Apologies to Billy Idol, but a recent article in the Washington Post about local weddings has me thinking in the abstract (I’m as far from the lavan as I have ever been) about wedding customs and how they change.
The article makes a number of interesting points. It starts by describing how non-desis have discovered the business opportunities involved in brown weddings, such as Sue Harmon who has two white mares specially reserved for baraat duty, or Foxchase Manor which has learned how to handle the havan without setting off all the fire alarms:
“The normal instinct is to blow out the fire when you’re done … But that creates this huge puff of smoke that’s actually much bigger than when the fire is lit. So the key is to keep the fire in a portable container, and then when you’re done, you carry it outside and close all the doors before blowing it out.” With an average of 80 South Asian weddings a year, the staff has had ample opportunity to perfect the technique, he added. [Link]
Still more interesting to me was a story of how other “ethnic” couples have adapted some aspects of desi ceremonies:
 |
|
Why wear white? |
South Asian vendors, meanwhile, are increasingly hearing from non-South Asian couples who want to borrow their customs. Caucasian couples who came across photos of Sood’s creations … have asked her to decorate their weddings in the same shades of maroon and gold. She’s even draped a mandap — the wedding canopy — with kente cloth for an African couple… [Link]
But the bit that really caught my attention was about how ABDs are wanting to have hybrid wedding ceremonies that incorporate aspects of the white weddings they grew up watching on television:
Perhaps most radical, however, is the growing use of whites and ivories in the decorations. “In Indian culture, white signifies mourning,” she said. “It used to be such a taboo for weddings. But now so many brides are demanding it.”
Priti Loungani-Malhotra, 32, a dressmaker based in Arlington County, has even designed a white version of the classic Indian wedding gown, with a mermaid-shaped lengha, or skirt, that would do Vera Wang proud. [Link]
I always thought precisely those two aspects of western weddings – the procession down the isle and the white dress / black tux were boring and dull compared to the circumambulation of holy objects (at least in some desi weddings) and bright red wedding garments. I know I’m a guy, and the long walk down the isle brings attention to the bride, but I just never liked it. For one thing, I don’t like the parts of either culture that view a woman as something to be given from one man (the father) to another (the husband).
How many of you would (or did) seize control of your wedding from your parents and create a wedding ceremony that incorporated aspects of both cultures? Are you all more enamoured of white wedding customs than I am?
[An aside] Incidentally, the whole white wedding thing comes from Queen Victoria who changed white from a color of royal mourning (as amongst many desis) to the color of the virgin bride:
Queen Victoria was not the first royal bride to wear a white wedding gown, but the first of the modern era. White had been a traditional color of royal mourning, and although not often utilized as such, white was not considered a suitable choice for a royal wedding. Victoria’s choice popularized the white gown as no other had before her. [Link]
should read :
“Is it a one time deal? sure I might be more likely to do it, either way my point stands that if you don’t truly believe in the act, you’ll just be going through the motions no matter how “
Why, HMF, it’s the sweetest thing you’ve ever said.
I liked this version better.
HMF, the ambiguity is in part due to my resignation that i most likely will not find a partner who holds this same belief on marriage. if it’s just a ceremony that i have to go through, i don’t have insurmountable objections – i believe in many of the basic tenets associated with marriage – i just abhor the form (which sometimes rules over substance) issue. though i would make it very clear to my partner that our relationship matters far more than any sort of ceremony for society’s sake. as for my parents, the ceremony is a small price to pay for a lifetime worth of poor communication with them. i am so different than my parents, and usually it doesn’t matter since the worlds reflecting these differences rarely meet, but this is sort of unavoidable in many ways. of course, i would still fight for doing away with many things in the wedding ceremony. but in the end, it’s a celebration of our relationship with those who matter to us. even if it’s not necessary, it’s still a celebration, no? this would most likely explain why i would not appear indifferent – i would give all these little parts of the ceremony my own new and subjective meaning. ha!
as for hard-core beliefs – yes, i do agree that compromising overly is a sign of incompatibility. as i explained above, i’ll compromise on the form, so long as our understanding on the substance is well-matched. there are several other issues that are, for lack of a better word, deal breakers. these are far more indicative, for me, of our compatibility than the issue of wedding/marriage.
Just curious about the prenup stuff in the earlier comments… anyone know a desi who actually has one or is doing one? Or is that hush-hush?
About prenups in general, some commenters vehemence makes me think about something I’ve observed lately – desi guys who very strongly feel that their wife should work and have a strong career… and those that are ok with her having a career but seem to long for the traditional stay-at-home type.
I’ve met too many desi guys with high-powered mummy’s (VPs, doctors, etc.) who complain about how they wish she was around, how they want someone they can take care of, etc. And these same guys going for the girls working in non-profits over someone who’s at their level in terms of earning capacity and/or education.
Ever been to a florida gators game? you wear orange for your personal safety as much as anything else.
Alright, if its a business decision to invite so-and-so then that’s fine, but back to the original point: Parents do not have assumed ownership over the event, making statements like the ones my friends parents made is absolutely unacceptable. If their parents treated them like sh*t, it’s a tragedy, but they should have the smarts to not turn around and do it to their kids.
Wow my comment was really unclear. About the desi guys who grew up with mothers with big-time careers (e.g., high income, demanding carers), I meant that a lot of these guys talk about how they wish their mom actually was around when they were growing up to do the traditional things more like making them food, getting them ready, etc. And that a lot of these guys talk about how they work hard so they can take care of their future family and put less pressure on their future wives…
Akin almost to I think the “nanny-syndrome” people you meet that may be non-desi.
[deleted]
What’s the issue with saying husband when you actually are married? I’m not getting the logic. A mother is a mother is mother no??
Sorry thru you entire absolutely endearing and sane posts I had to pick up on this one because it jumped at me because it’s a peeve. It’s like being invited for a bridal shower but not the wedding. You can’t invite people to an event where they are required to spend money and not give them the honor of inviting them to an event where you spend money. I think the actual ceremony is the most common denominator, all the events can be discretionary.
Accidental Enlightment, you may have just accidentally opened a can of worms here, but I do hear ya. My mom is a business woman and was one when I was growing up. I, like your friends, wish my mother had been around more when I was growing up. Even my mother wishes she had found a way to have a career and be home for her kids in the afternoons(after school) and in the summers. I think your guy friends are tops if they’re working hard to make it possible for their wives to have both, that is, of having a family and a career. Have I understood you correctly?
I should have explained further – it’s also know what events people can come to, also.
People who were invited to the Bachelor party weren’t invited because it was assumed they weren’t going to come to the wedding anyway (and they were the types that were interested in the bachelor party a lot more).
Also, its coming off the perspective of a wedding in India – it’s a bit informal and not as strictly regulated per person as one would do so here, in a wedding hall with table arrangements and all. The reception here seems to be the largest of all events. I’ve been to several weddings where only family were around for the wedding (a 100-200 people considering family sizes) and more at the reception. But your point is very valid – if you know someone can attend the more important function, you don’t leave them out by simply inviting them to a shower or lesser program.
In short, it’s being a bit strategic, an reciprocating satisfactorily (for relationships and bonds that matter, obviously). At least in my situation, no gifts or money was accepted from others in any event beyond the wedding. The Bachelor party was designed to combine vacation time of several people, and the party just happened to be that time. That way everyone could enjoy it and not inconvinience themselves too much.
Your point of people spending money on lesser events, then not being around to be treated for the main one is absolutely valid. We did not do that, just knew when and how schedules would work and communicated with our guests. Didn’t hear any complaints from the grapevine either 🙂
I butchered this. Meant to say, “It’s also about knowing what events people can come to in advance.”
JOAT, I hope you won’t consider this too forward of me but.. I was meaning to say this earlier but congratulations on your upcoming wedding and also to the common sense approach you are taking to the whole thing.It can’t be easy to organize a wedding half the world away and I can see from your posts that you are being really practical and also accomodating of your family’s/to be in-laws’ wishes etc etc. Go ahead and enjoy your traditional wedding- I hope it will be wornderful – it will be a nice memory for many years to come and pay no attention to some of the naysayers here!
Now, HMF, that wasn’t your original point. But I understand you have a reputation to uphold here, I wouldn’t want you to seem sweet even though your acronym would indicate you are…a right menace to bees, though.
I know, but even what you think was my original point, wasn’t even my original point. My original original point was restated in 2^8-1 or #255.
oddly enough, bees is only a single letter away from… well, you get it.
You never wished your father had been around more? Why this stereotype that the mother is a better parent than the father?
yes, I get it.
Sounds like you just made up that stereotype, as I never compared the two in the first place.
Awwww than Runa I’m trying to be practical but also practically in tears some days 🙂 hehehe.
This isn’t 100% clear to me, are you saying you abhor the actual ceremony? the reading of vows, or the “giving the bride away”, the religious aspects?
does my #96 explicate?
More from OppositeLand, I have my citzenship as well. ak, I believe I understand your point about the substance over form. There are so many assumptions made with marriage that are never really looked at or measured(form), because they’re just that, assumed. But by choosing not to take on the status of marriage you’re able to get at the substance of what your partnership is because there aren’t any ground rules to that relationship yet. In other words, you two can come to your own agreement of what the structure of the relationship is and not what society/culture have deemed them in the institution called marriage.
Ok Ak, I get it, when you say form you mean the “social sanction” component. But to me, that’s really all that a marriage is (or should be – it definitely shouldn’t be a ‘kick in the ass’ that forces people to say “well this is the person I’m with, better make the best of it” as it so often is done in the Indian context).
yay, bess! it was getting a bit lonely in OL. bess, thank you for that articulation.
JOAT, husband is clearly associated with marriage, and while i might have to go through with a marriage in form, i am uncomfortable that i be called a wife, or my partner a husband, since all of these link back to notions associated with marriage. if there were no social connotations associated, that’s fine. but until now, partner is the only word that comes closes to describing what sort of relationship i want. though i can see this becoming a problem – if we do get married by law, sometimes i will have to refer to him as my husband, and i can see myself doing that rather begrudgingly and sarcastically 🙂
HMF, glad it is clear. but it’s also not – i see your point. this thread has made it very clear what i have in store if/when i have that committed relationship. as for your notion of marriage – i would agree somewhat. and i have nothing against it – it just irritates me that other forms are not given the same respect, or even recognition.
257 is not me, the usual Amitabh who comments here.
Correct. Three strikes maketh a troll. Banned and deleted.
Amitabh # 274, Ah-ha! I did wonder about that because it definitely was NOT your style 🙂
JOAT:
as everyone here has offered congrats, I will do the same. although, this announcement seems to correlate with your new monicker JOAT instead of the full expansion. Wedding planning doesn’t leave you that much time to type out the full name I take it. Either that or you’ve chosen the well traveled path many entertainers have in the past:
New Kids on the Block = NKOTB Puff Daddy = P diddy Prince = the symbol thing
fyi – i was just watching E! true hollywood story (it’s so unnecessarily dramatic – i love it!) and apparently the official switch by the band to NKOTB was not for the sake of an acronym, or to save time; it was for an image change, in the face of competition from hip-hop and rap musicians.
same with
MC Hammer –> Hammer
and
Legion of Doom –> LOD
I think HMF is looking for a feminist sugar momma.
bess – yes, that was generally what i meant.
going point about why shouldn’t the father be around more… without having gone through child-raising myself, it seems like very a big challenge to raise a family that’s really connected to each other, without at least one parent dedicating him or herself full time to it – at least when there are multiple children involved and they are young. almost all dual career families i see either had a nanny or other caregiver (a.k.a. naniji/dadiji – grandparent) around almost full time to take care of the kids, so to speak. and the kids raised by a non-parent have conflicted emotions about whether they feel closer to that caregiver or the person who’s genetic material they’re actually carrying around.
the onus has traditionally been on the mother to stay at home… and statistically speaking more women are more open to making career sacrifices in order to have greater involvement with their families. a lot more men are as well, and there are all sorts of blends coming up with how parents are doing re: work-life balance, etc. but it’s still skewed to the female half.
perhaps this is post is dead so hopefully this topic will come up another time. i still think a lot of what HMF and Amitabh et al are saying prenup prenup prenup is kinda weird. i’ve never heard of any indian person openly getting one! do you think priya sachdev and vikram chatwal did? i can’t think of other desi examples where one spouse has much more than the other… but i just haven’t heard of it, even among really, really financially successful family and friends who married much less successful spouses. i don’t even know who’s brought it up…