Wedding Etiquette Forum

Gap between ceremony/reception?

135

Re: Gap between ceremony/reception?

  • edited August 2015
    banana468 said:
    I think we had some people skip the ceremony but whatever.   Our wedding was exactly 8 years ago.   It was about 100 degrees and while the church was air conditioned, you can only do so much with that when it's 100 degrees.

    We still opted for no gap and just rushed the receiving line and had minimal outdoor photos before the reception.   Instead we did a lot of outdoor formals after dinner when it was cooled to roughly 90 degrees.

    It's a pain in our area to find a place that let us in whenever we wanted.  But we picked our reception venue largely based on that and less about the details inside.   Still, our party was kickass. 
    In that case, happy anniversary! Does today's weather remind you of your wedding day weather? It's hot out there.





                       
  • lyndausvilyndausvi mod
    First Anniversary First Answer 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited August 2015
    lyndausvi said:
    Bottom line is I do not put conditions on my invites.  I would never say "hey, if you watch my hour long ceremony, then sit on your ass for 3 hours then  you are rewarded by be allowed to attend my reception."  If you can't do that, do not bother RSVP yes.

     Nope my invites are pretty unconditional.  If you can make it go both events great.   If you can only make it to the fun party.   So be it.  If you can only show up for dessert due to other obligations, we would love to see you.

    I didn't take attendance at the ceremony.  Other than my cousin I couldn't tell you if there were others who were not at the ceremony. I would never dream of telling my cousin he had to take the entire day off just to attend my wedding.  I was so appreciative that after a long day at work he drove 3 hours to party with us. He also had to pay for a hotel that night.


    I definitely see your point. Certainly there are times when people can't attend both ceremony and reception- even when there's no gap (like, can't get off work in time to make the ceremony but do show up for dessert, and certainly a day's childcare is an issue too). I just think, by my observations of 10+ years of gaptastic weddings, that many people won't attend the ceremony. Can't and won't are two different things. 
    In fact, one of my coworkers attended a wedding where over 400 guests were invited. She told me later there were easily fewer than 100 at the church, but over 400 at the reception! That means three hundred people couldn't attend the ceremony, or three hundred people potentially wouldn't attend the ceremony? Three hundred??
    Again, I am definitely not advocating for gaps, I hate them. But I perceive that many people who likewise hate them blow off the ceremony and just go to party. 










    Or 300 people are saying gap are fucking inconvenient.

    My SIL had a 2:30 wedding and a 6pm reception.  She was pleasantly surprised at "all the people" at church. She was expecting less.   I was surprised at how many were dressed in jeans and when back home to get ready for the reception.   

    Anyway, I think the fact there was a lot less people at the ceremony is a sign that people just protesting the gap by not going to the ceremony.  Instead of getting ready, then going home/out then attending the reception they are living their life.   Weekends are the time most people get their shit done.  Their kids have sports, whatever.   They don't have the time to waste it going to an event with long  ass breaks in between. 

      Can you imagine if you had kids?  I shudder to think of the babysitting cost of 10-12 hours due to a gap.    






    What differentiates an average host and a great host is anticipating unexpressed needs and wants of their guests.  Just because the want/need is not expressed, doesn't mean it wouldn't be appreciated. 
  • I do honestly think it's rude to not attend a ceremony and still attend a reception. The ceremony is 
    To do otherwise is like, "I don't care about you saying your vows, but I do care about the free food and booze." 
    the most important part! I'd rather decline the entire day's worth of events than attend only an evening reception. 
    All the gapped events I've been to have been 2pm or 3pm ceremonies followed by a 5 or 6pm cocktail hour start time. Never anything as egregious as an 11am ceremony followed by a dinner reception. 

    Naturally, rudeness of guests would be negated by proper hosting, so there's that. 
    I have never attended a wedding for the free booze and food. Why would I do that? I can go out to eat and drink whatever I like for less than I give as a wedding gift. I go to weddings to celebrate the marriage of loved ones. I have only been invited to one wedding with a gap - and I went to the ceremony, not the reception. But if I chose the reception instead of the ceremony, it would have affected no one. The B & G didn't take attendance. 

    Their pocket book did.
  • snowywintersnowywinter member
    5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper
    edited August 2015


    You're illustrating my point though. If you could only attend either the ceremony or reception due to logistical issues, I would hope someone would attend the portion that matters-- the ceremony. You could go out to dinner and drinks with your friends on your own dime and toast to their new marriage ("celebrate") at any time you want.

     I'm not saying that the ceremony isn't the most important part of the wedding day. I'm saying that it's not rude to attend one and not the other. 

    Personally, I think it is and I think you'd be surprised at how many others also think that. It's like someone showing up an hour late for a birthday party only to eat cake, then leave as soon as they were done. I'm not a fan of gaps during weddings, which is why when there is a huge gap, I simply decline the whole thing. I would never attend a reception if I didn't attend the ceremony. It's just tacky.
  • MGPMGP member
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited August 2015
    lyndausvi said:

    Can you imagine if you had kids?  I shudder to think of the babysitting cost of 10-12 hours due to a gap.    
    That would cost me $180 which is one of the many reasons I would simply decline an entire gapped wedding.




  • You're illustrating my point though. If you could only attend either the
    ceremony or reception due to logistical issues, I would hope someone
    would attend the portion that matters-- the ceremony. You could go out
    to dinner and drinks with your friends on your own dime and toast to
    their new marriage ("celebrate") at any time you want.


     I'm not saying that the ceremony isn't the most important part of the
    wedding day. I'm saying that it's not rude to attend one and not the
    other. 


    Personally, I think it is and I think you'd be surprised at how many others also think that. It's like someone showing up an hour late for a birthday party only to eat cake, then leave as soon as they were done. I'm not a fan of gaps during weddings, which is why when there is a huge gap, I simply decline the whole thing. I would never attend a reception if I didn't attend the ceremony. It's just tacky.


    Or it's bad planning by the hosts and they should lower their expectations when they plan a rude monopolization of their guests' time.

    You can't compare attending just the reception top attending a birthday party for just the cake. When a couple go out of their way to make a gap like that they are creating two events. If they don't intend to host their guests for the entire time, they shouldn't expect their guests to be there the entire time either.
  • And guests are free to decline the entire thing, as I have done in the past. I'm not defending the B&G by any means. I think it's rude of them to create such a gap. But I don't think it shows any more etiquette on the part of guests who choose to skip the ceremony and attend the reception.
  • MGPMGP member
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    banana468 said:

    Or it's bad planning by the hosts and they should lower their expectations when they plan a rude monopolization of their guests' time. You can't compare attending just the reception top attending a birthday party for just the cake. When a couple go out of their way to make a gap like that they are creating two events. If they don't intend to host their guests for the entire time, they shouldn't expect their guests to be there the entire time either.
    EXACTLY.  That's like inviting people to your house to watch an afternoon football game and then later serve dinner - but leaving in between the two to go have drinks with other people (akin to couples having super special wedding party happy hours during the gap).  Super rude.
  • MairePoppy said:
    I do honestly think it's rude to not attend a ceremony and still attend a reception. The ceremony is 
    To do otherwise is like, "I don't care about you saying your vows, but I do care about the free food and booze." 
    the most important part! I'd rather decline the entire day's worth of events than attend only an evening reception. 
    All the gapped events I've been to have been 2pm or 3pm ceremonies followed by a 5 or 6pm cocktail hour start time. Never anything as egregious as an 11am ceremony followed by a dinner reception. 

    Naturally, rudeness of guests would be negated by proper hosting, so there's that. 
    I have never attended a wedding for the free booze and food. Why would I do that? I can go out to eat and drink whatever I like for less than I give as a wedding gift. I go to weddings to celebrate the marriage of loved ones. I have only been invited to one wedding with a gap - and I went to the ceremony, not the reception. But if I chose the reception instead of the ceremony, it would have affected no one. The B & G didn't take attendance. 


    You're illustrating my point though. If you could only attend either the ceremony or reception due to logistical issues, I would hope someone would attend the portion that matters-- the ceremony. You could go out to dinner and drinks with your friends on your own dime and toast to their new marriage ("celebrate") at any time you want.  If I could only attend one or the other due to logistical reasons I would probably choose the reception.  Particularly if the reason I had to choose one or the other was due to their hosting failure.   



  • SP29SP29 member
    First Anniversary First Comment First Answer 5 Love Its
    I've attended a couple of weddings that had gaps. Before TK I never knew they were rude, always thought they were pretty common, but still, I had a feeling of "well this is weird... what now?".

    My cousin's wedding was a 2pm ceremony (church) and then the reception started at 5pm. I remember asking my mom, "so what now?", "Oh, go home and relax". Well I was already dolled up (I get just as fancy to attend the ceremony!), so I didn't want to DO anything, lest I get sweaty and ruin my make up, nor would I have time to do a whole lot. I think I mostly watched TV until it was time to go again.

    In the above case, I definitely could of used my day differently if the wedding were one event.

    The other two weddings were OOT. The first wedding I forgot the wedding gift at home so we ran out to the store and bought the same gift again (though after TK I learned it is perfectly reasonable to give the gift at a later date), which took up the time, though as I've learned, I didn't need to do that.

    Second OOT wedding we were staying about half an hour out of the wedding city, so there was no time to go back/forth to the hotel. At least the reception venue was open, but there was no food or drink ready so we just sat around.

    I will always attend both the ceremony and reception, and keep my mouth shut about the gap, but they ARE inconvienent and awkward, which makes them rude.
  • banana468 said:
    Plenty of guests I see announce it. They just tell the B&G that they'll be at the reception only. You can play the game of "Pin The Tail On The Split Etiquette Hair" but I'm going to say that if the B&G planned better this wouldn't be an issue. So they need to face reality.

    Plenty of guests also ask if they can invite their brother's third cousin once removed. Doesn't make it appropriate. Obviously, everyone can choose for themselves. For me, a guest attending just the reception is equivalent to the couple having a honeyfund or hosting a cash bar. Plenty of people do it so there will always be a lot of examples to point to, but that doesn't mean it's not tacky.
  • I've attended 2-3 weddings a year for the past 8 years. Every single one of them had a gap. I had no idea that it was considered an etiquette faux-paux until i joined TK.

    To be honest I never had a problem with the gap, and perhaps I was the odd man out, but it's simply all I knew. We'd go the ceremony then either go to the nearest persons house, nearest restaurant, nearest hotel room and have snacks and drink and hang out and then head to the reception. One wedding I had a nap in between, another FI and I went and saw some sights. I honestly never felt inconvenienced but I do realize that others may have.

    Our wedding timeline included a gap. While it's no excuse, its just what I knew from what I had experienced. When I came on here and found that the majority of people found it rude I found a way to mitigate it by renting out a hospitality room at the venue that people can go to in between events if they so wish (officiant was already booked for later in the day so we couldn't switch times). When I told people about the hospitality suite most of them thought it was strange and asked if it was necessary that they go to that because they had already made plans in between. I maybe had a handful of people say that they might make use of it. Might. 


    So I guess my guests are in the minority on the whole Gap thing, but at least I've covered my bases etiquette wise even if no one ends up utilizing it.
    image
  • banana468 said:
    Plenty of guests I see announce it. They just tell the B&G that they'll be at the reception only. You can play the game of "Pin The Tail On The Split Etiquette Hair" but I'm going to say that if the B&G planned better this wouldn't be an issue. So they need to face reality.

    Plenty of guests also ask if they can invite their brother's third cousin once removed. Doesn't make it appropriate. Obviously, everyone can choose for themselves. For me, a guest attending just the reception is equivalent to the couple having a honeyfund or hosting a cash bar. Plenty of people do it so there will always be a lot of examples to point to, but that doesn't mean it's not tacky.
    Not at all the same.  One is a person deciding to attend one of two events they were invited to in one day.  The other is blatantly asking for cash or asking your guests to subsidize their Thank You.
  • adk19 said:
    Not at all the same.  One is a person deciding to attend one of two events they were invited to in one day.  The other is blatantly asking for cash or asking your guests to subsidize their Thank You.

    I disagree. How many brides and grooms do you know who invite a guest to only part of the day? The ones who would do such a thing are incredibly rude. The invitation goes out for both, not one or the other. The reception is a thank you for showing up to celebrate their day and watch them exchange vows, which is why so many here are so bothered by things like cash bars or money dances.


  • edited August 2015
    adk19 said:
    Not at all the same.  One is a person deciding to attend one of two events they were invited to in one day.  The other is blatantly asking for cash or asking your guests to subsidize their Thank You.

    I disagree. How many brides and grooms do you know who invite a guest to only part of the day? The ones who would do such a thing are incredibly rude. The invitation goes out for both, not one or the other. The reception is a thank you for showing up to celebrate their day and watch them exchange vows, which is why so many here are so bothered by things like cash bars or money dances.


    Invitations aren't subpoenae. I'm free to accept one, both or neither. By creating a gap, the couple has turned their event into two events. 

    I wonder if you'd find it 'tacky' if I attended a wedding ceremony, but not the reception. Or does it just work the other way?

                       
  • adk19 said:

    Not at all the same.  One is a person deciding to attend one of two events they were invited to in one day.  The other is blatantly asking for cash or asking your guests to subsidize their Thank You.
    But they are not really two events. If they truly were it would not be rude to invite some people to one and not the other. The reason it is rude to invite someone to the ceremony and not the reception few hours later is because despite the gap it is one event.
    Anniversary
  • kitkat said:
    adk19 said:

    Not at all the same.  One is a person deciding to attend one of two events they were invited to in one day.  The other is blatantly asking for cash or asking your guests to subsidize their Thank You.
    But they are not really two events. If they truly were it would not be rude to invite some people to one and not the other. The reason it is rude to invite someone to the ceremony and not the reception few hours later is because despite the gap it is one event.

    By putting a gap in between, the couple has made it into two events. The reason we say it's one event is because it's supposed to be treated as such in that the entire time the guests are fully hosted in some capacity, whether it's a cocktail hour after the ceremony or the reception directly following. 
    image
  • snowywintersnowywinter member
    5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper
    edited August 2015
    Invitations aren't subpoenae. I'm free to accept one, both or neither. By creating a gap, the couple has turned their event into two events. 

    I wonder if you'd find it 'tacky' if I attended a wedding ceremony, but not the reception. Or does it just work the other way?



    No, they are not two events. Would you think it okay if you were invited to a ceremony and not the reception? I bet everyone would think that's one of the etiquette blunders of 2015 if someone did that, and rightly so.

    And no, I'd have no problem with someone attending the ceremony and not the reception. Why would I? That's the important part. The reception is the thank you. If you'd rather not receive a thank you in the form of a free fancy dinner and alcohol, that's your choice. But when people skip the part that actually IS all about the couple just to go get free dinner afterwards, that's just classless. If you can't see that, then go right ahead and do what you're doing, but there are plenty of people thinking that's just as big a faux pas as creating a gap between the ceremony and the reception.
  • snowywintersnowywinter member
    5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper
    edited August 2015
  • CMGragainCMGragain member
    First Anniversary First Comment First Answer 5 Love Its
    edited August 2015
    Things were so much simpler when most people got married in church in the afternoon, and had cake and punch in the fellowship hall afterwards.
    The more complicated weddings have become, the easier it is to unintentionally offend someone.
    httpiimgurcomTCCjW0wjpg
  • MGPMGP member
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    Invitations aren't subpoenae. I'm free to accept one, both or neither. By creating a gap, the couple has turned their event into two events. 

    I wonder if you'd find it 'tacky' if I attended a wedding ceremony, but not the reception. Or does it just work the other way?



    No, they are not two events. Would you think it okay if you were invited to a ceremony and not the reception? I bet everyone would think that's one of the etiquette blunders of 2015 if someone did that, and rightly so.

    And no, I'd have no problem with someone attending the ceremony and not the reception. Why would I? That's the important part. The reception is the thank you. If you'd rather not receive a thank you in the form of a free fancy dinner and alcohol, that's your choice. But when people skip the part that actually IS all about the couple just to go get free dinner afterwards, that's just classless. If you can't see that, then go right ahead and do what you're doing, but there are plenty of people thinking that's just as big a faux pas as creating a gap between the ceremony and the reception.
    They SHOULDN'T be two events.  That's the crux of this whole discussion and most of us on these boards agree with that.  From an etiquette standpoint it SHOULD be one event, no gaps, continuously hosted, and everyone invited to everything.

    Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world and too many self important people think it is acceptable to invite people to the ceremony and not the reception, or even invite people to the tail end of the reception for "cake and dancing" because they are rude, terrible planners that can't afford to feed everyone.  And they are so delusional they actually convince themselves that people should be OK with these egregious infractions on how to treat human beings because it is their SPECIAL DAY and all of the underlings should be HONORED that they were at least invited to something.  Makes me want to barf.

    As I said before, I feel that (given no gaps) a guest attending only the ceremony or reception is kind of rude (if they were available to attend both), especially only attending the reception but you can't control people's behavior just your reaction to it.  As long as you invited them to everything and hosted them properly it's best to just thank them for what they did attend and move on.
  • MGP said:
    They SHOULDN'T be two events.  That's the crux of this whole discussion and most of us on these boards agree with that.  From an etiquette standpoint it SHOULD be one event, no gaps, continuously hosted, and everyone invited to everything.

    Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world and too many self important people think it is acceptable to invite people to the ceremony and not the reception, or even invite people to the tail end of the reception for "cake and dancing" because they are rude, terrible planners that can't afford to feed everyone.  And they are so delusional they actually convince themselves that people should be OK with these egregious infractions on how to treat human beings because it is their SPECIAL DAY and all of the underlings should be HONORED that they were at least invited to something.  Makes me want to barf.

    As I said before, I feel that (given no gaps) a guest attending only the ceremony or reception is kind of rude (if they were available to attend both), especially only attending the reception but you can't control people's behavior just your reaction to it.  As long as you invited them to everything and hosted them properly it's best to just thank them for what they did attend and move on.

    I think we're on the same page here. The only part where there's a slight difference is that whether there is a gap or not, I still think it's rude for people to attend just the reception. Just because the couple is etiquette-challenged doesn't mean the guests need to be. I'd never dream of doing such a thing, but maybe that's just me.

  • Our wedding is on a Saturday in July. The Catholic church ceremony is at 3 and should end by 4. We are expecting many people to drive 15 minutes to the hotel, drop off their cars, and get on a shuttle for the reception. The cocktail hour that starts at 6. There is a big festival in the area that may cause traffic and there may also be shore traffic as we live in NJ. I am hoping that it isn't too much of a gap.
  • Invitations aren't subpoenae. I'm free to accept one, both or neither. By creating a gap, the couple has turned their event into two events. 

    I wonder if you'd find it 'tacky' if I attended a wedding ceremony, but not the reception. Or does it just work the other way?



    No, they are not two events. Would you think it okay if you were invited to a ceremony and not the reception? I bet everyone would think that's one of the etiquette blunders of 2015 if someone did that, and rightly so.

    And no, I'd have no problem with someone attending the ceremony and not the reception. Why would I? That's the important part. The reception is the thank you. If you'd rather not receive a thank you in the form of a free fancy dinner and alcohol, that's your choice. But when people skip the part that actually IS all about the couple just to go get free dinner afterwards, that's just classless. If you can't see that, then go right ahead and do what you're doing, but there are plenty of people thinking that's just as big a faux pas as creating a gap between the ceremony and the reception.
    There we go with the free dinner again. I have never attended a wedding for the 'free dinner.' Ever. What makes you think that people go to weddings for the food?

    The classless people are the ones who expect guests to find something else to do so the bride and groom can have their evening reception hours after the ceremony.

    FYI, I have never attended a ceremony and skipped the reception because my family members and friends have manners and don't have weddings with gaps. 



                       
  • MGPMGP member
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper


    MGP said:
    They
    SHOULDN'T be two events.  That's the crux of this whole discussion and
    most of us on these boards agree with that.  From an etiquette
    standpoint it SHOULD be one event, no gaps, continuously hosted, and
    everyone invited to everything.

    Unfortunately
    we don't live in a perfect world and too many self important people
    think it is acceptable to invite people to the ceremony and not the
    reception, or even invite people to the tail end of the reception for
    "cake and dancing" because they are rude, terrible planners that can't
    afford to feed everyone.  And they are so delusional they actually
    convince themselves that people should be OK with these egregious
    infractions on how to treat human beings because it is their SPECIAL DAY
    and all of the underlings should be HONORED that they were at least
    invited to something.  Makes me want to barf.

    As
    I said before, I feel that (given no gaps) a guest attending only the
    ceremony or reception is kind of rude (if they were available to attend
    both), especially only attending the reception but you can't control
    people's behavior just your reaction to it.  As long as you invited them
    to everything and hosted them properly it's best to just thank them for
    what they did attend and move on.

    I think we're on the same page here. The only part where there's a slight difference is that whether there is a gap or not, I still think it's rude for people to attend just the reception. Just because the couple is etiquette-challenged doesn't mean the guests need to be. I'd never dream of doing such a thing, but maybe that's just me.



    I think it is rude to attend the reception only as well (if there were no gaps and the guest was truly available and just decided not to attend)- but certainly low on the rudeness scale, like not a relationship ending thing. As I said, I had a few "reception only" attendees and I know most were due to the fact that they were my husband's coworkers and everyone has to work Saturdays all the time.

    Personally I would not feel comfortable attending the reception only, I would likely decline the whole thing instead. If I am not available for all, I just wont go to anything.
  • There we go with the free dinner again. I have never attended a wedding for the 'free dinner.' Ever. What makes you think that people go to weddings for the food?

    The classless people are the ones who expect guests to find something else to do so the bride and groom can have their evening reception hours after the ceremony.

    FYI, I have never attended a ceremony and skipped the reception because my family members and friends have manners and don't have weddings with gaps.

    The fact is that when people skip the ceremony and attend the reception, the perception is that they're there for the food and alcohol, not the couple. The part that was truly about the couple was the ceremony, not the reception. If you don't do that, then I obviously wasn't talking about you.
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards