Miss Manners on 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 blog
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 blog