Brief Knitting Content and Miss Manners on Wedding Websites
I'm almost done with the main knitting on my vest; I'm working on the last pocket, and then it's just a spot of seaming, a mad wrestle with the button band (not looking forward to that), and the traditional whining at The Weaving-In of Ends. Good times will be had by all; photographs will be had soon.
Miss Manners and Wedding Websites:
So I was reading my local paper (AJC) and found today's Miss Manners' column thought-provoking. The reader question is about wedding websites; the reader describes what sounds like a typical wedding website, comments on the slick, overly-produced nature of it (in his/her view), and asks
Is this a new trend? Is the romance gone from weddings in the name of slick merchandising of the couple hoping to take in a truckload of gifts? Does one assume there will be a prenuptial agreement, too? It is all so showbizzy. I'd enjoy knowing what you think about it.
Miss Manners' response acknowledges the usefulness of the wedding website as a place to disseminate information that might have bulked up the invitation, but then goes on to say
The unlimited space on the Internet seems to have turned everyone into the person no one wants to sit next to on the airplane. And beyond the widespread general desire to pour out their lives and thoughts to all and sundry, lovers are notoriously susceptible to believing that they are the center of the universe and the envy of all.
Of course, they are influenced by show business. Do you think the couple has spent that long engagement gazing at each other? They have been working on the set, the costumes, the make-up, the props and the extras (that's you, the wedding guests).
So they not only create the promo but include a sort of illustrated fan magazine story about themselves.
Thoughts? When I read this, I felt that she had articulated a problem I've been unable to put my finger on as I go through this process, a sense that the material, keepable pieces of wedding representation today (the invitation, the photography, the website) feel to slick to me, too staged (even as the "journalistic" style of photography wants to be unstaged). But then I consider that we have an unprecedented amount of control in the process today that we couldn't have had even 10 years ago; we can create invitations and other paper-elements with our computers and easily print them on high-quality photo printers. We can set up a website specifically about our wedding, giving our guests an easy access point for wedding information, with links to hotels, registries, and other services they may need to access to attend the event successfully. We can share components of our special day with relatives who are living in different places with ease, and the assistance of vendors (like photographers who offer web access to photos--and ordering) makes it possible for Aunt Petunia to purchase (if she chooses) and entire set of photos to remember the special day.
And it just makes me feel so dirty. It's too slick, too plastic, too produced. I look at photographer's websites and the magazine-ready photos of real weddings make them seem unreal to me. They feel like so much style over substance, but I'm sure to the participants they feel like a real representation of their weddings and themselves--don't they?
cross-posted at my lj
Comments
I had no idea you had an LJ... or did I?
Posted by: Tipper | October 21, 2007 04:05 PM
I think if overdone it feels too slick and produced. Lots of folks want that for some reason. I too blame the celebrity-itis and the "I'm more special" mentality. But what's so special about having a wedding just like everyone else's? Nate and I had a very perfunctory (but pretty) wedding website in 2004, mostly b/c our invites were for a destination wedding and were done on postcards. We are cheap and efficient.
Posted by: Melanie | October 22, 2007 08:15 AM
You know, I have never been a wedding person. I personally loathe a big production and all the hoopla and stress that goes with it. I think that sometimes people get so caught up int he *presentation* of the wedding, that they sometimes forget the whole point of what it's about.
I recently got remarried. It was the second time around for both of us. We decided to get married at the courthouse. It was the best thing we could have ever done and the focus was on the *reason* we were getting married. It was fantastic.
Just my 2 cents. :)
Posted by: grace | October 22, 2007 03:01 PM
I understand where a website might be helpful, but honestly? If someone's invited to your wedding, they should know you well enough that you don't have to "tell them your story", and if Uncle Joe needs directions, isn't he more likely to call Aunt Jane than find your wedding website (because he'll have lost the Save the Date card with the wwww addy, anyway).
There are ways to have a wedding without it being an overly orchestrated event, lacking in feeling. Choosing things that reflect your personalities is key; having fun is crucial. I am sure (after meeting you once!) that your choices will be perfect for the two of you and convey the love and caring you have for each other.
Posted by: elizabeth | October 22, 2007 04:48 PM
just another person to agree with all that's been said. While I can see the appeal of the website, in terms of efficiency and information, it does leave things feeling slick. I have been to so many overly produced, overly catered weddings that I am hoping my girls either 1.elope or 2. have backyard weddings
Posted by: ann | October 22, 2007 05:20 PM
One of the best things about our wedding was getting to see and talk to people that we don't get to see and talk to every day. If everyone had a website to look everything up on, then I wouldn't have gotten the "I'm so excited for you! We're coming to the wedding! Yay!" as well as the "We can't come to the wedding! Boo-hoo! But tell me everything anyway!" phone calls and emails. And missing that would have been a drag.
Posted by: Monica | October 24, 2007 01:46 PM