invitation samples full of etiquette errors

whovianstark

I just wanted to say, thank goodness for these boards! I have posted before that proper etiquette is something I am really working on but it does not come naturally to me. I just got a packet in the mail from an invitation company with samples. As I went through the packet I noticed many etiquette errors that without these boards I likely would have made myself.
1. EVERY SINGLE ONE HAD WHERE THEY WERE REGISTERED LISTED
2. One said "ceremony starts at 1:30 PM please arrive 30 minutes prior"
3. This one didn't really bother me but I have learned on the boards that it is against etiquette "Mom's name and the late father's name are happy to announce the...."

JoanE2012

I realized *after* our wedding that invitation companies aren't the greatest with wording!  We worded the year wrong (two thousand and twelve) because that's what all the samples had.  Didn't even think twice about it at the time.  Highly suggest following these boards and reputable sites such as Cranes.

charcoalandblush

I found this when building my website too. I hate the knot templates, so I built mine through squarespace. SO MANY of their wedding website templates/pages have horrible stuff. One template had a page saying that they hadn't registered and that gifts weren't required, but if you'd like to give a gift, we want cash for our honeymoon. You can paypal it to us or just bring a check to the wedding.

Also a detailed timeline of wedding weekend events, each with an attire requirement (ex. "Smart Casual" for sunday brunch)

SP29

It's no wonder why poor etiquette perpetuates.... 

lilacck28

whovianstark said:

I just wanted to say, thank goodness for these boards! I have posted before that proper etiquette is something I am really working on but it does not come naturally to me. I just got a packet in the mail from an invitation company with samples. As I went through the packet I noticed many etiquette errors that without these boards I likely would have made myself.
1. EVERY SINGLE ONE HAD WHERE THEY WERE REGISTERED LISTED
2. One said "ceremony starts at 1:30 PM please arrive 30 minutes prior"
3. This one didn't really bother me but I have learned on the boards that it is against etiquette "Mom's name and the late father's name are happy to announce the...."

What company was this??? I ordered a bunch from wedding paper divas and minted, and none mentioned registries or arriving early! (I vaguely remember there were some more minor blunders though...)

JCbride2015

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

But wow, those are pretty terrible.  And why would you put "The late father of" on the invitation anyway?  Don't you want to avoid making people feel sad when they look at the sample?

charcoalandblush

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

lilacck28

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

The one I picked says "together with their families / M & M / request your presence as they celebrate their union" 

I don't like the word "union". Have to reread knot posts to find the proper wording. "request your presence as they celebrate their wedding"? no. that doesn't make sense. "request your presence as they join in marriage"? I think that was it. 

charcoalandblush

lilacck28 said:

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

The one I picked says "together with their families / M & M / request your presence as they celebrate their union" 

I don't like the word "union". Have to reread knot posts to find the proper wording. "request your presence as they celebrate their wedding"? no. that doesn't make sense. "request your presence as they join in marriage"? I think that was it. 

Off the top of my head, I think it's:

Non-church: "Together with their families Bride and Groom request the pleasure of your company at their marriage..."

Church: "Together with their families Bride and Groom request the honour of your presence..."

At least that's what I think I've seen on the boards. I have a wedding planning book that says it's always the second except without the "u" ("honor") for non-church weddings, but I've never seen that on the boards and probably trust the boards more.

lilacck28

I just tried to fit "request the pleasure of your company as they join in marriage" on my invite. Doesn't fit. BOO. 

So... the options that fit are:

1. Together with their families, M & M request the pleasure of your company at their marriage

2. Together with their families, M & M request the pleasure of your company at their wedding

3. Together with their faimilies, M & M request your presence as they join in marriage

@charcoalandblush @JCbride2015 @ everyone else in the knot universe.... Thoughts?

 Basically, as evidence by my recent freakout post about addressing envelopes, I'm not quite concerned with absolutely following tradition with these invitations (so, I'm not overly bothered that we're only using our first names, even though I would have liked to... but I like the design of the invitation and last names don't fit.) However, I most definitely want everyone to understand the gist of the invitation and not think they're invited to a post- wedding party. And, of course, I want the invitation to sound okay! 

charcoalandblush said:

l

Off the top of my head, I think it's:

Non-church: "Together with their families Bride and Groom request the pleasure of your company at their marriage..."

Church: "Together with their families Bride and Groom request the honour of your presence..."

At least that's what I think I've seen on the boards. I have a wedding planning book that says it's always the second except without the "u" ("honor") for non-church weddings, but I've never seen that on the boards and probably trust the boards more.

charcoalandblush

I like 1 & 2 (more partial to #1, but I would do either). I can't put my finger on why, but 3 just sounds sort of weird to me.

If your main concern is making sure it sounds like a wedding + reception invite vs. a reception only invite, i think all 3 will definitely work.

I'm going through the same thing with our invites right now re: first vs. full names. There are some invitations that DF and I both LOVE, budget-friendly, the paper feels wonderful, the perfect level of casualness/fanicness for our wedding/us as people, would only need a regular stamp, in our main color, minimal changes needed. But I really love the thought of our full names, and they just won't fit. Still trying to decide if that's a dealbreaker or not.

lilacck28

@charcoalandblush

Thanks for the input! I just sent all these questions to my parents and FI's parents. They're going to think i'm BSC. haha 

Also, YES, I'm totally with you. It's frustrating when it doesn't all come together EXACTLY right. I had planned to design my own so that I could fit ALL THE WORDS (I wanted to list both sets of parents, last names, etc.) but time just ran short and we found a design that just...almost worked perfectly.  

FI looked at me like I was nuts when I said "oh no! Our last names won't fit! Maybe Minted designers will add them in teeny script for us below the first names?" In his words "uh... why bother? all the guests know our last names. And if they don't, they're on the return address." 

Besides that, FI and I just didn't like any of the other invitations (and I ordered a TON of samples! and looked at a ton more online) quite as much as this one. So, goodbye went our last names. They're not that great anyway  

LtPowers

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

If I may, what's wrong with that? It's informal, but I'm pretty sure it's acceptable wording.

Powers  &8^]

whovianstark

lilacck28 said:

whovianstark said:

I just wanted to say, thank goodness for these boards! I have posted before that proper etiquette is something I am really working on but it does not come naturally to me. I just got a packet in the mail from an invitation company with samples. As I went through the packet I noticed many etiquette errors that without these boards I likely would have made myself.
1. EVERY SINGLE ONE HAD WHERE THEY WERE REGISTERED LISTED
2. One said "ceremony starts at 1:30 PM please arrive 30 minutes prior"
3. This one didn't really bother me but I have learned on the boards that it is against etiquette "Mom's name and the late father's name are happy to announce the...."

What company was this??? I ordered a bunch from wedding paper divas and minted, and none mentioned registries or arriving early! (I vaguely remember there were some more minor blunders though...)

I will check out wedding paper divas and minted. Thanks for the info!

charcoalandblush

LtPowers said:

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

If I may, what's wrong with that? It's informal, but I'm pretty sure it's acceptable wording.

Powers  &8^]

I think the "right" way is "request the pleasure of your company" (non-church) or "request the honour of your presence" (church). Not sure why - that's just always what I see people posting here.

CMGragain

lilacck28 said:

@charcoalandblush

Thanks for the input! I just sent all these questions to my parents and FI's parents. They're going to think i'm BSC. haha 

Also, YES, I'm totally with you. It's frustrating when it doesn't all come together EXACTLY right. I had planned to design my own so that I could fit ALL THE WORDS (I wanted to list both sets of parents, last names, etc.) but time just ran short and we found a design that just...almost worked perfectly.  

FI looked at me like I was nuts when I said "oh no! Our last names won't fit! Maybe Minted designers will add them in teeny script for us below the first names?" In his words "uh... why bother? all the guests know our last names. And if they don't, they're on the return address." 

Besides that, FI and I just didn't like any of the other invitations (and I ordered a TON of samples! and looked at a ton more online) quite as much as this one. So, goodbye went our last names. They're not that great anyway  

Never take etiquette advice from someone who will profit if you follow it!  (Exception:  Crane's has been doing proper wording of wedding invitations for 200 years.)

WHO is hosting your wedding?  This is what determines proper wording.  If your parents are hosting, you cannot also be hosts.

This wording is non-traditional, but acceptable for a non-church wedding:

Together with their families

Bride's Full Name

and

Groom's Full Name

request the pleasure of your company
as they are united in marriage
Saturday, the date of June
two thousand fifteen
at six o'clock

Venue Name
Address
City, State

Reception to follow  (If your reception is in the same location as your ceremony)

If BOTH your sets of parents are hosting:

Mr. and Mrs. John Smith
Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Jones
request the pleasure of your company
at the marriage of
Bride's Full Name
and
Groom's Full Name
(etc.)

I am curious.  WHY do you want to put both sets of parents on your wedding invitation?  Unless they are both hosting, it isn't proper, and it doesn't honor or include them.

CMGragain

LtPowers said:

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

If I may, what's wrong with that? It's informal, but I'm pretty sure it's acceptable wording.

Powers  &8^]

"Celebrate the marriage" does not make it clear that this is a wedding invitation.  It could be an invitation to a celebration of a wedding that took place at an earlier date, or worse, a PPD..

whovianstark

CMGragain said:

LtPowers said:

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

If I may, what's wrong with that? It's informal, but I'm pretty sure it's acceptable wording.

Powers  &8^]

"Celebrate the marriage" does not make it clear that this is a wedding invitation.  It could be an invitation to a celebration of a wedding that took place at an earlier date, or worse, a PPD..

Yes! I'll have to check tonight but I think many of them were worded this way and I thought that the guests were either invited to a PPD or  the reception only.

lilacck28

CMGragain said:

Never take etiquette advice from someone who will profit if you follow it!  (Exception:  Crane's has been doing proper wording of wedding invitations for 200 years.)

WHO is hosting your wedding?  This is what determines proper wording.  If your parents are hosting, you cannot also be hosts.

This wording is non-traditional, but acceptable for a non-church wedding:

Together with their families

Bride's Full Name

and

Groom's Full Name

request the pleasure of your company
as they are united in marriage
Saturday, the date of June
two thousand fifteen
at six o'clock

Venue Name
Address
City, State

Reception to follow  (If your reception is in the same location as your ceremony)

If BOTH your sets of parents are hosting:

Mr. and Mrs. John Smith
Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Jones
request the pleasure of your company
at the marriage of
Bride's Full Name
and
Groom's Full Name
(etc.)

I am curious.  WHY do you want to put both sets of parents on your wedding invitation?  Unless they are both hosting, it isn't proper, and it doesn't honor or include them.

I've seen you say that a lot @CMGragain... that it isn't proper/ doesn't honor or include the groom's parents to include them unless they are hosting... but that's simply not the case for Jewish weddings. 

See evidence from your favorite, Crane And Co (http://blog.crane.com/2012/02/09/invitation-etiquette-religious-cultural-customs/#jewish-weddings) : 

Jewish Weddings

According to Jewish tradition, marriages are made in heaven. Men and women are brought together to marry one another by God himself. Women are not married “to” men. Rather, men and women are joined together in marriage. In recognition of this tradition, the joining word on Jewish wedding invitations reads “and” instead of “to.”

Jewish custom also celebrates the joining of the two families, so the names of the groom’s parents always appear on the invitations. Their names most properly appear beneath the groom’s name and a line reading “son of Mr. and Mrs. Solomon Lang” or on two lines reading “son of / Mr. and Mrs. Solomon Lang.” Their names may also appear at the top of the invitations beneath the names of the bride’s parents. This is done occasionally by parents of the bride who feel that they honor the groom’s parents more by placing their names at the top of the invitation. When this is done, the request line reads “at the marriage of.” The bride, in this case, uses her full name but no title. The groom’s title is omitted as well to maintain uniformity.

BUT... I'm slightly bucking that tradition by doing "with their families." Both sets of parents are fine with that, and I feel that "with their families" still follows the spirit of the tradition.  

Also, in many ways, I see ALL of us as hosting. We're all going to be greeting people, trying to make guests feel comfortable, etc. I'm not sure why we can't all be hosts. 

lilacck28

But also, @CMGragain .... why is Crane and CO. correct but other sources are not? 

Why does the day need to be one the wedding invitation, instead of just the date? Why does the year need to be spelled out? Why does the full name of the bride and groom need to be on the invitation? I see these rules as relevant only if they help guests avoid confusion... but I think "May 24th, 2015" is just as easy to figure out as "Sunday, the twenty-fourth of May, two thousand fifteen."  And "11:30 in the Morning" is just as easy to understand as "Half past eleven in the morning."

 Therefore, I'm going to go with the pretty floral invitations FI and I picked out, that unfortunately just don't have that much space for tons of text. Because there is still enough room to put the relevant information for my guests, even if that text does not follow, to the letter, the rules that some people deem most correct. 

CMGragain

The bride and groom never directly host a party that is held in their own honor.  If they are hosting their own wedding, the wording in the passive mode is used. 

The pleasure of your company is requested
at the marriage of
Bride's Full Name
and
Groom's Full Name

The OP did not indicate that she was Jewish.  Most Jewish brides are aware of their different wording.   Wording is also different for some cultures outside the USA/Canada area.  I only give advice for our own culture.  Catholic invitations can also be a little different if a full mass is being held.

CMGragain

lilacck28 said:

But also, @CMGragain .... why is Crane and CO. correct but other sources are not? 

Why does the day need to be one the wedding invitation, instead of just the date? Why does the year need to be spelled out? Why does the full name of the bride and groom need to be on the invitation? I see these rules as relevant only if they help guests avoid confusion... but I think "May 24th, 2015" is just as easy to figure out as "Sunday, the twenty-fourth of May, two thousand fifteen."  And "11:30 in the Morning" is just as easy to understand as "Half past eleven in the morning."

 Therefore, I'm going to go with the pretty floral invitations FI and I picked out, that unfortunately just don't have that much space for tons of text. Because there is still enough room to put the relevant information for my guests, even if that text does not follow, to the letter, the rules that some people deem most correct. 

There is nothing wrong with non-traditional wording, as long as it gets the job done clearly and concisely.  Last names should absolutely be included, but you may omit your middle names if you must have more space.  "Celebration of marriage" does not adequately tell that guest that this is a wedding invitation, so you should not use it.

lilacck28

CMGragain said:

The bride and groom never directly host a party that is held in their own honor.  If they are hosting their own wedding, the wording in the passive mode is used. 

The pleasure of your company is requested
at the marriage of
Bride's Full Name
and
Groom's Full Name

The OP did not indicate that she was Jewish.  Most Jewish brides are aware of their different wording.   Wording is also different for some cultures outside the USA/Canada area.  I only give advice for our own culture.  Catholic invitations can also be a little different if a full mass is being held.

I'm sorry. I thought when you asked "WHY do you want to include both sets of parents" you were asking me, since it was me you were quoting! I AM Jewish, so that's why I mentioned it. It was simply the answer to your question, and not meant to be a "gotcha! found a culture that doesn't fit what you say!" (well, only a little ) 

CMGragain said:

lilacck28 said:

@charcoalandblush

Thanks for the input! I just sent all these questions to my parents and FI's parents. They're going to think i'm BSC. haha 

Also, YES, I'm totally with you. It's frustrating when it doesn't all come together EXACTLY right. I had planned to design my own so that I could fit ALL THE WORDS (I wanted to list both sets of parents, last names, etc.) but time just ran short and we found a design that just...almost worked perfectly.  

FI looked at me like I was nuts when I said "oh no! Our last names won't fit! Maybe Minted designers will add them in teeny script for us below the first names?" In his words "uh... why bother? all the guests know our last names. And if they don't, they're on the return address." 

Besides that, FI and I just didn't like any of the other invitations (and I ordered a TON of samples! and looked at a ton more online) quite as much as this one. So, goodbye went our last names. They're not that great anyway  

Never take etiquette advice from someone who will profit if you follow it!  (Exception:  Crane's has been doing proper wording of wedding invitations for 200 years.)

WHO is hosting your wedding?  This is what determines proper wording.  If your parents are hosting, you cannot also be hosts.

This wording is non-traditional, but acceptable for a non-church wedding:

Together with their families

Bride's Full Name

and

Groom's Full Name

request the pleasure of your company
as they are united in marriage
Saturday, the date of June
two thousand fifteen
at six o'clock

Venue Name
Address
City, State

Reception to follow  (If your reception is in the same location as your ceremony)

If BOTH your sets of parents are hosting:

Mr. and Mrs. John Smith
Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Jones
request the pleasure of your company
at the marriage of
Bride's Full Name
and
Groom's Full Name
(etc.)

I am curious.  WHY do you want to put both sets of parents on your wedding invitation?  Unless they are both hosting, it isn't proper, and it doesn't honor or include them.

ETA: quote 

lilacck28

CMGragain said:

lilacck28 said:

But also, @CMGragain .... why is Crane and CO. correct but other sources are not? 

Why does the day need to be one the wedding invitation, instead of just the date? Why does the year need to be spelled out? Why does the full name of the bride and groom need to be on the invitation? I see these rules as relevant only if they help guests avoid confusion... but I think "May 24th, 2015" is just as easy to figure out as "Sunday, the twenty-fourth of May, two thousand fifteen."  And "11:30 in the Morning" is just as easy to understand as "Half past eleven in the morning."

 Therefore, I'm going to go with the pretty floral invitations FI and I picked out, that unfortunately just don't have that much space for tons of text. Because there is still enough room to put the relevant information for my guests, even if that text does not follow, to the letter, the rules that some people deem most correct. 

There is nothing wrong with non-traditional wording, as long as it gets the job done clearly and concisely.  Last names should absolutely be included, but you may omit your middle names if you must have more space.  "Celebration of marriage" does not adequately tell that guest that this is a wedding invitation, so you should not use it.

I agree @CMGragain! Which is why I'm not using it, and I never said I was. 

And why do last names absolutely need to be included on the invitation? It's certainly more formal... but our guests know who we are. 

Just so we're clear, I do appreciate your knowledge about these matters, even if I disagree with some of what you say! And I am very much enjoying this back and forth. 

CMGragain

Last names need to be included because you should never ASSUME that the guests know who you are.  They should not need to consult the return address to figure it out.  I know many people with the same first names.

Example:  We are Joan and John Smith.  DH has a cousin named James Smith who is also married to a woman named Joan.  Relatives have often confused us,  (No, I didn't have a baby two months after our wedding!)  ;-)

OK, it's not exactly the same thing, but it does show the need for absolute clarity in names.

lilacck28

CMGragain said:

Last names need to be included because you should never ASSUME that the guests know who you are.  They should not need to consult the return address to figure it out.  I know many people with the same first names.

Example:  We are Joan and John Smith.  DH has a cousin named James Smith who is also married to a woman named Joan.  Relatives have often confused us,  (No, I didn't have a baby two months after our wedding!)  ;-)

OK, it's not exactly the same thing, but it does show the need for absolute clarity in names.

Point taken!

In my case (I do NOT claim that what I am doing is necessarily right for everyone!) , almost everyone I am inviting has already received a STD and is expecting an invitation (the guest list is a moderate size, and made up almost entirely of very close friends, and family members that we knew from the get go we were inviting). And the few exceptions who have not received a STD, we will be contacting in order to get their address. So they'll know exactly who we are when they get the invitation. Plus, our names are not all that common, add in the combination of our two names.... very much doubt there's another Lilacck and lilacck's FI couple that any of our friends/ family know.

Not to mention, the first thing they'll see is the envelope (and the return address, with our full names). The invitation, etc. will come second. The first thing I do when I receive mail is look at the envelope to see who sent it, so I don't know why that would be difficult or an imposition on the off chance anyone invited has a spontaneous case of dementia and forgets our first names/ their relationship to us.

LtPowers

charcoalandblush said:

LtPowers said:

charcoalandblush said:

JCbride2015 said:

My Minted invitation sample said something like "Celebrate the marriage of..." which actually makes me think it's a party after the fact, not the wedding itself.  Other than that, nothing major.

A lot of the ones we looked at had that too. Or "Mr. and Mrs. Brides Parents invite you to the marriage of..." I never realized there was a "right" way to address invitations until I started reading TK boards.

If I may, what's wrong with that? It's informal, but I'm pretty sure it's acceptable wording.

Powers  &8^]

I think the "right" way is "request the pleasure of your company" (non-church) or "request the honour of your presence" (church). Not sure why - that's just always what I see people posting here.

That's the correct formal wording, but informal invitations (to informal events) can (and should) deviate from the traditional forms.

CMGragain said:

"Celebrate the marriage" does not make it clear that this is a wedding invitation.  It could be an invitation to a celebration of a wedding that took place at an earlier date, or worse, a PPD..

Indeed, but I was referring to the "invite you to the marriage of" wording.

Powers  &8^]