guests may feel if they are on the "bride's
side" and had never met the groom ... having to walk up to him during his
wedding reception to give him a card. This would take up a lot of the
groom's time during the reception. Like I said, we had at least 50 cards.
> Or walk past the gift table without feeling you're supposed to have
> brought another gift even though you might have sent a gift ahead of
> time?
At our wedding, and on most diagrams I saw throughout the planning process,
the "gift table" was in a back corner of the room. Not in a high-traffic
area.
> I think that's probably the case. New ideas or ideas that go against
> what you've been exposed to can seem quite foreign. But I can assure
> you that in practice, it works to everyone's benefit and I've never
> heard a complaint about it. Most guests are relieved to know that the
> gift is going to a safe place rather than left out in the open where
> goodness knows anything can (and occasionally does) happen.
It still doesn't appear *that* much more convenient since someone still has
to take the gifts home at night. I guess I don't see what the major
difference is between having them on a table in the reception room and
having them in another room in the same building. If the gift table is in a
back corner of the room and a groomsman or a member of the waitstaff is
assigned to watch it all night, it will be relatively safe. Either way, the
gifts will all still have to be loaded up into someone's car that night.
For us, my DH's parents took all the gifts home with them in their van, and
kept them at their house until we got home from our honeymoon. When we got
home, we opened all the gifts at his parents' house. It worked out well.
I understand your side and I'm not saying "my way" is right ... just saying
it works for us because this is what my family has done for years and it is
what they are used to.
Leslie
Noe Spaemme
<lesli...@stargate.net> wrote:
>Noe Spaemme <rita...@usa.net> wrote in message
>> Really? This surprises me. It's quite simple. Like saying, "Welcome...
>> may I take your coat?" Usually at the point, the guest says, "Where
>> can I put this gift?" The greeter/attenant/designatef person would
>> say, "I'd be happy to take care of that for you."
>
>I am just curious ... but is this designated greeter person a family member
>/ friend or member of the hotel / hall staff? I've never encountered anyone
>like this at anything but a business luncheon or charity-type function ...
>and if I needed to hang my coat, I would look for a coat rack or check. I
>wouldn't hand it off to some stranger.
>
>My husband and I were talking about this ... and he mentioned that he would
>feel uncomfortable giving the gift to a stranger. I agree with him.
It doesn't have to be a stranger. It would be an usher or other
attendant. It should be someone the guests will feel comfortable with.
An experienced concierge-type person would likely work in cases where
the hosts don't want to press the attendants into additional duty.
>
>> Typically, the guest asks where to put the gift. If the guest is
>> looking around quizzically, the attendant is to say, "May I help you
>> find something?" Then the guest volunteers he's looking for a place to
>> put the gift.
>
>Ok, I get this part, but I'm picturing my reception hall, which had an
>entry-way where things like the guest book and place cards were ... and the
>reception area was adjacent to the entry way. Does the greeter stand in the
>entry-way or in the reception area? Because I wouldn't look for a place to
>put my gift until I got inside the reception area.
That's an individual logistics question. It's whatever works best for
the location and other factors.
>
>> Yes. The card is supposed to be given to the groom. But I can't
>> imagine you sweating bullets over what to do with a greetings card.
>> There is always the option of mail.
>
>When I say we received a lot of cards, I do mean A LOT. Like, at least 50. I
>can't imagine what would be more inconvenient ... having a card box that was
>locked with a key that guests could put their card in at their convenience,
>or having to carry 50 cards (most with money inside) around in my jacket all
>night.
>
>Not to mention the awkwardness guests may feel if they are on the "bride's
>side" and had never met the groom ... having to walk up to him during his
>wedding reception to give him a card. This would take up a lot of the
>groom's time during the reception. Like I said, we had at least 50 cards.
This is why I think they should be mailed. A box is just too easy for
some "well-meaning" person on the wait staff to walk out with during
the hub-bub of dancing and so on. It happens. More than we like to
think.
But when cards are given to the groom, he hands them off to his best
man who secures them elsewhere. The best man is charged with seeing
the cards are kept safe until your return. The groom is not supposed
to spend the evening with a jacket full of cards.
>> Or walk past the gift table without feeling you're supposed to have
>> brought another gift even though you might have sent a gift ahead of
>> time?
>
>At our wedding, and on most diagrams I saw throughout the planning process,
>the "gift table" was in a back corner of the room. Not in a high-traffic
>area.
Problematic. Too easy for gifts to walk off when they're out of the
way. Again, this happens more than we like to think.
>> I think that's probably the case. New ideas or ideas that go against
>> what you've been exposed to can seem quite foreign. But I can assure
>> you that in practice, it works to everyone's benefit and I've never
>> heard a complaint about it. Most guests are relieved to know that the
>> gift is going to a safe place rather than left out in the open where
>> goodness knows anything can (and occasionally does) happen.
>
>It still doesn't appear *that* much more convenient since someone still has
>to take the gifts home at night. I guess I don't see what the major
>difference is between having them on a table in the reception room and
>having them in another room in the same building. If the gift table is in a
>back corner of the room and a groomsman or a member of the waitstaff is
>assigned to watch it all night, it will be relatively safe. Either way, the
>gifts will all still have to be loaded up into someone's car that night.
It's logistics for one thing. The gifts can be dealt with the
following day if the family chooses and if the location permits the
safe lock up of gifts overnight. Some will do this.
It's also about not making those who came empty handed feel bad by
seeing the gift table which silently beckons... "Put a gift on me...
put a gift on me..."
>
>For us, my DH's parents took all the gifts home with them in their van, and
>kept them at their house until we got home from our honeymoon. When we got
>home, we opened all the gifts at his parents' house. It worked out well.
For many it works out just fine. There are alternatives which could be
and, in many cases, should be explored. Having a gift table is not the
only way to go about it nor is it always prudent.
>I understand your side and I'm not saying "my way" is right ... just saying
>it works for us because this is what my family has done for years and it is
>what they are used to.
And I'm not about to say you did anything wrong. I'm suggesting that
in many cases, there are ways to minimize the hassle of leaving the
parents to haul the gifts away, minimize breakage, minimize theft,
minimize cards becoming separated from the gift. And my very first
suggestion is that guests send gifts to the HC prior to the wedding.
Hope this helps,
Noe
nikid
> To which if handled correctly, someone like you could point to the
> proper person and say, "He'd be happy to take care of that for you."
> Then the designated person would relieve the person of the gift and
> put it away.
lol i think their hands are glued to the thing and as they do not know me
and know me only as "the DJ-lady"
they would not trust me with this
> In your experience, you've surely seen frazzled parents wondering how
> the heck they're going to get all those gifts in the car and to the
> HC's new home. You being witness to this so many times, I'm honestly
> surprised that you advocate taking gifts to the reception. It really
> is quite inconsiderate.
hmm no because they were prepared for this,
considdering that after the wedding you usually
have to take all the decorations that you wish to keep home also
as with the leftover cake, and all the other stuff
I heard parents and Brides and Grooms
complain about that
never have i heard em complain, about the gifts
The parents usually fuss about how to get that dang arch appart so
it fits through the door ;-P
as for the wishing wells, its not something you HAVE to buy or rent
i have seen severeal nice ones that were hand made,and as i said
you can just use a little wicker basket. Also a 99cent card
is hardly to be compared to a gift, and the people who bring the cards to
the
reception and hand em to the bride and groom,
hmm I know i wouldnt feel comfy walking arround with all those cards.
Crystal Dreamer
"nikid" <ni...@ptd.net> wrote:
>
> as for the wishing wells, its not something you HAVE to buy or rent
> i have seen severeal nice ones that were hand made,and as i said
> you can just use a little wicker basket.
My future Mother in law sells Avon. She made a wishing well out of an avon
box and it turned out very nice. First, she sprayed the entire box in
offwhite spray paint, and let dry. Then she covered the box in lace, and
spraypainted over the lace in lavender. After the paint dried, she peeled
off the lace and there was a gorgeous design left on the box.
She then cut a hole large enough for a few envelopes to slip through on the
box lid, and set it on the box. Two dowl rods were inserted ontop of the
box, parallel to each other. She made a "roof" using two rectangle pieces
of styrofoam and two triangle pieces. She then painted the styrofoam the
same way the box was painted.
Lavender lace was hot glued onto the edges of the "roof" and two paper
westminster bells were hung at an uneven length in the center of the roof.
If anyone is interested, I'll try to get a digital picture of it.
--
~Crystal Dreamer~
http://www.mydreamcake.com
rangitotogirl
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 07:53:04 GMT, "nikid" <ni...@ptd.net> wrote:
>
> >umm properly?
>
> Yes, properly. Taking the gifts to the reception creates a burden on
> those who have to transport them away afterward.
Yes it does
>It creates a burden
> trying to insure that any semi-attached card stays attached to the
> correct gift.
Yes it does but this is not insurmountable
>It creates a burden in insuring that the gifts are
> secured so as to prevent theft. It creates a burden to the couple who
> will be spending their first two weeks home from the honeymoon writing
> thank you notes for gifts which should have been sent prior.
Umm, actually there's often more time after the wedding than before...
>
> Whoa... do you really expect the bride and groom to stop what they're
> doing at the reception so they can receive and open your gift on the
> spot? Do you expect the bride and groom do to this for every gift that
> might be taken to the reception?
>
We made time to open our gifts with the assistance of our bridesmaids. We
couldn't open the whole lot as that would have been rude but we spent about
10 minutes or so opening them. There are also many guests who just love
seeing the gifts that people give. I guess this makes them rude.
res0ogrn
> > Um, no it's not. The only proper way to give wedding gifts is to send
them to
> > the intended recipient well before the wedding.
Ummm no. Not here anyway. Almost everyone brought presents to every single
wedding reception that I have ever attended. Some even bring them to the
church! I would think it odd to mail anything before the wedding, unless
you knew you would not be attending. People just assume you bring the gifts
to the reception. Sometimes the bride and groom even make time to open them
there! This whole "proper" way to give is bizarre to me. It must be a
regional thing that does not extend to anywhere near where I, or anyone that
I know, lives.
rangitotogirl
single
> wedding reception that I have ever attended. Some even bring them to the
> church! I would think it odd to mail anything before the wedding, unless
> you knew you would not be attending. People just assume you bring the
gifts
> to the reception. Sometimes the bride and groom even make time to open
them
> there! This whole "proper" way to give is bizarre to me. It must be a
> regional thing that does not extend to anywhere near where I, or anyone
that
> I know, lives.
Ditto, the only ones over here that ever seem to give gifts prior are the
bride and groom's immediate family. The bridal party even ended up giving
their gifts to someone else to cart along to the reception even though it
would have been far simpler for everyone including them to have given them
earlier.
stompergal
the reception, then the families cart them home...then the brides mother (or
other family member) has a 'brunch' the day after for the bride/groom to
open all the gifts....
This is how we are doing it...Although I think most people give money, not
gifts. Those that are not attending the wedding usually send a gift / card
through the mail.
"rangitotogirl" <rangit...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:c_bq8.1085$Og6.1...@news02.tsnz.net...
Ron Ng
>other family member) has a 'brunch' the day after for the bride/groom to
>open all the gifts....
How VULGAR!
Ron Ng Knows!
Ron Ng
>wedding reception that I have ever attended.
How VULGAR!
> Some even bring them to the
>church!
How VULGAR!
>People just assume you bring the gifts
>to the reception. Sometimes the bride and groom even make time to open them
>there!
How incredibly VULGAR!
Ron Ng Knows!
Lesliekaye
> Ummm no. Not here anyway. Almost everyone brought presents to every
single
> wedding reception that I have ever attended. Some even bring them to the
> church! I would think it odd to mail anything before the wedding, unless
> you knew you would not be attending. People just assume you bring the
gifts
> to the reception. Sometimes the bride and groom even make time to open
them
> there! This whole "proper" way to give is bizarre to me. It must be a
> regional thing that does not extend to anywhere near where I, or anyone
that
> I know, lives.
This is an ongoing argument on this newsgroup, similar to the cash bar
debate. I can tell you that my background is the same as yours, where people
in my family always bring gifts to the reception. Planning a wedding and
pretending that they *won't* bring gifts to the reception when you know damn
well that they will is rude, IMHO.
I received several gifts at home before our wedding, however, and actually
wished all my guests had done this. Most were sent from folks out of state
who were flying in and it would have been difficult for them to take a gift
on the plane. It was nice, though, because I was able to write the thank you
note in a prompt manner and I knew the gift was safe in my home.
But people are different. My advice on this is to do what you and your
family are used to. It worked out beautifully for me.
Leslie
T Flynn
> But people are different. My advice on this is to do what you and your
> family are used to. It worked out beautifully for me.
And if one family's customs differ from the other, go with the more
conservative. If one family always mails and the other family always
brings, it might not be a bad idea to make sure there's a non-display-type
area for the carried-in presents.