Wedding guides
Dear Andy
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponI'm torn about The Bridesmaid's Survival Guide. On the one hand, a quick glance at the promotional material reveals to the trained eye exactly what is afoot. It is in no way meant to help bridesmaids. Its only purpose is to keep one more ink-stained wretch from ever again having to write videocassette blurbs or software advertising copy. Given the depths of grimace-inducing humor she was able to reach, this desperate woman has very likely done hard time standing outside a burning building thrusting a tape recorder at someone watching their every possession reduced to cinders and forced herself to ask, "How do you feel Mrs. Jones? Quickly, now--I'm on deadline."
Even the best among us have written drivel to put food on the table. So, I've got her back, but only to a point. Surely even writers have prostitutional limits. On the one hand, my hat's off to her for coming up with such a clever and fiendishly simple book idea. On the other, how can I respect someone capable of titling a chapter: "Showers (Without Soap Scum Buildup)." Get it? Or, my personal favorite, as determined by factoring in both sheer gall and willingness to mystify: "[When china shopping with the bride], leave the plastic at home. Of course I mean credit cards, but if you habitually eat off throwaway paper chinette with plastic utensils, be sure none of those have made their way into your purse either. Digging around for a lip liner and coming up with a plastic fork instead could induce an urge to marry for the wrong reasons." What does that even mean? Writer to writer, I think we both know it means that she assumed the bridesmaids receiving this little gag gift at the bachelorette party would either be too busy dry-humping the stripper or too drunk to ever snort-giggle their way as far as Page 52.
Here's where I lose all sense of solidarity with her though--why bother to thank her parents "and the rest of my family for their love and prayers," as if this were a serious endeavor? It's like the gangster rappers or nearly naked, pelvic-thrusting girl singers who thank God on the awards shows. That always seems just a little weird to me. I mean, when she writes something substantive (and there's no reason to think she can't), she'll say that again and the words will be meaningless. I have every intention of writing a blockbuster, thinly disguised screenplay/novel so I can become fabulously wealthy and live in a mansion with servants. But what I will not do is pretend that it's serious literature that college students will write their theses on. It's always so annoying when actors do the talk show circuit promoting Booty Call 2 and Beautiful Teens With Way Too Much Money Whining About Nothing at Ridgemont High and we all have to pretend to take it seriously. "I was totally Julie," one of these twits enthused to Jay Leno recently. Julie's boyfriend was mean to her. Then she got a makeover and he was, like, really sorry. So yeah, she probably was totally Julie. Just once I'd like to hear an actor in some afterthought of a movie say, "Listen, I wore fab clothes and used half my brain in that role. It paid the bills. But now I'm working on something serious and demanding." I won't hold my breath. McDermott, the author, should have just thanked her agent, her publisher, and an indulgent public, and called it a day.
I guess it's because of the Vermont civil union announcement and the Gay Pride festivities I just attended, but Martha Stewart's massive tome on weddings struck me as in-your-face hetero, militantly conservative. Given that many gay men surely find her to die for, she might not want to alienate such a potentially lucrative market (you know it's true). Sometimes that stance wickedly works for her in courting gays: "If you or someone you love said yes, let America's wedding experts help you create a day as romantic as the day he asked." But then there's: "Martha Stewart ... [has] guided brides down the aisle, onto the dance floor, and over the threshold with thousands of ideas for making their wedding day unforgettable." Here's a weird passage: "Our goal ... is to provide anyone planning a wedding with inspiration and ideas that will help her create an unforgettable day." Why not "any bride" or "any woman"?--she rarely assumes men add much at all. Why isn't it "their" unforgettable day? Does she think women are supposed to do all the work? Does she think men don't care about their weddings, that big, hairy sweaty men can't tell nosegays from gardenias? Maybe she thinks that if they can, they're gay, and God forbid they should use her books.
Throughout planning our wedding, I was continually struck by how surprised our vendors were to have me remain in the background and how little people expected to tend to Scott. Everything was "the bride, the bride, the bride," while they tried to give him a magazine and send him off to the couch. Did you feel you were treated like a goofball or a nuisance, too? That's the gap that The Knot is trying to wedge itself into; it touts itself as the only wedding guide that caters to both brides and grooms. It's a gimmick of course, niche marketing, but at least there's a real need undergirding the money lust. I think men are going to be more involved all the time, and rightfully so.
I can't help being offended by Martha's book. Our wedding was just that--ours. We built it together (though he did the nuts and bolts), and it was beautiful. Our friends and families are still talking about it. It was the best day of my life. I resent, even figuratively, the way she blanked Scott out. Its like a Martha Stewart bride marries herself.
Unselfishly,
Debra
P.S.: I remembered last night that Scott and I chose nearly all our vendors from www.washingtonian.com. They have a section of the site devoted purely to wedding info. It was a real timesaver. They weren't the cheapest around (the listees were compiled from surveys of the magazine's readers), but we felt confident that the wheat had been separated from the chaff. That mostly held up. Since we have no relatives in the area to help, we had to do it all ourselves while both holding down jobs. It was brutal and we just didn't have time to test drive companies plucked from the Yellow Pages. They gave reliable estimates and the pros and cons, culled from the survey responses. Extremely helpful.
This week, a discussion of the new spring crop of wedding guides, including The Knot's Complete Guide to Weddings in the Real World (click here to buy it), The Knot's Ultimate Wedding Planner (click here to buy it), The Best of Martha Stewart Weddings (click here to buy it), and The Bridesmaid's Survival Guide (click here to buy it). Andrew Ward is the articles editor of Esquire. Debra Dickerson is a senior fellow at the New America Foundation; her memoir, An American Story, will be published in September. 
The Tea Party Protesters Are Getting Smarter
Lithwick: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's Trial Is a Lousy Place To Examine the Legality of Torture
Who Is Mrs. Cohen From Hadera, and Should Israelis Care Where She Puts Her Money?
What Wired, Esquire, and Hooters Magazines Think You Should Give for Christmas
Save the Planet. Eat More Brie.
How Easy Is It To Hike Into Iran Accidentally?
Reader Response from The Fray--to be read after the final entry:
It should come as no surprise that weddings were originally about fulfilling certain obligations--the groom gives the bride a ring to show he has the cash to provide for her, the bride's family kicks in a dowry (and/or a big party) to make it all worth the groom's while. Like quite a few other things in our society, once we stop doing things for purely economical reasons, merchants have stepped in to convince us to do things for "personal" reasons. And how better to demonstrate our individuality than by our taste in clothes, floral arrangements, music, food and so forth? In many respects, the modern wedding is a perfectly condensed version of an American consumer's life. Everything from who we invite--the people we like, the people our parents insist on, the people our parents want to impress--to what we feed them reveals how thoroughly we believe that the way we spend our money illustrates our best, most admirable qualities. If we splurge on an open bar, we are generous hosts. If we choose an elegant venue, we have exquisite taste. If we serve a sumptuous meal, we appreciate the good things in life.
Here is my most recently-uncovered piece of commercially-produced wedding lore. After the First World War, the De Beers diamond mining concern wanted to bulk up its sales. In England, diamonds were considered stuffy and overly-aristocratic. In France and Italy, diamonds were completely unfashionable, and in Germany, they were having some economic problems that made the likelihood of creating demand extremely unlikely. In the late 20s, De Beers hired an ad agency to create an American ad campaign. Out of the thin blue air, a series of ads created the universal perception that diamonds have been the timeless expression of human love throughout the ages, that a diamond engagement ring is the single best expression of commitment and love one human being can offer another, and that every bride-to-be of taste, distinction and means sports a diamond engagement ring. Before the campaign, diamond engagement rings were not especially popular. Less than 40 years later, 75-85% of all brides wore them. Another example of the power of advertising: In 1968, less than 5% of Japanese brides wore a diamond ring, by 1981, nearly 60% did.
--Katewrath
(To reply, click here.)
(5/8)
For the last year, we've been creating our special day. We now have 18 days to go. We are both dead tired and want this over with. What I've learned is this: Weddings are for florists, cake bakers, photgraphers, DJs, jewelers, tent rentals, caterers, and oh yes, the Couple. The biggest winners? The florists. They profit so enormously from your sudden interest in nosegays, bouquets, and table vases--it's downright criminal. It would definitely be cheaper to have the wedding party carry and wear dollar bills than the wilting delights a florist creates. The photographer comes next. In both cases, we recognized you are not purchasing bulk flowers or asking Uncle Leo to shoot a few rolls. Florists and photographers are artists. But the mark-up is steep. (I coulda swore I didn't dress up for our first visits with these guys.)
The traditional wedding has become such an unreal fantasy paid for by third party family members, the prices charged for everyday objects become dizzying. We have often felt like vulture yummies. We did not find any bridal books worth recommending, and bridal magazines for brides-to-be are like cocktail magazines for recovering alcoholics. Readers run the serious risk of falling off the reality wagon.
--Al
(To reply, click here.)
(5/11)