Martin, Judith, and Jacobina Martin - Miss Manners' Guide to a Surprisingly Dignified Wedding

[oyceter]

I read this because despite having been to several weddings, I can still never quite figure out what to do/what you're supposed to do. This is even more confusing now that I am part of sister's wedding party and therefore have things to do that extend beyond the day of the wedding.

This book was written with the notion that today's weddings have now become massive, expensive events in which the bride selfishly makes demands of everyone because it's "her day." I have, as I'm sure some of you expected, some issues with this. Given that this is Miss Manners and not a book on gender roles and social commentary, I'm okay with the fact that she doesn't unpack this more, but I'm also disappointed that it simply goes with this cliched view of weddings and brides. This is not to say that selfish brides don't exist, but I think the narrative of the selfish bride handwaves how much USian society pressures women to view their wedding day as The Biggest Day of Their Entire Life, how so much of the traditional female narrative is being male person's noun (brother's sister, father's daughter, son's mother, etc.) and this is still within that frame but at least focuses on the woman, how there is so much pressure for the bride to plan the whole damn thing herself with the groom supposedly not having any input or help, and etc. So yes, selfish brides exist, but on the other hand, condemning them for selfishness while ignoring all these other factors annoys me.

Also, as you have probably noticed, I keep using the terms "bride" and "groom." This is because although the book acknowledges same-sex marriages, it's very much written with heterosexual pairs in mind. Miss Manners is supportive of same-sex marriages, but the way the book is written, it's very..."things don't exist unless readers bring them up." There's a very standard narrative in place, and the book does not break out of it unless prodded to do so. This was an excellent example for me of authors who probably want to be inclusive but are unintentionally exclusive because they don't think outside the norm.

For example, I kept reading advice on how good brides who are not selfish will take their parents into account and such. Which, yes, great if you have a good relationship with your parents. Not so great otherwise. It's also very whitebread American culture, despite Miss Manners' acknowledgement of other cultural traditions.

I was particularly irked by her annoyance at people who solicit funds and money at bridal showers and weddings and etc. One reader made a point that sometimes it is cultural, but the only response was that if the bride's mother was writing to Miss Manners about it, obviously it wasn't cultural enough. And I am all for her aghastness at people's behavior, except in variations of my culture, you give money at weddings. And when you have weddings that include both the older generation and a younger, more Americanized generation, I don't actually think it's rude or whatnot to talk about present giving, because people are confused!

But this may just be me, and after all, this is why I picked up the book in the first place.

Other than that, it is a perfectly nice book, but it is a much more interesting read as a sociological artifact of a particular time and culture. And its presentation of itself as "etiquette" makes it even more jarring to read than historical fiction would be.

Comments

[lady_ganesh]

This is, I think, one of the reasons my family practice is to Give Stuff. Because then no one knows how much you spent and it's the thought that counts, right? (Also, my grandparents came from Not Much and were very good at putting things together, crafting, etc.)

[troisroyaumes]

Well, obviously I can't speak about other cultures, but in my culture, it's also a very well-established tradition (older than the cash-giving) for the two families to exchange certain types of gifts before the wedding, and the fact that no one knows how much was spent has certainly not stopped engagements being broken because the gifts in question were not high enough in value. People's abilities to create conflict are endless, regardless of whether it's cash or goods.

My mother and her acquaintances range from working to lower middle class; they're also pretty resourceful at putting together gifts when non-cash gifts are appropriate. But giving a gift instead of cash would not really be appropriate at the Korean-American weddings they attend, especially since the type of wedding gifts that are usually given in U.S. culture are traditionally given by the parents of the couple. Honestly, it sounds as gauche to me as I'm sure cash-giving sounds to other people. My parents avoid the drama over cash by just not attending weddings where they know they can't afford the kind of cash that is expected. /shrugs

[lady_ganesh]

People's abilities to create conflict are endless, regardless of whether it's cash or goods.

That is so true.

[telophase]

And the corollary to Giving Stuff, which is to Give (non-homemade) Stuff and then never inquire as to why you haven't seen the Stuff displayed or used in their household, as the point is more-or-less to allow the couple to get cash discreetly and gracefully by returning the Stuff to the store.

[lady_ganesh]

Indeed. That's harder with couples from out of town, though easier with the rise of chains.