.
Polite and Respect?
C'mon Ron - put a little logic into play here.
The bride and groom spend $5,000 on a great wedding band, plus another $800 for a DJ to play the breaks, and last hour.
The bride and groom spend the first hour with a photographer, if they choose to dine before a formal dance - do you really believe that proper wedding protocol dictates that the dance floor remain EMPTY for 2 hours while the expensive band and DJ play background filler?
Did you know that the minimum room charge for a ballroom like the Westin Copley is well over $15,000? add the band/DJ and divide that by 5 hours: your "politeness" represents a waste of nearly $7,200.
If up to 40% of the reception is supposed to be background music it's no wonder so many DJs feel threatened by iPods!
I don't know about you but in these parts, nobody dances until the Bride and Groom have their first dance. It's just protocol.
The Bride and Groom will either dance right before dinner, or right after dinner.
Wow, that's a lot of money. That bride and groom better get dancing. You seem to be creating all kinds of scenario's where people not are being able to dance until after the couple and wasting time and money. Speaking for myself I never said under any circumstances people are not allow to dance before the bride and groom. If they wish to follow tradition, etiquette, respect, protocol, whatever then it is proper for the guests to wait to dance until the bride and groom have graced everyone with their first dance. Since people these days do just about whatever they wish, in some cases it doesn't matter. This scenario that it slighted in your favor doesn't change the fact that many people know to respect the couple and not dance until they have.Polite and Respect?
C'mon Ron - put a little logic into play here.
The bride and groom spend $5,000 on a great wedding band, plus another $800 for a DJ to play the breaks, and last hour.
The bride and groom spend the first hour with a photographer, if they choose to dine before a formal dance - do you really believe that proper wedding protocol dictates that the dance floor remain EMPTY for 2 hours while the expensive band and DJ play background filler?
Did you know that the minimum room charge for a ballroom like the Westin Copley is well over $15,000? add the band/DJ and divide that by 5 hours: your "politeness" represents a waste of nearly $7,200.
If up to 40% of the reception is supposed to be background music it's no wonder so many DJs feel threatened by iPods!
Turn the tables, how fair is it when a couple has spent a lot of time and money learning a specialized dance. Rehearsing their timing and preparing to wow the crowd with their first dance. But when it comes time half the people either aren't in the room, or their outside getting some air. Or maybe they've been dancing so much not caring about the wishes of the bride and groom, only thinking about their own fun, that half the wedding guests aren't even paying attention to the couple.
You can create and exaggerate all kinds of scenario's to work both ways but still it doesn't change the fact of what some people have come to expect. Now with all this fuss you've gotten so far away from my original intent of what I said you've missed the point.
Originally posted by ME!
.
I don't forbid anyone from dancing at anytime. If my couples want to party as soon as guests arrive then we party. When a couple is trying to figure out when to do their first dance I tell them what, why, and how things work best. This helps them make an informed decision. I tell them that most people out of respect will not dance until they've seen you the bride and groom do your first dance. You've officially opened the dance floor. That makes the majority of the couples more comfortable to do the first dance upon their introduction into the ballroom.
G
Guest
Guest
So, now back to the topic at hand (and to keep Fuzzy off Tylenol), I will be trying a wedding on June 6th with Justin's agenda format. I'll post it later on this evening.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth, here.
You say there's no restriction - yet, you label the act as "disrespectful."
Make up your mind - is it wrong or not?
What you are calling "tradition" is just "superstition" imposed by social insecurity. There is no historical or cultural precedent that reserves the dance floor until the the Bride and Groom dance.
I didn't miss your point reagrding what people "think" about the dance floor. I'm just informing you that your notion about why they think that way is incorrect. It is NOT a tradition - it is a social phobia.
I recommend you try it with the Bride's agenda.
G
Guest
Guest
LOL.... let's stop with this silliness about "wasted money" at an event.
Come on.... they pay x-amount for use of the room for ALL PARTS and aspects of their celebration combined - not just "for dancing."
As long as they are IN THE ROOM, it doesnt matter if their toasting, eating, mingling, folding paper airplanes, whatever...
They are using the room - they're getting what they paid for.
Only if the B&G explicitly stated they are renting a room for 5 hours and fully well EXPECT 4 hours of that to be dancing ahead of time would the "wasting money" scenario come into play. In that extreme (never to happen) case, it would simply be on the dj to help the couple plan that first hour so as to allow the desired amount of dancing.
To say that money is "being wasted" if people arent dancing or able to dance is foolishness.
They're their for the formalities as well as the "let loose." It's all part of the same big picture, and the couple is paying money to the venue to house both.
Come on.... they pay x-amount for use of the room for ALL PARTS and aspects of their celebration combined - not just "for dancing."
As long as they are IN THE ROOM, it doesnt matter if their toasting, eating, mingling, folding paper airplanes, whatever...
They are using the room - they're getting what they paid for.
Only if the B&G explicitly stated they are renting a room for 5 hours and fully well EXPECT 4 hours of that to be dancing ahead of time would the "wasting money" scenario come into play. In that extreme (never to happen) case, it would simply be on the dj to help the couple plan that first hour so as to allow the desired amount of dancing.
To say that money is "being wasted" if people arent dancing or able to dance is foolishness.
They're their for the formalities as well as the "let loose." It's all part of the same big picture, and the couple is paying money to the venue to house both.
Careful man.... don't hurt yourself... That stuff ain't for the faint of heart!
Nah.... you'll do fine. You make the event... not the playbook you use. Its just a little easier on the eyes... that's all.
G
Guest
Guest
I did a wedding for Seventh Day Adventists. They don't dance. Nobody danced.
They also didn't waste their money because they had a nice wedding reception with enjoyable conversation enhanced by enjoyable background music.
They also didn't waste their money because they had a nice wedding reception with enjoyable conversation enhanced by enjoyable background music.
Exactly. Different strokes for different blokes. Everyone has a different definition of a successful event - it's easy for us to forget that sometimes and assume that every event *should* play out a certain way.
It's not the money - it's the artificial and unnecessary limitation you place on your own potential.
Just like the poeple who are anxious to dance but won't because they've bought into the collective social phobia that no one is supposed to dance before the Bride. It's just not true. It's the result of people not knowing what's acceptable in a given social setting giving way to one more urban myth.
It's just like any other social myth/phobia.... but in the end, who cares? What's the basis for any etiquette or social-norm? This isn't any more or less baseless than any other we could name.
If the Bride and Groom share that "phobia," and they want it that way, our job is to facilitate.
If a couple comes up to me and says they want to open up the floor the minute they walk in and dance until dinner is served with their first dance after the cake, you can bet I'll do it.
It may be a pseudo-tradition based on really NOTHING, but what does that really mean? Basis for it or not, it's still become a tradition that is ingrained to some considerable degree in both couples and their guests.
Can we choose to be maverick's and renegades and push boundaries to maximize "danceage" at events and change things up? Sure! If the couple goes along with it or suggests it, then FULL STEAM AHEAD!
But does it really make a difference if we or the clients choose to not go that path?
Much ado about nothing!
If the Bride and Groom share that "phobia," and they want it that way, our job is to facilitate.
If a couple comes up to me and says they want to open up the floor the minute they walk in and dance until dinner is served with their first dance after the cake, you can bet I'll do it.
It may be a pseudo-tradition based on really NOTHING, but what does that really mean? Basis for it or not, it's still become a tradition that is ingrained to some considerable degree in both couples and their guests.
Can we choose to be maverick's and renegades and push boundaries to maximize "danceage" at events and change things up? Sure! If the couple goes along with it or suggests it, then FULL STEAM AHEAD!
But does it really make a difference if we or the clients choose to not go that path?
Much ado about nothing!