Submitted by Victoria McMagnus on Thu, 02/28/2008 - 17:33.
Getting married is a major event in anyone's life - but for many people the wedding itself is the focal point. People plan the event for months, sometimes years, and women fuss about the smallest details of their dress and that of the bridesmaids and pageboys; the flower arrangements; the food, the reception and so on. They get their inspiration from celebrities who they want to emulate, so that they too can be a star.
The average cost of a wedding in the UK is £17,000 and in the US $28,000. Only a quarter of those weddings are paid for by parents, according to a US survey.
Even the Church of England has become so alarmed by the insane overspending and materialist obsession around weddings that it produced a booklet, "Making the Most of Weddings," saying that people should spend far less and be more environmentally responsible. The Church rightly points out that the meaning of marriage has been lost through the "spend, spend, spend" culture. In a rare example of down-to-earth common sense from the Church, they advise that brides should go so far as to consider buying their dress from a charity shop, hitching a ride and having guests at the reception bring along their own alcohol!
The mega-wedding is a crazy modern trend, and it is good to see ecclesiastical opposition to it. Yet people go ahead with these shows in their millions, and they are organized in Churches regardless of the disgust of the clergy carrying out the ceremony. And the clergy is probably too polite to have a word with the couple in advance.
The cost and the spectacle does put some people, either bride or groom, off being married, if they are being pressured into it, adding to the likelihood of remaining unmarried permanently. Other brides, however, seem to be so keen on being the center of attention at the nuptials - being a princess for the day - that the event itself becomes their main reason for getting married!
Many feel humiliated if they don't make a costly impression on friends and family, as if it would make them seem to be lesser people. Yet, the duration of the marriage is generally in inverse proportion to the cost of the wedding. Possible reasons for this: starting marriage off in heavy debt; the sheer stress of the event; the anticipation followed by the anticlimax of returning to normality and then, the kind of people who want to have a big, vulgar wedding. Such people are egotistical materialists with personalities ill suited to long term cooperation in a relationship.
If an expensive party would ever be justified, it would surely be better deferred for a ten year anniversary, to celebrate success. A family reunion is good in that it can help a couple bond with their tribe and some kind of cultural sense of belonging also. This sounds unlikely amongst westerners, but you can imagine it mattering greatly to some other more traditional people.
Marriages are the business of families yet, since we marry for love rather than duty, it is far more romantic to have a quiet ceremony with only a handful of close relatives/friends attending. Really that is so much classier!
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
What rs2112 said
We got married seventeen years ago. It was around Valentine's day (which we didn't realize), so no flowers to be had. But there was nice greenery on the tables. Ribs, catfish and sides from a local BBQ joint, tabbouleh from a Lebanese restaurant, cakes from the bakery down the street (no wedding cake). Total cost about $15/guest. My wife wore a dress that had been owned by her grandmother. The wedding was in a local Irish pub, and we were out in time for the afternoon crowd. The Irish band that was setting up did a few numbers for us for a few extra dollars.
It was a great wedding with no consultant, no umpty thousand dollar once-in-a-lifetime dress, no gift registry, none of the Wedding Industry crap.
A year and a half ago two of our dearest friends got married. I performed the ceremony. My wife stood in for the bride's family and kept her from bolting. The whole thing was done at the groom's aunt's house. The women cooked. It was beautiful and memorable.
On the other hand, my sisters' weddings were huge, elaborate, hideously expensive and done at a hotel that specializes in that sort of thing. The brides were frazzled. The grooms were confused. The whole thing had a cookie cutter feel. And they had to be run by a consultant who had to have been at least half border collie. It was more an exercise in conspicuous consumption running on rails than a celebration of their marriages.
So true...
I was married in 2006. I was very proud of the fact that my wife and I decided to go "low-key". We didn't overspend on silly invitations, just something conservative which also looked nice. We weren't concerned with seatback covers or favors. We had the reception at my parent's house with lots of yummy appetizers, no full meals at $100 or more per plate. No tent, everyone came through the front door and relaxed inside the house for the most part. We were married in a small, famous New England chapel. The best part? People are still talking about what a great time they had - in my opinion, because we "forced" family members not used to speaking to each other, and new in-laws, to mingle with one another instead of sitting in separate tables, grouped together and yet lonely, in some huge, white, cold room with zero feeling attached to the reception. At the reception, the men went outside to smoke cigars and celebrate w/ me; the women were congratulating my new wife, and people just had a great time because we were accessible to them and not at some grand master table sitting above everyone in the most condescending way imaginable. And yet people continue with their silly, $100K-plus ceremonies suited for 17th century royalty. I loved this article, it really resonated with me. Good work Victoria!