My fiance and I are from different parts of the country. My father is in ill health and cannot travel, so I must get married in my home town. However, I would like to have the reception in my fiances home town because he has a huge family and we have lots of friends in that area. How should we go about splitting up the two events? Is it rude not to have a reception for the guests that can only attend the wedding?
2006-11-29 06:24:15 · 7 answers · asked by funnyhaha 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Weddings
What you can do is get married in your town as originally planned and have a smaller scaled back reception. Depending on the amount of guests, you can make it as informal as a huge backyard bbq with family or go with a few select people to a nice restaraunt.
As far as the reception, it makes sense to have the larger one where the majority of the people are. That way everyone feels included, and you have twice the amount of fun.
A reception doesnt necessarily have to have dancing and all that, like i said, you can take the smaller group out to a nice restaraunt or have a nice party at one of the relatives houses. that wont be deemed tacky.
The nice thing about two receptions is that you get to see everyone, and everyone walks away feeling happy.
2006-11-29 06:28:25 · answer #1 · answered by glorymomof3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should have a small cake and punch reception after the wedding, maybe an hour or two. If folks are going to travel to your wedding, you should give them the opportunity to congratulate you at a reception -- that's what they're for, after all!! We're talking a couple hundred dollars max for a little, simple reception so people can see you and your new hubby and give you the gifts and cards they brought.
But as far as having another reception in your fiance's hometown, that's totally fine, and done pretty often now that people move away a lot more often. A friend of mine had 3 (THREE!! Count 'em!) receptions after her wedding. The one at the church, one in her mom's hometown, and another with her husband's parents and family.
2006-11-29 14:44:42 · answer #2 · answered by jael_hk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One bride had her wedding in the town she now lives in & has friends. Her immediate family attended, but that's all who could make it.
The reception was held in her home town where her parents & most of her relatives lived. This was 3 hours away. Those who attended the wedding who were able to go, went to the reception as they were held the same day.
But before the party began, the bride & groom had a short ceremony with the exchanging of wedding rings. The family felt like they got to be a part of the actual wedding ceremony.
Everyone, both friends & family seemed pleased. I like when a plan comes together. :)
2006-11-29 14:40:01 · answer #3 · answered by weddrev 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, that is rude. Have one wedding and one reception. Let people travel...the guests come to the wedding, the wedding doesn't go to the guests. Some people will come, and some people won't.
2006-11-29 16:38:44 · answer #4 · answered by Pink Denial 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it is not rude some people only do a ceremony and no reception. My mothers friend did a ceremony and then had her reception a few weeks later. You can do it however you want to do. I think it makes things more interesting
2006-11-29 14:52:38 · answer #5 · answered by BabyDolll128 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why don't you just have 2 receptions?
You can have your regular wedding day and then throw a big party in the other location on another day.
2006-11-29 15:21:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes
2006-11-29 15:51:24 · answer #7 · answered by Jenny 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋