My younger D is going to be the maid of honor in the wedding of a high school
friend. The future bride and groom live in Chile (the two met when the bride was there for a college foreign study
program–the groom is from Chile). The bride decided to have the wedding on Martha’s Vineyard. She has no ties to the island and has never been there–although she is from Massachusetts and went to college in Boston.
The bride’s view was that since many of the guests will be coming from Chile, it would be more interesting for them to be on the island than in the town where she grew up, which is lovely, but basically a small New England town with not much to see or do. Does this meet the criteria of destination wedding? If she had the wedding in her hometown would that be a non-destination wedding? If I am staying overnight to attend a wedding, I think it’s a destination wedding.
When DS’s classmate got married a few months ago, his GF and her family flied 8000+ miles to go to that classmate’s wedding. The destination is literally on the other side of the globe. It is likely just a trip which serves two purposes: their family’s annual vacation and going to the wedding. This is because they are really not “that close.” They just “stopped by” (and likely gave them the gift) for half an hour only for the wedding.
If they did not choose that destination, they might choose another destination for vacation because they take this kind of long distance summer vacation quite often.
“They’re free to choose to have it there, but I think they are concerned that people won’t go, and if that’s a big concern, I’d argue that they should be having it in their home state. (I don’t think they’re at all obliged to make it so people can go, but if having a lot of people there is a priority, they should think about that)”
To me it doesn’t seem at all unusual that if bride is from city A and groom is from city B but they now reside / live / work in city C that they get married in city C. I’m from the generation where a woman got married “out” of her home town, but I was also 21. I think that’s changed and city C would make perfect sense - and maybe having their young city C friends is more important than Great-Aunt Bertha from A and Cousin Whatshisnane from B.
"The bride’s view was that since many of the guests will be coming from Chile, it would be more interesting for them to be on the island than in the town where she grew up, which is lovely, but basically a small New England town with not much to see or do. Does this meet the criteria of destination wedding? If she had the wedding in her hometown would that be a non-destination wedding? "
To me, yes, that’s exactly the distinction. To me a destination wedding isn’t defined by how many people need to travel - all the Chilean folks need to travel one way or the other. It’s defined by whether the location is one where they have ties or not. It’s not a value judgment to me. Just a definition.
Re: “Many of the guests will be coming from Chile.”
According to this link, Chile is one of the countries in the Visa Waiver program with the US. So at least the guests do not need to apply for the visa to enter the US:
It is interesting that only 38 countries have such an agreement with the US.
Both of our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, are not one of these 38 countries. Why is that (especially Canada)? DS visited Canada early this year; I think he did not have to apply visa to visit Canada. (He happened to have an unexpired US passport and used it to go back and forth between US and Canada.)
I heard of a joke about Canada and US: Old and retired US citizens like to go to Canada (some may like to live there if they can spin it due to its perceived or real social services, some poor US citizens may like to visit there to buy their cheaper drugs.) However, younger Canadians like to come to US to find a job.
To add on to my earlier post, the travel for a non-destination wedding may be as burdensome as the travel for a destination wedding (may even be more burdensome - getting to a small town in the middle of nowhere may be harder than getting to a resort where there are frequent flights, airport shuttles, rental cars, etc.). I think they are just different choices these days.
I think the stereotype of a destination wedding used to be “selfish bride and groom just want their dream wedding in their dream locale and they’re making everyone else shell out their hard-earned money and vacation days on THEIR location” but I think as it becomes more common, the stereotype is changing. It seems like it’s case by case depending upon where the bride, groom, family and friends are located.
"As for would I rather travel to a resort with nice amenities than a “boring hometown” wedding, I think with hometown weddings, where the bride and/or groom grew up, where they know the vendors or perhaps even have friends doing the flowers, catering, etc. would be far more personally meaningful than a slick resort. "
I was married in my hometown (or more accurately where I had gone to high school and where my parents lived), but I didn’t “know the vendors” (flowers, music, etc.) til we went and selected them. They weren’t meaningful people in my lives or anything. I was married at a hotel that had recently opened (indeed I think my wedding may have been the first one held there), but again the venue didn’t mean anything to me. I don’t think “being in one’s hometown” necessarily means that the vendors are BFF’s.
As for the friends doing the work, etc. – I have to say, I think this is a new trend I’m not really crazy about, this expectation that your friends should be doing the work of your event, as if they have nothing better to do with their time than stuff your goodie bags or handwrite your place cards or whatever. I can see if someone volunteered, esp if they had professional skills (for example, I have a relative who bakes / decorates cakes professionally and so she’d offer to do a cake as her present), but there seems to be a new bridal trend of this assumption that your BFF’s all want to do work for you and I don’t get that.
Yeah well it seems to be the new bridal thing. In my day when we were bridesmaids our job was to throw and/or attend showers and look pretty for the camera on the wedding day. We weren’t goody-bag stuffers or favor-makers or place-card makers or table-setters or table-cleaners. We weren’t workers; we were guests!
In my mind, if the wedding is at a place that I need to travel to get to, like the bride’s home town or current town etc. I think of that as an “out of town wedding.” I think of a destination wedding as a resort or vacation area where everyone travels and stays at the resort, but no one involved actually lives or has ties there. The location is as much part of the event as the wedding itself.
Never heard of the bridesmaids being expected to do the work for a bride’s wedding. Maybe its a regional thing. Now that said, when my DS got married a few months ago, the hospitality bags arrived the DAY BEFORE the wedding weekend! Her mom had boxes of stuff from costco lined up in her living room and sheets with the nametags to be put on the bags. We (she, I ,bride-to-be, very pregnant sister of bride-to-be and a family friend) stuffed all the hospitality bags (there was one for every wedding attendee/couple). It was a labor of love.
The wedding was across country for us, but that is where they live. The wedding was driving distance from where they live, but it was a somewhat long drive (maybe 1 1/2 to 2 hours or so) so some people coming to events all weekend chose to stay closer to the venue. Some drove back and forth. There were many out-of-towners. I wouldn’t call it a “destination wedding” and I think thats what some peoople are getting hung up on.
Speaking as one who will be the MOB in 3 1/2 weeks - as I mentioned upthread there is nowhere the wedding could be held that did not involve travel for most people invited. We did consider immediate family but it is just not possible to consider the situations of 200 people. That said some folks will not be attending due to finances/health issues/work/other commitments/new babies, etc.
D’s wedding date was set 2 years ago. We kept our fingers crossed that all of the grandparents would be able to be there but sadly lost my much loved FIL last spring.
It is what it is. My plan is to relax and celebrate the occasion!
My SIL had her wedding in her home town, where her parents still lived. She was on the other coast. It made for lots of extra logistical work for her parents and for her maid of honor who called herself “slave of honor”.
I think it is nice to take the needs of guests into account–especially the “must-have” guests like close family and people you are asking to be in the wedding party. This includes cost, health, mobility, and time.
I think a lot of people have weddings in somewhat destination-y settings that are reasonably close to where one of the people lives (we had our wedding in Manhattan, for example, even though my wife’s family lived on Long Island). I don’t see that as very problematic. My concern is really with the idea of having your wedding in some remote location, even though you know that means that Grandma won’t be able to come.
“Are they obligated to choose the one that will be least costly for guests?”
@Marian Obligated to the guests? No. (If they’re obligated to anyone it’s the closest family they absolutely want to be part of the wedding.) But it’s a NICE GESTURE to offer hotel options at different price points. That should apply to both at-home and destination weddings.
I’ve been to a 5 weddings in the last three years (friends’ kids and a niece) and I think that most couples today are really considerate of their guests. For all of these weddings, the couples had wedding websites that include all sorts of helpful information about the wedding site–how to get there, where to stay (with lots of options), what to do, etc. Back in the day (I got married 34 years ago) generally all a guest received was an invitation. I appreciate having information readily available and certainly the internet (which wasn’t available back then) has made it easier for couples to provide their guests with information.
Ah, I see some confusion about what I meant referring to friends doing the flowers or knowing the vendors. For my first wedding, my sister’s and my brothers, all of which were in my hometown, my PARENTS knew many vendors. So our flowers were done by a shop my parents used for everyday flowers, my brother’s reception at a restaurant owned by his new FIL’s friend, my catering done by a friend of dad’s business. That’s what I meant, not the Sue will be making kleenex flowers or Jimmy grilling hotdogs for the meal. I know that Dad’s and the in-laws’ business connections made it easier to chose vendors. Oh, and my first wedding location was a well-known park famous for it’s beauty. It was a popular wedding location in our town, but also held fond memories for me as a place we used to play. A pretty park in some random town would not have meant the same. My sister got married at a venue run by her new FIL. It saved my folks so much money and was very lovely. I just don’t see that as possible in some town designed for tourists.
For my wedding to H, we DID have a friend, a professional photographer, do our photos. Of course we paid her going rate! And we got food from a vendor our restaurant business friend suggested.