![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oyceterI 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.
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.
(no subject)
Sun, Apr. 8th, 2012 04:35 am (UTC)This is what I love about online registries -- the couple says what address they want the stuff to be sent to, so all I have to do is choose an item off the registry and pay for it, and the shipping and delivery location are all taken care of, easy-peasy.
When I was in college and an acquaintance was getting married, I also liked that online registries provided the option of buying one wineglass out of a desired set of eight, because it meant I could afford to get him and his spouse a present. A lot of the college crowd did that, buying one or two items that were part of a set, and the couple got their eight wine glasses and six plates and whatever the heck else they wanted, in the end, without any of us overstretching our budgets.
Random other online registry stories: when a classmate and a TA from college got married, I heard about it from a mutual friend, and because they had an online registry, I was able to buy them a present. I'm not sure they remembered who I was, though, because I never got a thank you note. It was sort of an impulse purchase. Online registries --> bonus presents from acquaintances!
On the flip side, when two of C's friends got married, we looked at their registry and decided there was nothing on it that we wanted to buy for them (90% fancy kitchen stuff that this couple would never have used). When they moved to CA, we got them nice wine instead, which they liked.