Talk:Wedding/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Untitled

I always thought the traditional end-of-wedding music was from Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream. The .ogg sample is the first time I've heard the Widor piece. -- Merphant — Preceding undated comment added 11:00, 19 November 2002 (UTC)

I'm not too clued up on the exact order. There's "here comes the bride", then the Mendelssohn upon the actual kiss. I think the Widor comes later; or possibly while people are waiting around for the bride to arrive. (egad, how do I even know this?) -- Tarquin 11:05 Nov 19, 2002 (UTC)

As far as I know, the Wagner is used as a processional (as the bride walks down the aisle), and both the Mendelssohn and the Widor are used as recessionals (as the bride and groom leave the church). The Mendelssohn is perhaps more usual, but the Widor is often used at grander weddings, I think. I could be wrong, but I'll add this to the article anyway, and somebody can fix it if I am. --Camembert

Incidentally, it may well be that the Widor has become more popular since being used at Prince Charles and Diana's wedding in 1981, but I don't know that for a fact, I'm just speculating. --Camembert

Traditionally Wagner(Lohengrin) is played as the bride goes to the altar, and Mendelssohn(Midsummer Night's Dream) as she leaves the altar. Both are now in Britain considered old fashioned, and theatrical and never played at smarter weddings. Widor's toccata became fashionable after it was played at the wedding of Princess Margaret in the early 1960s, it is played generally on leaving the church. Couples can have played whatever they like from a pop song to a hymn. In Britain 'Trumpet Voluntary' (or an abridged version known as 'Trumpet Tune') and the 'Prince of Denmark's March' are popular choices, as is Handel's Water Music. Widor's toccata requires a very large organ, so often the 'Arrival of the Queen of Sheba' (which does not) is played as the bride leaves (contrary to the title). I have the misfortune to be able to play a church organ, hence I know these things! Giano 16:56, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• The same sort of reverse snobbism exists in the U.S.; many established churches disdain both the Wagner and the Mendelssohn, for no real reason, except perhaps that they are hackneyed. Some churches (or their organists!) refuse to allowed these pieces at all; it seems to be the same sort of 'popular' elitism (talk about your oxymorons!) that had opera singers bagging Sarah Brightman in the 80s and 90s. Ah, well. Small correction on 'Trumpet Tune' and 'Trumpet Voluntary', Giano, I thought they were different pieces by different composers--one is Purcell maybe? They're often incorrectly attributed and mixed up with each other--including by me! Don't feel like looking it up just now...Quill 00:49, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• p.s. on Music: Giano is right on all counts about Wagner and Mendelssohn, but it wasn't always that way, I believe Eleanor Roosevelt had Mendelssohn played as a processional, for example. Elizabeth L. Post, as conservative as she is, weighs in in favour of both, but concedes that many folks find ...those pieces unsuitable, too secular, too "overdone", etc. And many couples simply hae choices that mean more to them or that they prefer.' In the U.S. today, High churches such as Lutherans and Episcopalians frown on them, and on secular music at weddings; the Roman churches tend to allow just about anything. I, for one, hate that Widor toccata! Quill 07:03, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

The white dress never symbolised virginity. The veil does. That the white dress symbolises virginity is a common misconception (it symbolises that the dress is only going to be worn once), but it is still written out in etiquette books (as a result of this misunderstanding), and supposedly the "proper" way to do things, for a divorcee or widow not to wear a purely white dress. --Daniel C. Boyer 17:31, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• A full-kit church wedding the second time around is delusional, and like any self-deception is a proper subject of comedy. Wetman 23:37, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're a hard man, Wetman! I would forgive a young widow e.g. who had been married in a registry office two hours before her young man shipped out and lost him in battle a month later. Then, too, I find it sexist and offensive that the 'second wedding rule' (or third, or fourth...) de rigueur only applies to the woman--the man could be a jaded syphilitic old reprobate and still have all the trimmings--jeez!Quill 00:49, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

External Links

Folks just can't help themselves--keep linking to commercial sites. Even the ones that don't look like it at first sight, are. I'm tired of reviewing and deleting, so I'm taking out the heading.

If someone comes up with a site that is truly by a hobbyist, they can add it in. Quill 05:43, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your wish is granted ;-) Przepla 10:57, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wedding ceremonies

I can't seem to find any descriptions of wedding ceremonies themselves - what the parts are for or what they mean, variations, roles & responsibilties etc. Surely there would be some pages already?

I was going to take a look at the one for Thai Buddhist weddings, but couldn't find it. Should I start a page called Thai Buddhist wedding ceremonies or Thai Buddhist wedding ceremony or should it be called something else?

--KayEss 16:47, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Recentness of today's weddings

It would be nice to see more information and emphasis on how remarkably recent the current Western wedding is (within the last 200 years at most). -Acjelen 5 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)