Miss Manners.

Tears at weddings often far from joyful

May 04, 2005|By Judith Martin.

Weddings still make people cry, Miss Manners has discovered. But not, it seems, for the traditional reasons.

The spectacle of an innocent young couple inspired by love to leave the homes and protection of their respective parents and create an irrevocable bond used to set off the sensitive souls among their guests. When people of experience create a negotiable bond subject to cancellation, it may still be touching, but perhaps not to a tear-jerking extent.

However, among the people associated with modern weddings, there are still plenty on the verge of tears:

The bride, because she has spent a year planning this wedding, and has discovered that the flowers for the table are a deeper pink than she ordered and don't match the sashes on the bridesmaids' dresses.

The bridegroom, because he has had a lonely year and is not sure the solution to it is that events planner who has been ordering him around.

The mother of the bride, because she has been told that she didn't put enough money into the wedding to entitle her to have any opinions about how it should be conducted.

The father of the bride, because he has been told that he couldn't bring his second wife, who is home crying.

The mother of the bridegroom, because she has been forced to wear a dress in a color she hates.

The father of the bridegroom, because he paid for his daughter's wedding in its entirety and has now been told that tradition demands that at his son's wedding, he pay for a dinner party for the entire guest list the night before and for all the liquor being consumed during several days of festivities.

The bridesmaids, because their time, money and patience has been freely consumed for events, clothes and demands to which they never consented.

The groomsmen, because they've had too much beer all week. (The bridesmaids have had just as much, but they hold it better.)

The guests, because they realize they have blown their vacation time, as well as great sums of money for transportation, hotels and several rounds of presents, in a place and with a crowd they haven't chosen, only to stand around doing nothing while the wedding pictures are being taken.

The bride's colleagues, because they had to chip in to give her a shower, and they weren't even invited to the wedding.

So who, exactly, is enjoying this ordeal?

Miss Manners still believes in happy weddings, and has been to more than a few. But she is beginning to understand why observers of the wedding scene--other than those who are there for love or money--assert that there is an inverse relationship between the elaborateness of the wedding festivities and the success of the marriage. A number of sociologists, divorce lawyers and members of the clergy have been quoted remarking that the more lavish, complicated and prolonged the arrangements, the more likely the marriage is to end in divorce.

Here is what makes her teary: The spectacle of a couple--perhaps not so young and not so innocent but nevertheless in love--who feel obliged to devote untold amounts of time and money to producing an elaborate festival that is beyond their experience and capacity and leaves everyone cranky.

Dear Miss Manners--If one is in the shower or bathtub when a visitor knocks at the door, is it permissible to don a bath towel to let them in? What if the visitor happens to be a relative?

Gentle Reader--Forgive Miss Manners for asking, but, ah--were you expecting anyone?

If not, do you really want to open the door to a stranger when you have no clothes on? But if you were expecting someone, why aren't you dressed yet?

The only relatives who would qualify for an exception are those who shout, "Honey, I'm home! Let me in! I forgot my key," or those to whom you plead, "Ma, please, I keep asking you to call and tell me when you're coming."

