Let's talk about dancing.

thelastdreamer · November 2013

FI and I are deciding between two venues. One is larger and would accommodate 225 guests. If we go with this one, we'll have a larger wedding with simple (but still well-hosted) food, lots of dancing, etc. We'd invite all our college friends and it would definitely be a more party atmosphere.

The other venue is small, a tiny white chapel on a hill. It's exactly what I've always imagined. But it only holds 80 people. FI and I would be sad to not be able to have every single person we may want, but we also like the idea of really being able to "go all out" if we only had 80 people. As in, five course top of the line dinner, etc. We like the idea of it being intimate.

However, if we go with the second venue (what we're leaning toward), we're not sure about dancing. Most of the people who would be invited would be our family, most of which are extremely conservative, no dancing type people. Like I'd say 55-60 of our 80 guests would probably not be at all into dancing. At that point, is it awkward to have dancing at all? I want a first dance and Father/Daughter, Mother/Son, but I don't want to then open the dance floor and hang out with five people while everybody else purses their lips at us. I know it's rude to only have special dances though.

Thoughts? If I go with plan B, should I just scratch dancing? I know you can't always have your cake and eat it too. I'm just curious what people think - if you went to a wedding, would you care if you were one of seven people on the dance floor?

mysticl · November 2013

I have been one of just a handful of people on the dance floor. It gave us plenty of room to move. The non-dancers weren't opposed to use dancing, no body was disapproving of us. They either just weren't into dancing or were too busy smoking to be in the reception.

JoanE2012 · November 2013

I've never been to an evening wedding without dancing, so it would be weird to me. No dancing would be more accepted to me at an afternoon wedding or an evening wedding that's held at a venue where no dancing typically occurs (ie restaurant, wine cellar, etc) and the reception is shorter.

Me personally? I wanted dancing, so I would opt for the first choice. It's really a personal decision.

southernbelle0915 · November 2013

If I were you, I'd go with the bigger venue and invite your friends. Have fun, have dancing!

I guess it depends on what you want to prioritize though. I always prioritize having more people and a good time than a "dream venue" or whatever. But everyone is different. I also think about the relationships I want to maintain down the road. So if you're only mildly friends with these college buddies, I can see going with the white chapel. If they're people you want to maintain close relationships with, I'd go with the bigger venue.

misssunshine17 · November 2013

I would also go bigger. I guess it depends on what type of wedding you want. At the end of the day, for us, we really wanted to celebrate with everyone who was important to us, so we went with a cheaper venue to accommodate that.

KatWAG · November 2013

I think having more family and friends is more important than the perfect venue. Plus it sounds like you know the bigger venue will result in a more fun night.

itzMS · November 2013

I personally loved my big wedding with all of our cousins and high school/college friends. It was so fun seeing so many people socializing and having a great time.

My vote is if you can afford it, go big.

thelastdreamer · November 2013

Haha ok I see that the consensus is go big. But IF we chose to go small, do you think it's weird to have dancing if only a handful of people partake? Or should we just scratch the dancing?

tammym1001 · November 2013

I think it depends on your and FI's personalities. FI and I definitely could have had a huge wedding with a party atmosphere, but that isn't really our personality and we would have been a little uncomfortable being the center of attention of all those people. We opted to go for something much smaller and intimate. We are still having dancing, but there may only be 10 or 15 people dancing. I think it's perfectly fine, but it will definitely be a much different atmosphere than a huge club type scene.

southernbelle0915 · November 2013

thelastdreamer said:

Haha ok I see that the consensus is go big. But IF we chose to go small, do you think it's weird to have dancing if only a handful of people partake? Or should we just scratch the dancing?

It's only weird if the people dancing think it's weird. If you want to have a small dance floor, do your dances and then leave it open if people want to dance, go ahead. If your family is as you describe, it'll probably stay vacant but at least you're giving people the option.

thelastdreamer · November 2013

Yeahhh. Hmm. After reading these responses and talking to FI I'm even more torn. Romantic, intimate, fancier wedding with nearest and dearest, or fun, relaxed celebration with all our friends. Blahhhhhh. Somebody decide for me.

I think we're going to think about it for a couple more days and then make a call. To those who had one type of wedding or the other, were you happy with your decision and why?

tammym1001 · November 2013

I haven't had my small, intimate wedding yet, but I'm definitely excited that we are doing it this way. The only bad thing so far has been that there are definitely people upset that they aren't invited. I'm ok with that, but if you worry about hurting people's feelings it may be something you want to think about.

southernbelle0915 · November 2013

thelastdreamer said:

Yeahhh. Hmm. After reading these responses and talking to FI I'm even more torn. Romantic, intimate, fancier wedding with nearest and dearest, or fun, relaxed celebration with all our friends. Blahhhhhh. Somebody decide for me.

I think we're going to think about it for a couple more days and then make a call. To those who had one type of wedding or the other, were you happy with your decision and why?

We had about 175 people. REALLY glad we did - it was our style, our dance floor was packed, and all of our family/friends were there. I'm glad we did it this way because I would rather refer to my wedding as "exciting" and "a blast" than "intimate" and "fancy". It's totally a personal thing though, but for us, a big wedding with lots of dancing was the right choice.

I think your idea to sit on it for a couple of days is a smart one. Next week revisit it.

JoanE2012 · November 2013

thelastdreamer said:

Haha ok I see that the consensus is go big. But IF we chose to go small, do you think it's weird to have dancing if only a handful of people partake? Or should we just scratch the dancing?

Nope, as long as you don't have a huge dance floor. It should be proportional to your guest list.

I think it's nicer to provide the option for people to dance if they want to. I know some of the older folks in my family wouldn't normally hit the dance floor for the "upbeat" songs, but they would get out there for the slower songs. You can also have the DJ "read" the crowd. If he notices more people get out to dance for a particular genre, he could play a bit more of that.

And you will be chatting it up with your guests, so chances are slim that you'll be on the dance floor all night unless you purposely do so.

erinlin25 · November 2013

if the option is there I always enjoy a dance floor and will dance even if I am the only one dancing. which has totally happened before. No matter how big or small your wedding there will always be a handful that will or will not dance. I would have it as an option, especially if you are looking forward to the spotlight dances.

Let's talk about dancing.

Re: Let's talk about dancing.

Choose Another Board

Search Boards