posted Wed, 06 Sep 2006
The Bodacious Red-headed Pediatrician and CheeseGuy have mailed their wedding invitations. It is going to be a lovely, lovely event. A lovely, grand, grown-up event. They worded everything so diplomatically: “Adult reception to follow.” That’s very well done, don’t you think? You may take your children to the wedding if you wish, but the reception is for the grown ups. Just in case you couldn’t figure it out from the time – wedding at 6:30.
It’s a Jewish wedding, and I think they’re like Catholic weddings in that they last a little longer than five minutes. Some of the Protestant weddings I have been to have been very efficient. I’ve never been to a Jewish wedding, but I believe there is some ritual involved, so I think the ceremony will go on past 7:00. Which puts the reception starting no sooner than 7:30. Which means it’s definitely not a kids’ thing.
Not that I have a problem with children at a reception in theory, but this isn’t my party. I’m not paying for it. I’m not making the rules. A bride and groom should be able to have the wedding they want (especially if they are paying for it) and it’s perfectly reasonable to say “no kids.” I hope they don’t get any grief over this.
Actually, they should be able to say “no kids” in the ceremony itself. At my friend “Deborah’s” wedding, a crying toddler interrupted the first reading. As in his mother was supposed to do the reading but as soon as she walked up the aisle toward the altar, he started screaming. She heaved a big sigh – Oh no! Her child couldn’t be without her for one moment! Wasn’t she important! – and turned back. The sacrifices she made for motherhood! Her husband (brother of the groom) did the reading instead, I think. I don’t know why it didn’t occur to her to have someone watch the kid during the ceremony – or take him outside for that part – because she had to have had a pretty good idea this would happen. Actually, she did – she even warned us about the possibility. But then she wouldn’t have had the satisfaction of upstaging the bride, who was marrying the “successful” brother. So it all worked out for her in the end.
Back to BRHP. The invitation is elegant – gold letters on maroon card stock. The reception is going to be elegant. Last line of the invitation states, “Black tie optional.” Yay! A chance to dress up. Let’s see how many people actually do. I think this is a subtle hint to people not to dress like slobs. Not that everyone will pick up on it. For Stephen and Leigh’s big winter party in February, they put “cocktail attire” on the invitation – and people still showed up in jeans. True, some were dressed to the nines – suits for the men, smashing dresses for the women, but others were in jeans. And not even high-fashion jeans with heels and slutty, sparkly tank tops or the male equivalent, high-fashion jeans with a dark sweater and jacket. Just jeans, tennies and a t-shirt. That, my friends, is not cocktail attire. That is cleaning out the residence where the cock lived before the tail was pulled attire.
SH and I were talking about the reception and what to wear. “I have a tuxedo,” he said. “It might actually fit me now that I’ve lost 16 pounds—“
I cut him off. This is where he goes into his little soliloquy about how easy it’s been for him to lose weight and all he’s had to do is drink less beer and how he never exercises and wow, would you look at that! down 16 pounds since he met me even though it seems like he eats way more than I do but I work out all the time and have to watch everything I eat and isn’t that weird! This is not a speech that seduces, for any men who are reading.
“Is it a good tuxedo or one of those nasty ‘70s prom tuxes?” I asked.
“No, it’s nice!” he laughed. I shouldn’t even have asked. SH always dresses very well. He has a tremendous sense of style – except for the mustard and the orange shirts and I’m working on getting rid of those.
The working life: The rat race
2 days ago