<p>Personally not feeling judgmental here at all, just trying to answer questions about what is commonly considered to be a host’s responsibilities to his her her guests at a private affair. In real life I’d say nothing at all unless specifically asked for my input. </p>
<p>I’ve been to scores and scores of weddings - I have had a great time at almost all of them. I definitely don’t judge or turn up my nose because someone doesn’t do things the way I would do them, and know how to go with the flow, live and let live. But when the subject comes up in an anonymous forum, I think it’s fair game to share accepted social conventions and the rationale behind them. </p>
<p>I would not want any guest of mine at a private affair whether at home, or in a club, restaurant or catering place to feel that that he or she is not offered the same choices as the person with cash in hand. It offends my sensibilities as a host and goes against all common standards of courtesy and etiquette, IMO. As a guest, I would never, ever say a word about the cash bar in the corner to the host or anyone else.</p>
<p>That’s a fair point, roshke. I would not have considered a guest as wanting to have a drink but not having the money for it. If that were liable to be the case, that would be bad. Not sure it would be often, but I guess it could be.</p>
<p>I see nothing wrong with an open bar at a wedding. At my daughter’s wedding we had a raw bar and champagne cocktails an hour before the reception started; there was also wine with dinner. After dinner, there was an open bar until 9 pm. We had to end the wedding at 10 pm because of zoning issues (venue was on the beach near a residential area). Young people went on for an after party to another venue (house) that we rented for the bridal party to stay. My D and son-in-law provided the alcohol for that event.</p>
<p>All I’m saying is that if I couldn’t afford to pay for alcohol, I wouldn’t have a cash bar. I would have what I could afford and I would not ask guests to pay for alcohol. Changing the venue from my home to a restaurant or another function hall doesn’t make a difference to me–I’d still want to cover costs of food and drink for my guests. </p>
<p>To answer a question above–yes, I have been to weddings where there was no alcohol. Mentioned one in my previous post. Also, my sister-in-law had no alcohol at her wedding–she and her spouse had religious prohibitions against it. Both were very lovely weddings.</p>
<p>I’ve been to weddings with a cash bar–last one was 3 years ago (H’s administrative assistant). She had a champagne toast and then a cash bar for everything else. It was a very nice wedding in a very expensive and elegant venue, which, I imagine, was why she went with the cash bar.</p>
<p>Id be happy with water,we dont drink enough plain water anyway (& besides, those happy cookies make me thirsty.) jk While I like to have champagne for toasting, it isnt a requirement & I would like to think that if I am a close friend / relative of the happy couple, I can have a good time with whatever beverage they choose to serve.</p>
<p>For those people who refuse to attend an event without alcohol, can you explain your reasoning?</p>
<p>“No bar” doesn’t necessarily mean no alcohol at all. I’ve been to weddings where waiters passed around signature drinks on trays or where they serve <em>a</em> glass of wine or champagne to the tables for the toast. There were no bars at those. Have also been to some where there was an open bar, but only for the duration of the cocktail hour.</p>
<p>The only alcohol served at our wedding was a bottle of scotch per table. The wedding party toasted with sparkling apple cider. Didn’t hear any complaints and many many hundreds attended. Have since attended many e nets where there is a single or sometimes two bottles of wine per table. Open bars are infrequent in our social circle.</p>
<p>I wish the couples at many weddings I attended had cut the open bar and sprang for live music instead of that awful DJ music if money was an issue.</p>
<p>Yikes, good thing you guys were not invited to my wedding. Well, actually, many of you would have loved the first one: fancy place, open bar, sit down dinner, live band… But the second one, the one that has lasted 25 years-plus? My, huge faux pas, multiplied. We were in a restaurant, Sunday brunch, around 2 pm. Did you know champagne is included with Sunday Brunch? Awesome! That’s why we chose that time. We also provided a case or two of wine. Anyone who wanted to buy a drink could do so as they wished, if they wished. No big deal. I guess, according to some of you, we were wrong to have a “cash bar.” Sorry, I don’t agree.<br>
I’ve seen the money dance a few times, and I think it’s cute. But, paying admission to a Jack and Jill party? Ridiculous!
I went to a pot-luck wedding once, at a winery in Napa. Wine was free, but the guests brought the food! I brought fruit salad, I remember. Honestly, it was lovely, we all loved the bride and groom, and had a wonderful time. Most of us had to drive at least one hour to get there. The groom was a musician, most of his friends brought their instruments, and there was a lot of great jamming and dancing. There are many different ways to have a lovely wedding. I wouldn’t worry too much about the etiquette.</p>
<p>All (or virtually all) Quaker weddings are potlucks. It’s tradition. We don’t think the family, and certainly not the bride and groom should have to worry about. We don’t have a minister (or, to be more precise, we are all ministers), so there is no minister to pay. The space is free, or by donation. I’ve seen a few with some minor music, but again, rarely paid musicians - usually friends. We take the marriage under the care of the Meeting, and that includes all of the arrangements. We all sign the wedding certificate (even the kids).</p>
<p>I think a potluck would be great. It not only is budget conscious but it allows the guests to participate and even share something from their own family traditions if they want to.</p>
<p>I think it’s easy to say “Cut costs elsewhere” if you are having a raw bar plus champagne (not that there’s anything wrong with that), but if your entire wedding budget is a few thousand dollars, including the gown and tux, with a guest list of immediate family and close friends, there isn’t anywhere to cut costs. Yes, you could give up the inexpensive but nice venue and have it in a park, but I deeply resent the notion that only wealthy people deserve to have a roof over their heads at their weddings. </p>
<p>Etiquette is about making people feel comfortable and welcome, not about flaunting your wealth. No version of etiquette I ever learned (mostly from my country-club attending, yachting grandparents) ever involved requiring middle-class people to choose between aping the customs of their wealthy counterparts or acting like paupers. </p>
<p>I suspect that many of us who are functionally okay with a cash bar see alcohol as an extra, not as a part of the deal - like comped parking. (In Boston, this can be a very big deal.) Other people think that booze is intrinsically part of the meal, and a cash bar is like asking people to pay for their sides or iced teas.</p>
<p>Frankly, of all the wedding sins out there, a cash bar bothers me the least. I hate dollar dances; asking people for money; shaking down your friends with multiple showers (engagement party, wedding shower, Jack and Jill party, bridal tea - all for the same wedding); destination weddings; and expensive bachelorette parties, planned by the bride and paid for by her minions, whoops, attendants. </p>
<p>Compared to all that, “We’re having a champagne toast, but if you want more, the bar is in the other room” is so absurdly mild - and sensible, for various reasons - that I simply refuse to get worked up over it.</p>
<p>Why does saying I wouldn’t choose to have a cash bar imply that I think only “people with money should have a roof over their heads”–I don’t think that at all. My position is that people should do what they can afford and what makes them comfortable. If they want to have a cash bar that’s fine. I’m not casting a judgment on people who make that choice. I was simply stating my preferences.</p>
<p>I 100% agree. I’m only 25 and I have no plans to get married for a long time, if at all. If I ever get married, I would want something very very small with close friends and immediate family. I think it would even be fun go to go to Vegas and get married. I think it is foolish to spend $25k, $50k, etc. on a wedding when that money could be spent on a down payment on a house.</p>
<p>I never understand all of the parties just for a marriage. What’s the big deal with making a spectacular event out of two people getting married- when 50% of them will get divorced? If you want to get married, get married. You just shouldn’t expect people to pay to watch you get married.</p>
<p>How is entertaining within your means equivalent to " acting like paupers".?</p>
<p>CTTC, I could not find the " skipping the church " part you are referring to, could you explain?
I had my wedding outdoors & my reception in a church( only trust June Seattle weather so far), albeit the church had many past lives including a funeral home, it was however where my fathers memorial service was held.
But you dont need a church to have a meaningful wedding.</p>
<p>Fun?
I dont understand what that means either.
To me, the ritual& perhaps slowish parts give more meaning to the lighthearted parts.
You need all of it.</p>
jk While I like to have champagne for toasting, it isnt a requirement & I would like to think that if I am a close friend / relative of the happy couple, I can have a good time with whatever beverage they choose to serve.</p>