News: IT'S THE 2ND ANNUAL GUATEMALA LIBRARY PROJECT BOOK DRIVE!    LOOKING FOR DONATIONS OF SCIENCE BOOKS THIS YEAR.    Check it out in the "Extending the Hand of Kindness" folder or here: http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=139832.msg3372084#msg3372084   

  • November 20, 2017, 05:36:23 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Poll

The First Dance, dancers are:

Just the Bride and Groom
80 (74.8%)
Bride and Groom, joined partway through by Groomsmen/Bridesmaids in the pairing they walked out of the church in
20 (18.7%)
Bride and Groom, joined by their parents
3 (2.8%)
Whoever gets on the dance floor first
2 (1.9%)
First dance is the Father/Daughter dance
2 (1.9%)

Total Members Voted: 107

Author Topic: Dancing  (Read 21093 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gellchom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3722
Re: Dancing
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2015, 04:21:45 PM »
I've also seen, instead of the attendants, special dances like "All married couples to the floor! Okay, if you've been married less than a month, sit down!" Ending up with the couple who've been married the longest still dancing. Some people enjoy those special dance "games" but I don't see how they really encourage people to dance, because you can only take the floor and stay there if you meet the rules.

I've also seen this a few times (and we are getting to be among the last groups dismissed, lol!).  Sometimes the last couple left, who have been married the longest, gets the bride's bouquet instead of her throwing it to the unmarried women.  I think that's a charming innovation -- the bouquet toss long ago began to seem very outdated and sexist.  I can't remember the last time I saw anyone do it, now that I think of it.

katycoo

  • Member
  • Posts: 4204
Re: Dancing
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2015, 05:19:44 PM »
Dancing doesn't automatically mean romance, or scrabble. But it does represent a fairly physically intimate connection for a few minutes. If your bridal party is good with it, fine. But if it makes anyone uncomfortable, it is scarcely important enough to justify their distress.

See, I do not feel that way at all.  While I rarely partner dance, I've always just considered it in the historical social construct.  Much like in days gone past where one might be expected to dance with all kinds of people at an event, you make nice for a minute then go your separate ways.  While dancing *can* be intimate, its not something I associate as a default.

LtPowers

  • Member
  • Posts: 474
Re: Dancing
« Reply #32 on: February 24, 2015, 10:23:47 AM »
See, I do not feel that way at all.  While I rarely partner dance, I've always just considered it in the historical social construct.  Much like in days gone past where one might be expected to dance with all kinds of people at an event, you make nice for a minute then go your separate ways.  While dancing *can* be intimate, its not something I associate as a default.

Were that the usual mode at wedding receptions, you might be on to something here. But I just don't think that's the mindset of modern wedding guests. Especially so when the song to which the bridal party is dancing is a strongly romantic one, and accompanying the lovely new couple that just sealed their relationship.


Powers  &8^]

Yvaine

  • Member
  • Posts: 10037
Re: Dancing
« Reply #33 on: February 24, 2015, 10:30:08 AM »
See, I do not feel that way at all.  While I rarely partner dance, I've always just considered it in the historical social construct.  Much like in days gone past where one might be expected to dance with all kinds of people at an event, you make nice for a minute then go your separate ways.  While dancing *can* be intimate, its not something I associate as a default.

Were that the usual mode at wedding receptions, you might be on to something here. But I just don't think that's the mindset of modern wedding guests. Especially so when the song to which the bridal party is dancing is a strongly romantic one, and accompanying the lovely new couple that just sealed their relationship.


Powers  &8^]

I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

When I was in high school, we had an event for May Day that involved, among other things, a group of seniors who danced in pairs to exhibit the ballroom-dancing skills they'd learned in PE. (We had a required ballroom-dancing class our senior year.) They picked the best, and paired them by height, IIRC. If any of the pairs were dating for real, it was a coincidence. Obviously, there are big differences (for example, most modern wedding parties aren't required to take ballroom lessons!), but I think of this as a similar thing. It's not intended to pair the attendants as lovers.

Lynn2000

  • Member
  • Posts: 8322
Re: Dancing
« Reply #34 on: February 24, 2015, 11:36:21 AM »
See, I do not feel that way at all.  While I rarely partner dance, I've always just considered it in the historical social construct.  Much like in days gone past where one might be expected to dance with all kinds of people at an event, you make nice for a minute then go your separate ways.  While dancing *can* be intimate, its not something I associate as a default.

Were that the usual mode at wedding receptions, you might be on to something here. But I just don't think that's the mindset of modern wedding guests. Especially so when the song to which the bridal party is dancing is a strongly romantic one, and accompanying the lovely new couple that just sealed their relationship.


Powers  &8^]

I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

When I was in high school, we had an event for May Day that involved, among other things, a group of seniors who danced in pairs to exhibit the ballroom-dancing skills they'd learned in PE. (We had a required ballroom-dancing class our senior year.) They picked the best, and paired them by height, IIRC. If any of the pairs were dating for real, it was a coincidence. Obviously, there are big differences (for example, most modern wedding parties aren't required to take ballroom lessons!), but I think of this as a similar thing. It's not intended to pair the attendants as lovers.

Though in that case, the students had been preparing to dance together for months, if not longer, and had gained experience dancing with multiple partners during their lessons. I don't think anyone is intending to "pair the attendants as lovers," but I can see how it would be uncomfortable for some people, to have the dancing with a more or less random person sprung on them late in the game, especially if they never dance otherwise (or never dance without their romantic partner).
~Lynn2000

Yvaine

  • Member
  • Posts: 10037
Re: Dancing
« Reply #35 on: February 24, 2015, 11:53:52 AM »
See, I do not feel that way at all.  While I rarely partner dance, I've always just considered it in the historical social construct.  Much like in days gone past where one might be expected to dance with all kinds of people at an event, you make nice for a minute then go your separate ways.  While dancing *can* be intimate, its not something I associate as a default.

Were that the usual mode at wedding receptions, you might be on to something here. But I just don't think that's the mindset of modern wedding guests. Especially so when the song to which the bridal party is dancing is a strongly romantic one, and accompanying the lovely new couple that just sealed their relationship.


Powers  &8^]

I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

When I was in high school, we had an event for May Day that involved, among other things, a group of seniors who danced in pairs to exhibit the ballroom-dancing skills they'd learned in PE. (We had a required ballroom-dancing class our senior year.) They picked the best, and paired them by height, IIRC. If any of the pairs were dating for real, it was a coincidence. Obviously, there are big differences (for example, most modern wedding parties aren't required to take ballroom lessons!), but I think of this as a similar thing. It's not intended to pair the attendants as lovers.

Though in that case, the students had been preparing to dance together for months, if not longer, and had gained experience dancing with multiple partners during their lessons. I don't think anyone is intending to "pair the attendants as lovers," but I can see how it would be uncomfortable for some people, to have the dancing with a more or less random person sprung on them late in the game, especially if they never dance otherwise (or never dance without their romantic partner).

That much is true, though I forgot to mention, they weren't paired with the people they'd been dancing with in class! :) We got to pick our partners for the class, so it was usually at least a friend, but the pairing for the event was mandated. And I'm assuming, I think, that the bride and groom mention this expectation pretty early in the game. If not, it's more of an issue.

LtPowers

  • Member
  • Posts: 474
Re: Dancing
« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2015, 09:13:32 PM »
I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

If anything, that's worse. The bridal party are not entertainers.

Quote
When I was in high school, we had an event for May Day that involved, among other things, a group of seniors who danced in pairs to exhibit the ballroom-dancing skills they'd learned in PE. (We had a required ballroom-dancing class our senior year.) They picked the best, and paired them by height, IIRC. If any of the pairs were dating for real, it was a coincidence. Obviously, there are big differences (for example, most modern wedding parties aren't required to take ballroom lessons!), but I think of this as a similar thing. It's not intended to pair the attendants as lovers.

An exhibition of students is entirely different. Context is important.


Powers  &8^]

CakeEater

  • Member
  • Posts: 3379
Re: Dancing
« Reply #37 on: February 25, 2015, 11:58:47 PM »
I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

If anything, that's worse. The bridal party are not entertainers.


No, but they are part of the 'show' of the wedding. This is just part of that in some regions. It's so much part of a wedding reception here, that if you really didn't want to do it, you would either not be in the wedding party, or you'd mention it to the B&G and work out a solution befre you accepted the job.

English1

  • Member
  • Posts: 410
Re: Dancing
« Reply #38 on: February 26, 2015, 08:26:02 AM »
I couldn't tick a box as here the 'first dance' of the B&G isn't always the first dance of the evening. It's their personal first dance together, quite often other people are already dancing but there'll be a little announcement and everyone will move out of the way.

The couple then usually shuffle around looking mortified for a minute or so (interspersed with a bit of kissing) until the rest of the guests take pity on them and start dancing again. >:D

Yvaine

  • Member
  • Posts: 10037
Re: Dancing
« Reply #39 on: February 26, 2015, 08:27:56 AM »
I actually think the "bridal party dancing" thing really is more of a ritual, and less of a romantic thing between the pairs of attendants. After that, yeah, the dancing might get more personal. But I think in most cases, the bridal party dance is meant to "open the dancing" and also to look pretty. It's a showpiece.

If anything, that's worse. The bridal party are not entertainers.


No, but they are part of the 'show' of the wedding. This is just part of that in some regions. It's so much part of a wedding reception here, that if you really didn't want to do it, you would either not be in the wedding party, or you'd mention it to the B&G and work out a solution befre you accepted the job.

Yeah, I think to an extent, they are entertainers a little bit. This can be taken way too far, as we've seen with bridezillas who mistake their bridesmaids for models and want to dictate their hair color, weight, tattoo status, and so on. But if there was no "show" to it, there wouldn't be all the matching-dresses stuff, they wouldn't all process down the aisle grandly, etc. None of this is required to make the couple "really married"--they'd just need the number of witnesses required by law, and it wouldn't matter how they were dressed. There's a lot about BWWs that really is showlike. I'm not saying this as a negative, but just as a thing that is. It's kind of a cross between a show and a ritual and a superstition (see: the history of bridesmaids).

LtPowers

  • Member
  • Posts: 474
Re: Dancing
« Reply #40 on: February 26, 2015, 09:02:17 AM »
Weddings are not showpieces.

Miss Manners speaks:

Quote
Miss Manners is only too aware of the unpopularity of the position she is taking. Nobody loves a critic. Why shouldn't a wedding be entertainment, and draw on the experience of professionals in the business?

Her first reason is that this is often bad theater, and she is not the only critic. Not every amateur, no matter how in love, can produce a good original script. It is one thing to have friends murmuring, "I thought the church needed more flowers"; and quite another to hand them your courtship and philosophy to critique.

The second is that a wedding should be a joyous but serious occasion, rather than light-hearted entertainment. It's marriage itself, not the ceremony, that is supposed to be a scream, Miss Manners thought.


Powers  &8^]

Another Sarah

  • Member
  • Posts: 971
Re: Dancing
« Reply #41 on: February 26, 2015, 10:41:32 AM »
I didn't tick a box as at every wedding I've been to in my neck of the woods, the bride and groom dance, either for a whole song or for a verse and chorus, then other couples join in. I think the most I'd say about the bridal party is that there's a bit of an obligation to get other people dancing if nobody else does. But mostly there's some dancing, then cake cutting and the first dance go together, then everybody gets back to dancing.

CakeEater

  • Member
  • Posts: 3379
Re: Dancing
« Reply #42 on: February 26, 2015, 12:41:05 PM »
Weddings are not showpieces.

Miss Manners speaks:

Quote
Miss Manners is only too aware of the unpopularity of the position she is taking. Nobody loves a critic. Why shouldn't a wedding be entertainment, and draw on the experience of professionals in the business?

Her first reason is that this is often bad theater, and she is not the only critic. Not every amateur, no matter how in love, can produce a good original script. It is one thing to have friends murmuring, "I thought the church needed more flowers"; and quite another to hand them your courtship and philosophy to critique.

The second is that a wedding should be a joyous but serious occasion, rather than light-hearted entertainment. It's marriage itself, not the ceremony, that is supposed to be a scream, Miss Manners thought.


Powers  &8^]

I'm not even sure what's meant here.

Of course part of many weddings are for show.

Unless you and your fiancÚ walk into a registry office wearing the clothes you happen to have on, there's definitely a show going on. Why flowers and a ballgown, and matching wedding party, and a beautiful cake, and special cars with ribbons on them, etc etc? (I realise that not everyone has all of those things at their wedding)

LonniesMom

  • Member
  • Posts: 172
Re: Dancing
« Reply #43 on: February 26, 2015, 01:01:50 PM »
I agree with cake eater. I joke that orchestrating my wedding is like putting on a broadway production. No one is "performing" per se, but there are costumes (wedding attire), sets (venues, flowers, decorations), players (bridesmaids, groomsmen), music, etc. Obviously everyone isn't like this.

I, personally, am not having an attendant dance at my wedding. But, I do not think that there is anything wrong with it, unless it is over the top cheesy and obnoxious. I hate those.

LtPowers

  • Member
  • Posts: 474
Re: Dancing
« Reply #44 on: February 28, 2015, 12:03:47 PM »
I'm not even sure what's meant here.

Of course part of many weddings are for show.

Unless you and your fiancÚ walk into a registry office wearing the clothes you happen to have on, there's definitely a show going on. Why flowers and a ballgown, and matching wedding party, and a beautiful cake, and special cars with ribbons on them, etc etc? (I realise that not everyone has all of those things at their wedding)

Beautiful things can be showy, yes, but that is entirely different from treating a solemn (if joyous) occasion as an evening of entertainment for an audience.


Powers  &8^]