Oh yes, another wedding question. This time it is the potluck reception. Update in post #127

[eternalsummer]

You can tell them that in some cultures (Mexican for sure), relatives and friends of the bride and groom each pick some aspect of the wedding to finance.  So, the parents pay for something expensive (dress?), best friend pays for rehearsal dinner, best man picks up the booze, cousin Sally buys the flowers, uncle Jeb pays the band, etc.

 

 

Our wedding was super (super!) small and even so we had a bit of a potluck - mom paid for most of the food, my aunt and uncle -in-law cooked it, and my sister-in-law/best friend (she is both) bought a wedding cake for us.

[QueenCat]

What kind of bizarre economy is this you propose?  You'd reduced this to a tit for tat economic transaction? Buying new clothes isn't mandatory.  Not everyone travels.  When I travel I expect to pay for all my own meals no matter where I go or what I do. Some people can't afford a meal for everyone.  Your attitude is exactly the fuel that makes weddings so stressful.  I can only imagine how people would respond if their guests voiced that kind attitude.

 

 

I didn't read it as a tit for tat transaction. I guess family cultures are different as well. In our family, and really with all of the weddings we've gone to for friends as well, weddings are about the couple getting married AND the families/friends celebrating with them, getting to each other, often bonding for the future, etc. I wouldn't spend a couple of thousand on plane tickets, hotels, car rentals for a 20 minute ceremony and then it's over, not getting to spend time with everyone as part of the celebration. It'd be bizarre to find that expected. Meals don't have to be crazy expensive. I've seen catering done cheaply by local bbq places, which is just as fine as a fully catered and served sit down. It's about being together, celebrating.

[Ravin]

Are you aware of after parties? They are somewhat common and the guest lists are generally more selective than that for the event itself. The guests aren't being invited to continue the party, they are being invited to another party, one with it's own guest list. Not everyone gets invited to every party. This would be the "after party" crowd. Those not in that crowd wouldn't be invited, just like not everyone is invited to a bridesmaid brunch - it's for a specific set of people. 

 

There are other ways to self-select the after party. For example, my BIL's wedding and reception last year was held at a church that did not allow alcohol on the premises. It was a family-friendly event. The after-party was held at their favorite pub, and was more for their friends and adult company, so those of us with kids in tow, teetotalers, and those who travelled and weren't spending another night locally skipped the after-party and went home. There was no specific guest list for the after-party, it was more "you know who you are" informal word-of-mouth invites.

[heartlikealion]

I don't know about tit for tat. Maybe it's more of trying to be a people pleaser? I only expect (or rather hope?) for a meal if an event is scheduled smack during a meal time. This is my attitude outside of weddings, too. If it's offset enough then you kinda know "eat before you arrive" or whatever. I know that people have their reasons for not having meals and often it is financial restraints but sometimes it is just timing, stress, etc. Or a combination.

 

I got in a huge fight with my MIL one year over a birthday party. She told me that my way was wrong and that I must have a meal. I had intended on just cake/ice-cream but apparently that was very wrong, especially since a couple people were traveling from an hour away. The lesson I learned there wasn't that I was wrong, but that people are very opinionated on when to expect food LOL

[HS Mom in NC]

The people suggesting a cake and punch reception recommended doing it between meal times or after regular dinner hours.

No one is entitled to anything at anyone's wedding.  You're invited at the pleasure of the bride and groom and no one should do anything outside of their budgets.  I find the whole entitlement mindedness really disturbing; it's what causes most of the stresses and conflicts at weddings and it's time people stopped perpetuating it.
 

[Bluegoat]

Our church had this but for funerals. Let me tell you, do not get in the way of the funeral ladies!!

 

My church does this for funerals, and also supplies the organ/choir.  Not for weddings though I could imagine it being done as a sort of one-off.

[Bluegoat]

Are you aware of after parties? They are somewhat common and the guest lists are generally more selective than that for the event itself. The guests aren't being invited to continue the party, they are being invited to another party, one with it's own guest list. Not everyone gets invited to every party. This would be the "after party" crowd. Those not in that crowd wouldn't be invited, just like not everyone is invited to a bridesmaid brunch - it's for a specific set of people. 

 

Often after-parties have different hosts.  And whether they do or don't, there is almost always a sense that they are a VIP event.

 

The trouble with that is it tends to imply that the other guests are not VIPs.

 

I don't think the idea of a seperate dinner for some is necessarily bad, but it would have to be handled carefully.  Otherwise it could really seem like it was drawing a line between the important and unimportant guests.  If it was clearly the wedding party, or immediate family, or even extended family, it would be easier, or if it was a few hours after the main reception.  But if it is dividing things up less clearly - some extended family is invited but not others, or people are leaving the main party for the "special" party, it could easily create hard feelings.

[Bluegoat]

I really think that with the idea of entitlement, or owing people something, it's often a case of "all tese things are true".

 

I don't think the wedding is all about the bride and groom.  They are hosting and they should host for the pleasure of their guests. And that does mean trying to accomodate their comfort.  If they need a small wedding with just cake and punch, the guests should not feel done out of something they are owed, OTOH it would probably be best not to put the event at a meal time. 

 

But I think it is also reasonable to say, if we are having an event were we invite many out of town people, sharing a meal might be a thoughtful/more imprtant option. 

 

After all, if I invite friends to my house to watch a movie where they will need to drive for hours, I will likely also want to offer a meal.  Even if it is really basic like a hotdogs and frozen fries, or beans and homemade beer.  And maybe I don't invite people if I really can't offer them anything, unless there is some understanding about that.

 

I think that there needs to be grace from all the people involved.

[slackermom]

As others have said, I would rather attend a cake and punch wedding than a potluck.

 

We have friends who originally said they were going to have a potluck reception, probably for about 200 guests. The reality of the logistics of that set in before the final invitations went out, and it changed to this:

 

Wedding at church around lunch time, followed by a reception in the church hall.  They put out deli platters for sandwiches, plus some fruit and veggie platters and some chips, and followed that with cake and punch. There were multiple cakes made by friends and family.

 

They announced at the ceremony and again in the hall that everyone was welcome to come back to the couple's house that evening for a potluck dinner if they wished to continue the party. I am guessing that maybe half the guests chose to attend that after-party, especially relatives, and far-flung friends who wanted to visit a bit longer before heading home. We stopped at a Thai place on the way and grabbed some takeout to share.

[shawthorne44]

My church does this for funerals, and also supplies the organ/choir.  Not for weddings though I could imagine it being done as a sort of one-off.

 

This makes sense.   Funerals are planned last minute by people who are stressed, grieving and probably just would like food of some sort.  

Weddings aren't that.