MetaChat - Crossposted from the Blue

It's cute. But I sense it's staged.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 16:11

Staged? No way! It's completely extemporaneous, just like the "So Long, Farewell" goodnight seen in The Sound of Music.

posted by mudpuppie 23 July | 16:13

Hehehe, you know what I mean.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 16:17

That was very cute.

posted by deborah 23 July | 16:22

Scene. Scene! Not seen!

(I am waaaay spacy today.)

posted by mudpuppie 23 July | 16:29

That's OK, I'm waaaay crabby.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 16:39

Today, I am a crab from space.

posted by box 23 July | 16:45

I can't be crabby. It's a beautiful day in central North Cackalacky, my holly shrubs are on the mend, I purchased a new hammock and I saw this video.

posted by msali 23 July | 16:58

It's rainy in NYC, recruiters are getting on my nerves, and I burned my tongue and both of my legs in separate hot food incidents. blaaaaaaaah.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 17:03

My heart is made from stone. Cold stone from the heights of the Andes. Maybe even colder than stone from the dark side of the moon. Yeah, I know, it's all dark, but then so is my heart.

posted by eekacat 23 July | 17:20

I hated all of you, and everyone on the internet. Then I watched that SLYT. Now I only hate a few people. . .none of you and no one in that video.

posted by danf 23 July | 17:22

Meh. It's on every single website today. Seems too viral marketingish to me but maybe I'm just a cynical bastard.

posted by octothorpe 23 July | 17:31

My aunt just sent it to me via Facebook, it must really be EVERYWHERE.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 17:36

I kinda wanted to hate that video, cos I am a little cynical about marriage these days (only a little though, honest) but I was unable to dislike it. For a while, I was starting to think that I was seeing the BIGGEST BRIDAL PARTY EVER though.

Oh, and I'd like to move to North Cackalacky. I like hammocks.

(on preview, TPS, perhaps you should PUNCH your aunt?)

posted by richat 23 July | 17:40

(or, perhaps, the recruiters, or the popcorn?)

posted by richat 23 July | 17:40

For a while, I was starting to think that I was seeing the BIGGEST BRIDAL PARTY EVER though.

Right, because they cycle around! That confused me, too, hehe.

I do not think I will punch my aunt, or the popcorn. I might punch some recruiters, though, just for giggles.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 17:43

Staged. But, effective for a youtube piece. I was hoping to say, staged, but maybe as an after the real ceremony thing, if they were all dance students at a performing arts school. . .but, no, those guys aren't dance majors, and all the bridesmaids look too much alike. Ok, maybe a dancing family? Nah. No traditionally selected wedding party could all move that well.

Um, TPS, wasn't that you in there, one of those "bridesmaids"? Ha. You guys could top this, easy.

posted by rainbaby 23 July | 18:07

No, I refuse. You didn't see Grace Kelly dance down the aisle.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 18:09

TPS, I do think a punching is in order. But, I can appreciate your lack of desire to punch your aunt. She just seemed handy is all, when I suggested some punching.

Oh, and WOW GRACY KELLY, WOW.

posted by richat 23 July | 18:18

I just watched Grace Kelly's wedding on YouTube, just to check on my claim that she didn't dance up or down the aisle. That would have been an embarrassing one to get wrong.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 18:27

Rainbaby, why do you think it's staged? I see several people in the party who can't really dance that well, including the bride. Unless you think her obvious nerves were just staged as well.

posted by muddgirl 23 July | 18:52

Well, it is staged, in the sense that it's choreographed. I stage and choreograph things for (meager ammounts of) money. I would point to the slow-mo sequence, later on, and the dude picking the flower up with his teeth earlier on to point to it being staged. Staged = planned and rehearsed. People - especially a group of people, just don't DO that!

Ok, it's possible they had a "wedding choregrapher" - and it was staged but really an actual wedding march. But as you noted, muddgirl, the bride isn't the stand-out dancer. So then, whose idea was it? Groom? Why do the bridesmaids look so much alike? ok maybe family resemblance, but it's a dang reach.

And I maintain that any semi-random group of eight non-performers can't handle that level of choreography under a stressful situation like a wedding march. Somebody would have cracked way more than anyone in this clip did.

I did enjoy it, and like I said, maybe, possibly, potentially, maybe, it was done (staged) as an post-script to the wedding, after the pressure was off, but I don't know.

I do enjoy the clip, for sure.

posted by rainbaby 23 July | 19:23

I'm just saying these people spent hours on this. Many, many hours. It's fun, but I don't know. The emotional works of a wedding, it seems unlikely to me that this was the planned real-life wedding entrance and they pulled it off this well.

Maybe I am cynical black-hearted bastard, I admit. : )

posted by rainbaby 23 July | 19:29

I'm with rainbaby. We've been trying to find the couple online all day, some little morsel that suggests that they are a real couple, but we haven't found it yet. I even read through all the YouTube comments to see if there was even one that said, "I love you guys, was so glad I was there, see you tomorrow at church" or something- nothing.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 19:31

Y'all please promise me right now that you'll do this at my funeral.

posted by BoringPostcards 23 July | 20:07

I think it's "staged" in that it was obviously choreographed and rehearsed, but I don't think it was "staged" in the sense of "fake." The attendees' reaction was truly spontaneous, including the silent shock at the beginning, and the dancers were beaming.

I'm probably repeating MeFi detective work - I haven't checked yet - but the guy's name is Kevin Heinz. ...this might be their registry and this might be another. This seems to be their Wedding Channel page. I also found a FaceBook page listing both the names Kevin Heinz and Jillian PEterson as friends.

I see no reason to call B.S. based on this video alone. They could definitely be two people who decided to have an awesome time with their wedding. I've been to enough laid-back, fun weddings this year to entirely believe it.

posted by Miko 23 July | 20:22

Ah ha! Miko is a better detective than I am.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 20:28

I'd still like to see a real wedding announcment, but they're hard to find even if you know the people. Since this got so much traction today, I suspect someone will track these people down over the next day or so...

But I just read the MeFi thread, and all I have to say is...if you think this is too happy and fun to be part of a real wedding, I'm sorry you've been stuck attending such lame weddings! This is pretty mild compared to some I've been to. The one with the bounce-house and trunk of disguises stands out in memory... as does the one where the groomsmen, all saltwater fishermen, performed sort of a sword routine with their fishing rods....

posted by Miko 23 July | 20:39

All the weddings I've attended have been perfectly lovely. I would never describe a day where two people pledge their love to each other as "lame", bounce-house or no bounce-house.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 20:41

oops ...might be Kheinz

posted by Miko 23 July | 21:04

So is that a current hit song that's playing in this video? Or am I completely out it and it's like ten years old and I've never heard it?

posted by octothorpe 23 July | 21:16

Chris Brown is a famous R&B artist right now, although not for good reasons right now. Not sure if the song was a single or not; I'm behind on my radio listening.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 21:18

Oh, OK. I have actually heard of Chris Brown and his problems but I didn't know he was a singer. If that's actually singing.

posted by octothorpe 23 July | 21:22

I am as sentimental as the next person, but I just cringed when I saw the first few seconds of this.

posted by pinky.p 23 July | 21:31

C'MON. PROMISE.

posted by BoringPostcards 23 July | 21:41

I CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN NOW IF YOU WANT

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 21:52

Whoops, I'm sensing the crabby... heh

But you BETTER be all happy and shit when I'm dead, or-

....!

Ok, there's no way to finish that.

posted by BoringPostcards 23 July | 21:59

rainbaby - Maybe I don't have a dancer's eye (actually, I know I don't), but I didn' think the choreography was that stunning. A few of them probably like to dance and were the ones confidently showboating, but a few others were pretty damn stiff and their moves were kept simple. Obviously they rehearsed and planned the basics, but I didn't see much cohesive or consistent skill or style to imply something greater than a group of people committed enough to a silly idea to pull it off.

I was pretty stunned that I enjoyed the clip, because it has all of the makings of things that I hate (bad music, weddings, forced goofiness, etc). But I also have a soft spot for people having fun - especially when that fun spreads to others. I'll be pretty bummed if I find out that this staged for some marketing campaign or even that it was done before or after "the REAL wedding".

posted by Slack-a-gogo 23 July | 22:04

WE'LL BE HAPPY ALRIGHTY.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 22:05

I wanted to hate but I can't. I do hope this is for reals. If it is it's fucking brilliant.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 22:14

Not to be a downer, but wedding parties do shit like this at receptions all the time. The only reason this one is getting play is because it's at the wedding proper. I think this is bizarre and, well, a little bit trashy. Who wants to be breathless and sweaty for their wedding vows?

posted by eamondaly 23 July | 22:46

I also have a soft spot for people having fun

Me too.

Who wants to be breathless and sweaty for their wedding vows?

It's summer in Minnesota, it's not like there's really any other choice.

posted by Miko 23 July | 22:51

eamondaly - At the reception, not so special. At the church ceremony, more fun. Granted, by tomorrow I'm sure I'll be back to my curmudgeon ways and second guess why I liked the clip, but at the moment I'll stick with it made me smile. Maybe four vacation days have relaxed my normally impenetrable "feel-good force field" - I'm sure once I'm back at work tomorrow I'll be back to my rain-cloud ways.

posted by Slack-a-gogo 23 July | 23:11

I think a wedding should be a celebration and this is.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 23:15

Don't get me wrong: I loved it, and they were clearly happy. But why is it "more fun" at the wedding itself? Why fuck with the tradition? What makes it better down the aisle at the ceremony instead of across the dance floor at the reception?

posted by eamondaly 23 July | 23:16

Why fuck with the tradition?

Well, tradition exists because it usually makes people happy. If tradition doesn't make people happy, then fucking with it probably will. And when it's done in a spirit of fun and love like this, that's why you do it.

posted by BoringPostcards 23 July | 23:20

Also, if I'm ever allowed to marry my hubby, y'all stand back, because this stuff is putting ideas in my head.

posted by BoringPostcards 23 July | 23:22

Who says the tradition wouldn't have made them happy? Not to be coarse, but I suspect they blew the wad there.

posted by eamondaly 23 July | 23:23

1. It's more fun because it's much more unexpected.

2. What tradition? It's not like there's a single appropriate wedding tradition any more. I haven't been to a non-customized wedding in ages, and the few I have attended were excruciatingly boring. In fact, the idea that there ever even was a standard appropriate wedding is a little bit of a late 20th-century anomaly where everyone pretended they were rich Edwardians for a while. Wedding traditions have constantly changed with their times. Processing down the aisle happily to the sound of a pop tune is not even really new - it's just a dance song instead of Mendelsohhn, and dance moves instead of staid half-steps.

I really, really don't get why people are worried about how this impacts tradition. If you like a staid, traditional wedding, you can certainly have one (for a price). But most people today adapt wedding rituals in their own ways to make sure the day is memorable, meaningful, and special to them. I personally don't find much meaning in a convential wedding ritual, with its stilted rituals that really derive from an upper-class, socially codified protocol that my family never was and never will be a part of. I'd rather not masquerade as that sort of person, and I applaud these people for doing it their way, too.

posted by Miko 23 July | 23:26

"Why fuck with the tradition?" Cuz tradition often means "look how much money we can spend!" and I find it dull and tawdry. I like fun at a wedding. YMMV.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 23:31

Have all of you ever asked your parents, aunts and uncles, and grandparents about how their weddings ran? I really think that we're mistaking "trends of the past few decades" with "traditions." They might have been somebody's traditions, but these behaviors and trends don't actually represent how most people got married before the Wedding Industry (tm) got hold of the idea that there was One Right Way to do this ceremony.

The wedding industry has us convinced that a "wedding' involves brides being given away by someone (usually a male of her family), a processional and recessional, an expensive, single-use white dress, a bouquet, a veil, etc. But most of these things - most of the idea we have of tradition - were products of the Victorian era, drawing symbolically on patriarchal property-exchange ideas dating even farther back. And even then, the vast majority of people didn't have this kind of wedding at all. Those kinds of weddings were for the elites, a small minority in financial terms.

Most weddings of regular people right up through the 1950s or so were civil ceremonies or perhaps church ceremonies (not quite as common outside Catholicism), performed without a lot of advance notice and without all this pageantry, followed by a community feast or a small reception. The wearing of white, the veil, the processions, the blah blah blah blah, were all customs appropriated by a newly expanding and aspirational middle class to mimic the behaviors of the wealthiest. They might have been traditions, but they really weren't the traditions of my family history, or most people's. If we base wedding traditions on the ways that most regular (non-rich) people got married, then they'd be super simple: wear your nicest regular outfit to the JOP, sign the papers, have your friends throw some rice at you, go back to your mom's place and eat roast beef on little rolls, then drive off in a car with shoes tied onto it and wake up to the sound of your buddies shivaree-ing you.'

Ask your older family members what was considered a reasonable or appropriate wedding in their day. Chances are, unless you come from the Brahmin class, your grandparents' and perhaps your parents' weddings were relatively free of what we have come to think of as "Traditions."

posted by Miko 23 July | 23:36

I kinda agree with eamon. If someone in my wedding party suggested this, I'd be really unhappy. If I attended a wedding like this, I'd have the fremdenschamen.

For me, it's like TPS said, any wedding where the couple are truly joyous to be making their public declaration is infectious and joyful. So I look at this video and think, why do people have to try so hard?

I mean whatever makes you happy, but I don't get why people think this is so special. It's just a stunt wedding and happy people. So, hurray yes, happy celebration people enjoying their celebration, but it strikes me just as no more special than matching toddler ring bearers or bridesmaids wearing black. I've never been to a wedding where people weren't that happy.

posted by crush-onastick 23 July | 23:38

Price is irrelevant to this discussion. They didn't pay any less for the church because they danced down the aisle, and I suspect they might have paid more.

Look, there are two phases to a wedding ceremony: in the first, you have the opportunity to tap into a long tradition of quiet reflection culminating in vows and kisses. In the second, you can cut loose and let your freak flag fly. I just think they really missed out on the chance to really enjoy a special moment by jumping the gun on the reception.

In short: they could have eaten their cake and had it too, but they opted out. Good for them, but having had the greatest wedding of all time, I really think they missed out on an opportunity there.

posted by eamondaly 23 July | 23:41

I been to many weddings where most people were not that happy. Fortunately I've been to many where most were.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 23:43

So I look at this video and think, why do people have to try so hard?

Because that's the new tradition! You can't just have a wedding; you have to DIY everything and be "unique" (just like everybody else) and make it all so fucking twee so you can post it on YouTube to impress people. It all stems from the same place that I would imagine a lot of wedding planning comes from- wanting to impress people. Just depends on you want to impress, I guess.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 23:43

Miko - I'm all for throwing the rule books out when it comes to personal expression. Too many people follow traditions just because it's what they feel obligated to do. Traditions are fine, if that's what you want, but they shouldn't be shackles.

You're fortunate to have been to many weddings that broke with tradition - I haven't been so lucky. Most of the weddings are more distinguishable to me by how far I drove or how hot it was in the church than anything that actually happened in the ceremony.

Mrs Agogo and I wanted no part of the wedding drama so we went on a vacation to San Francisco, drove to Monteray, and got married on a cliff overlooking the ocean with just us, a photographer, and a non-denominational official. For us it was perfect - we were able to enjoy the happiest day of our lives (and we were both able to wear of Doc Martens). But for other people the pomp and protocol of the big church wedding are part of the dream. I just don't get it.

posted by Slack-a-gogo 23 July | 23:44

why do people have to try so hard?

I really don't get the critique. It's their day, their commitment, their ceremony. Who cares whether you value the same things they do in a ceremony? You're the guest - your job is to bring the happy, not dictate the manner of the celebration. Someone else's wedding is never about you or your ideas of tradition.

We can all get married exactly as we please, and each ceremony can be a unique expression of who we are, what we value, and the experience we want to bring to other people as we unite our worlds. If what you value is a conventional wedding, you can certainly have one, and you'd have a warm reception from people that love you. If what you value is fun and unexpectedness, then you can certainly have a fun and unexpected wedding, and get a warm reception from people that love you. I have friends of all faiths - Indian weddings aren't "traditional," nor are Pagan ones, nor Chinese ones, nor are ceremonies that consist mainly of vows and ring exchanges and that's it. They're all weddings. They all meet the simple legal and social requirements. Anything else is a matter of taste.

Really, all wedding ritual choices are such individual choices that I have little understanding of why anyone would want to condemn anyone else's desires.

posted by Miko 23 July | 23:46

"Price is irrelevant to this discussion." For you perhaps. Not so for me. All the big expenditure weddings I have been to have been dull affairs (for me). The cheap ones have been fun (for me). So far (over about 35 years) the cheap ones have the better track record.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 23:47

Really, all wedding ritual choices are such individual choices that I have little understanding of why anyone would want to condemn anyone else's desires.

When you used all of the following words to describe traditional weddings- staid, boring, stilted- you were judging and condemning other peoples' choices. So, I think you probably could understand why anyone would want to do so, if you dug down a little.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 23 July | 23:51

Look, there are two phases to a wedding ceremony: in the first, you have the opportunity to tap into a long tradition of quiet reflection culminating in vows and kisses. In the second, you can cut loose and let your freak flag fly.

I submit that you have a particular schema for 'wedding' that is unique to your culture and life experience. You conceive of 'wedding' as a "quiet reflection culminating in vows" followed by "cut[ting] loose." This is a singular, particular kind of wedding. It's not the only kind of wedding, and not the kind everyone wants.

And I further submit that the word 'wedding' can actually take in a far wider variety of rituals, customs, behaviors, and experiences than the one you've encountered as standard, involving a solemn religious ceremony followed by a relaxed party. That's really only one kind of wedding. This couple didn't want to have that kind of wedding. And there is no one who has the power to dictate that that doesn't make it an appropriate, a meaningful, or a real wedding.

It kind of surprises me that variety in weddings is something that many people here and on MeFi seem not to have experienced. I do think that the more types of weddings you go to, the more different ceremonies you see, the less you'd be inclined to see this one as different in a way which is bad or inappropriate. There's really a huuuuuge variation in what happens at weddings in the modern U.S.

posted by Miko 23 July | 23:52

Yeah, TPS, but you missed a nuance: I don't critique the couple's decision to have those kinds of weddings. Those are not the kind I'd want, and not the kind I like to attend. But I'd never say they shouldn't have those kinds of weddings - which is what I see in the critique of this wedding as somehow beyond the pale. People should do what they want, even if what they want is a staid and predictable ceremony. A lot of people do take comfort in not varying from what they read as convention. As a guest, it's not my place to decide whether or not the choice was appropriate. But I can sure as hell say whether I thought it was a good time or not, from a guest's perspective. The legitimacy of their choice as one among many acceptable types of wedding, though, remains unassailed.

All the big expenditure weddings I have been to have been dull affairs (for me).

Seconded. The more expense, the less fun - to a one.

posted by Miko 23 July | 23:56

"Condemn" is a silly term. I'm not condemning them. I celebrate them. I got goosebumps like everyone else and giggled like a 9 year old. But as soon as the video was over I thought, "I guess that's it. They can't top that at the reception." And I was immediately sad for them.

To the "it's their day!" argument, here's an example: I know a kid whose parents saved twenty grand for their kid's 18th birthday. They gave him the money and told him to make his own choice about what to do with it. Instead of spending it on college or investing in anything, he took a part time job at Sports Authority and bought a Camaro. Sure, it was his money, but would you say it was well-spent?

And arse_hat, you're missing the point. I'm pretty sure they didn't get a dancer's discount. They would've paid the same price whether they danced or not, so that's irrelevant.

posted by eamondaly 23 July | 23:58

It surprises me that mecha is more conservative than the blue.

posted by arse_hat 23 July | 23:58

Sure, it was his money, but would you say it was well-spent?

Hell, no. But it wasn't my money.

"I guess that's it. They can't top that at the reception." And I was immediately sad for them.

See, but I think you're feeling sad because your own cultural expectations are that the reception is the place where you have to "top that." What if they don't want to? What if they just want to sit down and eat some good potato salad and hug people, and then pack up the gifts and go to the hotel? They're only 'missing' something if they aren't doing something they want to do. They may not feel your need to have a reception that's some sort of crazy blowout. Maybe they know that Great-Aunt Martha will be there with her portable dialysis machine and want it to be cool and calm. Maybe there is no reception. Maybe they invited everyone to the ceremony because it's cheaper, and are just going to take immediate family to dinner afterward. Maybe the reception is going to be in someone's backyard and feature volleyball and horseshoes instead of dancing. You just don't know, and it's quite possible that 'reception' to them, if they're having one, doesn't mean what 'reception' to you means.

posted by Miko 24 July | 00:01

"And arse_hat, you're missing the point. I'm pretty sure they didn't get a dancer's discount. They would've paid the same price whether they danced or not, so that's irrelevant."

I was just commenting on the fact that it is a very small wedding with very few accoutrements.

posted by arse_hat 24 July | 00:02

As for the "why do people have to try so hard?" discussion, I am usually weary of over-fake fun. Obviously there's a sliding scale there, and it might make me a judgmental jerk for rating what I think are other people's level of sincerity, but some people really do try to too hard to have fun. Or at create the illusion of having fun. Maybe because I've never had a problem finding fun, and most of my friends are the same way, I can't relate to having to schedule how and when to have fun.

But in the case of the video here, I really think it was a case of "wouldn't it be fun if we...". And then they did it, and appeared to have fun doing it. A few in the party looked a little less committed, but played along because it only works if the whole group does it. But who knows, maybe for weeks there were calls going back and forth trying to come up with something "extra kooky" or there was a great self-imposed pressure to make some kind of grand attention grabbing move.

I'm not exactly sure why this worked for me - it could have gone from cute and fun to cloying and unpleasant with just a slight change or two. If they were wearing clown noses I would have hated it. If they danced a little better or more in unison, I don't think I would have even made it to the end of the video. If they broke into the dance number in the middle of the vows I would have cringed because it would have seemed like the wrong time(maybe I'm more traditional than I think).

posted by Slack-a-gogo 24 July | 00:15

It surprises me that mecha is more conservative than the blue.

Nooooo kidding!

posted by Miko 24 July | 00:17

and this is the first thing on the nets to make me tear up in many years.

posted by arse_hat 24 July | 00:21

If someone posted a link to a Chris Brown music video of this song with dancing, everyone would be like WHAT THE HELL IS THIS TRASH, I HATE POP MUSIC. But in the context of a wedding video, everybody loves it (or at least very few people have commented specifically on the song itself). That's kinda funny to me.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 July | 00:21

I barely noticed the music and have never heard of the artist - and what I heard didn't make me want to learn more.

posted by Miko 24 July | 00:27

The song sucks to my tastes but so what? I would have been hard pressed not to dance with the wedding party. And yes Chris Brown is a low life turd but I had no idea who sang the song and even if I did I still would have wanted to dance.

posted by arse_hat 24 July | 00:30

Something about this video has been bugging me since I saw it and I just realized what it is. It reminds me of being in the Dominican Republic. A wonderfully Catholic place, the DR. People will just break out into dance and/or song, just any place at all, at any time. It just always makes me happy to be still breathing.

posted by arse_hat 24 July | 00:39

Jill & Kevin are for real.

posted by Miko 24 July | 06:51

I can't believe there's this much discourse over a wedding. It's *their* wedding, they can do what they want! Seems pretty low to me to judge a couple's choices at their event. It's not like they're forcing everyone to eat raw zebra ribs or anything. Just because it's not what people attending either expected or would prefer doesn't give them the right to shit all over it. It's not theirs to shit on.

What is it about something unique that goes well that makes people put their judgment hats on? I just don't get it.

I personally think most weddings are boring. They are for the people who say the vows. They always go by the same scripts. So if they always end up in the same place, why not play with how they get there & quit torturing everyone with predictability? Let everyone have some fun along with you - isn't that what a celebration IS? And if there are folks who want the re-runs of traditional, then they can sit there and wait it out. Or *gasp* leave.

*obligatory YMMV*

posted by chewatadistance 24 July | 07:27

Hey, eamondaly - turns out you needn't have worried about whether they could "top that" at a reception. On Good Morning America, there was this interchange:

Host: "What was the actual wedding dance like? Did you do the traditional wedding dance?"

Kevin: Absolutely not.

Jill: No. We had another choreographed routine to "This is the Rhythm of the Night" that we put together.

It's wonderful fun. In the interview they say that they had a single rehearsal for this, and let each pair of dancers just figure out their own moves.

posted by Miko 24 July | 08:27

I don't condemn it, Miko; I don't care about it. I wouldn't enjoy such a wedding; I wouldn't have such a wedding, but that such a wedding happens impacts me not at all. Like eamon, I think this wedding bypasses the moment of quiet reflection and solemnity that I find thrilling in weddings. That's my opinion; clearly it's not theirs. I don't believe they shouldn't have a wedding like that, but I also don't believe it's an example of something better than most people's wedding choices. That's the feeling I took away from all the praise of this wedding video; that it was more authentic than "traditional" weddings. The discussion over in the blue, particularly, struck me as "how amazing! how authentic! people actually happy at their wedding! because they weren't traditional! they weren't solemn!".

I guess I'm saying the same thing you are--Really, all wedding ritual choices are such individual choices that I have little understanding of why anyone would want to condemn anyone else's desires.--in the opposite direction.

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 08:35

That's not the opposite direction. That's exactly what I'm saying.

It's worth considering that though many people may choose a conventional wedding for reasons like yours - that you appreciate solemnity, pageantry, or whatever aspect of that sort of event appeals to you - many others end up having a conventional wedding for different reasons. In the blue there are a couple of stories about people whose spouses, or families, dictated most of the wedding choices, meaning they didn't feel free to be creative. In my own life, I've heard many of those stories, as, I'm sure, have most of us: "We'd rather have just had a small ceremony, but my mother wanted the extended family there./As far as I'm concerned we could have gotten married at the hotel, but my wife insisted on a church service./ His father paid for everything, so he picked the hall./ I didn't care about [this or that], but [the wedding planner/my grandmother] said this was the best way" And so on. It's not uncommon. There are so many stakeholders in a wedding, and a lot of the time, people make choices for different reasons other than their personal taste, perhaps even having an alternate/fantasy version of the wedding in their heads which they understand won't really happen.

So when people are surprised and pleased at this event, some of them are likely speaking from the reality of their own experience: that they didn't get to make all the choices they'd really have liked to; that the need to please others overrode their own personal tastes; that they simply felt better following the conventional script; that they had disparate ideas and compromised. That sort of compromise happens so often in wedding planning that it's a common trope. So many people, viewing this, are enjoying this couple's sense of freedom from those conventions, and perhaps admiring or envying their ability to do something that was surprising and delightful, and that didn't feel as weighted and compromised as their own weddings did.

posted by Miko 24 July | 08:53

I insist they do a live re-enactment. In Times Square, so I can join, too.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 July | 09:07

Comments on the Blue:

When my husband and I were planning our wedding the father wouldn't let us do anything. Our own vows? No. Having some of the wedding party read poems we loved? No. Lighting one of those two candles joined into one? No. He wouldn't even let us have the wedding march because it wasn't a spiritual song. He was concerned over the sleeveless dresses the maids wore, but was glad they went past the knee.

We complained and he pretty much told us that he was not involving himself in nonsense and we should thank him for 'fixing' our ridiculous plans.

***
We had a totally boring solemn ceremony, straight out of our Methodist minister's book. It was so much easier to do it that way.

***
This just reminds me of how lame our wedding was because her grandmother was footing the bill (and letting us keep the remainder, which we needed) and thus we had to do everything the "normal" way. I insisted on a top hat and tails, but that was as goofy as I was allowed to go.

***

The frequency of this kind of experience - as both participant and guest - is the reason so many people have found witnessing another choice refreshing, even if it's not for them personally.

I wish they had a "Rhythm of the Night" video, too.

posted by Miko 24 July | 09:12

Yeh, slack, you're probably reading it right. It probably wasn't a labored decision or an attempt to create fun. It surely was a genuine idea and expression, but it was one that did not work on any level for me.

My best friend got married almost ten years ago to a woman I had only just met, so aside from my best friend Groom and his sister and one other guy standing up, I didn't know anyone in the wedding party. The Groom's attendants (me, the sister, and two men) traveled to be in the wedding, the bride's were all local. Most of the planning had been done via email (although I did get to come to town to test and choose the caterer!), including the part where each member of the wedding wrote a vow to read and have the couple repeat. Groom was one of the most important people in my life, making a huge life change, and they seemed to be walking a weird line between wedding-industry-wedding and something that expressed their attitude, feelings, hopes and need for a occasion to mark their new life together.

At the rehearsal, the Groom's side were like goofy children. Groom's sister and I wore combat boots to the rehearsal (and to the wedding--but you couldn't see them under our traditional bridesmaid dresses); the two guys on our side were wearing Hawaiian shirts. The Bride's attendants (I still don't really know any of them, but she's fun) were all in going-to-meetin' clothes. The Bride's side vows all seemed so serious and deep; ours included "make time to have fun" and "don't forget that finding your own happiness will leave you free to create happiness with someone else". I thought the whole wedding was doomed to be boring or uncomfortable. But it wasn't. It was beautiful.

At the wedding, you saw how it reassured Groom to have his closest friends basically giving him their advice and consent during the ceremony. You saw how it helped the Bride connect her "old" life to her "new" life. It made sense, and it made their wedding very much theirs. It was still a little awkward; I suppose, in part, because it was two groups of strangers in a room--there was no long line of connection across both sides of the aisle. Bride & Groom hadn't grown up together, gone to college together, or even known each other more than three years. Many people in the room had known either the Bride or the Groom that long, or other people in the wedding party, but no-one had known both. Bride and Groom wanted to make a moment that moved them and made their leap of faith public and real, and they wanted everyone in the room to share it with them.

In my experience, weddings are not private moments for the couple or their attendants; they are events populated by the people the couple wants to witness their moment of public declaration of commitment. It's the couple's moment that is being solemnized, but the guests are there to add to the weight of it, to add to the thrill of it, to add to the celebration. I don't think performance makes sense in that ceremony.

Hm. I've forgotten where I was going with this. I wasn't moved by this wedding video, even if it was heartfelt. I don't think there's anything wrong with being unmoved by it. I don't think--in being unmoved by it--I (or anyone else) is questioning its intent or authenticity or joy. I've seen some pretty ugly wedding dresses, but I never doubted how beautiful someone looks being that happy at her own wedding.

I guess I'm just shocked by how many people have never been to a wedding that reflected the honest choices of the couple getting married.

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 09:23

That sounds like a really nice ceremony. I think that in thinking about this video, it's also important to remember that we're not seeing the ceremony, which could certainly have been as solemn, traditional, serious, and gracious as any conventional ceremony. The processional is just that - a means of getting the wedding party up the aisle. It was in an evangelical Lutheran church, so I imagine that the ceremony was religious and probably no less moving and solemn than others that happen there. You can't tell from the processional what the ceremony was like, nor judge the emotional impact of the entire wedding on the guests.

posted by Miko 24 July | 09:31

I suppose what I mean by the opposite direction is: I'm reacting to all the praise of this wedding in a negative fashion.

Instead of saying "Really, all wedding ritual choices are such individual choices that I have little understanding of why anyone would want to condemn anyone else's desires.", I'm saying "why would anyone want to make an exemplar of anyone else's desires".

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 09:32

Why fight everyone you know and love tooth and nail to have your wedding day your way when it doesn't even matter? It's a few hours and it's over, who cares if all the guests are bored or if there are elements you're not crazy about? Compromise never killed anyone. In the end, all that matters at the end of a wedding day is if the couple is married, so I can't look down on anyone who chose not to make their wedding a huge battle.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 July | 09:38

In the end, all that matters at the end of a wedding day is if the couple is married

I totally agree. What I'm saying is that it's not worth looking down on anyone for what they do, whether it's a quirky circus wedding or a re-created Di and Charles. Weddings can be complicated events, and different people feel different ways about it. There's a lot of variation, and there's no 'right way.' Some people consider the experience of the guests to be very important. Some consider it a private moment for the couple and a few witnesses. Some really love doing something that feels traditional. Some love creating a memorable event that feels unusual.

There's really no doing it wrong as long as the couple ends up married, so there's no doing it right either. Decisions about how to perform the ritual can come from what you like and what you want and what works for your family and the people who matter most to you. A lot of people enjoyed watching this, so fine. The couple enjoyed it, their guests enjoyed it. Convential weddings are fine. Unusual weddings are fine. Nobody else has to approve this kind of event, or enjoy it, or repeat anything like it, which is fine. Nobody's required to like this video, but other people might. Fine. There's nothing wrong with either of those kinds of people, though I think that saying "Weddings shouldn't be like this" is out-of-bounds if it's not your wedding, because it's all personal, and in the U.S. the only thing common to all weddings is the issuing of a marriage license and the binding legal contract it represents.

posted by Miko 24 July | 09:49

Wow, posted this yesterday, and almost immediately, sadly realized that the video had already gone viral. I watched it at every site where I encountered it. Tears ran down my cheeks and a big smile hurt my face every single time. I guess I was just having a good day (actually, yesterday was a GREAT day), but it never occurred to me to read into this little gem. I didn't look past the five minutes it took them to make their way down the aisle. My brain is armored against any in-depth analysis of what this video implies, or how it may reflect a shift in our cultural attitude towards marriage, conformity, solemnity of the day, religion, argh.
I wish that everyone could have seen it just as I saw it, and had no desire to read any further into it than to simply ascertain the name of the lucky couple. I had no idea it would generate so much conversation (I figured it had all been used up already on the blue).

posted by msali 24 July | 09:54

msali: I am also startled by how much discussion it generates. But then, every time I find myself thinking about what sort of wedding I'd have (nope, not even engaged), I'm also startled.

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 10:02

In any event, I love you all, and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it.

posted by msali 24 July | 10:06

crush-onastick has it.

posted by eamondaly 24 July | 10:14

Don't feel bad msali! I loved seeing it and I think it's a great little video. Like you say your brain is wired against reading into this, I'm wired to put myself in the situation and imagine what it was like. Any wedding I've been involved in, there is some degree of conflict, compromise, and resolution. A rehearsal for a traditional wedding in a church with a party this size might last close to an hour. Add in the choreography, and I'm looking at four hours easy. Every entrance is timed out, how do you run back around and re-enter, who stands where, etc. Then they choreographed another routine for the reception. That's a pretty big effort on top of the other efforts of a fairly big wedding. Another thing that I can't help thinking as this discussion goes on and on. . .did they do the thing where they selected the wedding party based on looking good in the dress and the ability to walk in rhythm and/or dance? I'd expect to see someone looking awkward as all heck and doing a little walk walk walk pose thing or something. And no old people. That element might have added to the charm for me. I'll never know. And they do look like they are having fun. I had fun watching it. I'm not judging them. But I'd really be curious about a behind the scenes look at how they pulled this off. It's cynical of me, I know.

posted by rainbaby 24 July | 10:23

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32122519/ns/today-today_weddings/

I'm with Miko.

This is fun and if you don't think so YOU SUCK! If you think they're messing with some great godly cosmic ritual that was formed by a manipulative patriartical and political system that believed in the ownership of women YOU SUCK. If you think they are disrespecting their guests by dancing down the aisles in shared joyous abandon then YOU SUCK. If you think their guests didn't appreciate this, then you didn't watch the video. Grandma is in her 90s and clapping happily along… apparently Grandma was part of the dance going out.

I also think that all the righteous hoo-ha posturing on the blue is full of retarded ass smoke. Everyone professes to be a good Christian or good whatnot and yet they're always first to break the tenant of judge not, lest they be judged. We should seize joy whenever it occurs because there's so damn little of it around. Make a joyous noise people.

I think this couple has a long and happy future ahead of them. The only issue I have with them at all is that she's wearing a nightgown from Anthropologie for all of these interviews. I know because I own the nightgown myself. It's not a dress, it's a nightgown people!! (Rubs chin and wonders if I can pull off that nightgown tonight at the bar with the husband.)

posted by eatdonuts 24 July | 10:32

It's kind of a Rorschach, yeah.

From a personal point of view, my idea of what kind of wedding I'd like to have has changed quite a bit since my early 20s. In those days I did value and envision traditional choices much more. When I gave it any thought, I generally imagined a church ceremony, a long gown, a big crowd, and a big reception. It just seemed like all the trimmings would be a lot of fun and would appropriately signal the specialness of the event.

At my advanced age today, and having been to umpty-up weddings - dozens and dozens - I have a really different perspective. To me, looking at it today, the wedding as a ritual has two purposes: one, to get married (duh) as in to exchange promises and complete the legal contract, and two, if you want, to ask your community's sanction and celebrate the new institution you're creating. I think there are really innumerable ways to accomplish those twin goals.

I've seen a lot of weddings, a lot of happy marriages, and a lot of breakups, and nothing about the size, solemnity, or expense of the wedding seems to bear on the eventual success of the marriage. So what I've come to value in a wedding - what I think makes a good wedding - is staying within your means, celebrating with your invited guests in a way which everyone enjoys, and keeping it simple while making the day feel special. At this point, when I imagine myself in a wedding I picture a nice but simple dress that could be worn at other special occasions, a simple and brief ceremony with a JOP or a friend who's a person of the cloth, and a nice warm relaxed buffet afterward with a little music. Probably outdoors somewhere if weather permits. No big woop, no fancy hall, no eleven bridesmaids, no over the top decorations or favors. Just a friendly simple celebration.

posted by Miko 24 July | 10:34

Hey rainbaby, eatdonuts' article from MSNBC has a lot of the detail you're wishing for.

Heinz and Peterson (she’s keeping her maiden name

Heh. If she's keeping it, it's not her 'maiden' name.

[Matt Lauer] asked the couple who came up with the idea.

“It was mine,” Jill told Lauer. “I danced growing up and was a dancer through college and loved dance as a way to express yourself and share joy. So it was something I always thought about doing.”

It didn’t take her fun-loving husband Kevin long to agree to the idea, saying the decision to dance was “the first thing we really decided about the wedding that he wanted to do.”

posted by Miko 24 July | 10:44

This is fun and if you don't think so YOU SUCK! I really don't think this statement agrees with what Miko is saying. And eamon is easily one of the least judgmental people I have ever met, so I really don't think he is judging anyone in not thinking that the video is fun. And I'm in my own head, all the time, and for all my many failings, not thinking this is the most amazingly awesome fun repudiation of evil weddings in the whole wide world is not one of my many failings.

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 10:56

For the record: I was being a bit tongue in cheek in my response. I however have no way with text so it is entirely possible it didn't come across as such.

posted by eatdonuts 24 July | 10:58

Oh hey, nothing about the video, but Miko's last comment reminded me that, in general, of the weddings I've attended, the younger the couple, the more traditional the wedding.

Probably lots of factors there... who is paying, caring more about expectations, not wanting to do the "wrong" thing etc. etc. But just something I have noted over the years.

posted by gaspode 24 July | 10:59

Yeah, I definitely am not saying anyone sucks.

the younger the couple, the more traditional the wedding.

I've noticed that too.

posted by Miko 24 July | 11:00

(yeh, I was probably a little trigger-happy, eatdonuts. here, have a cookie. EVERYONE loves cookies)

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 11:07

Hi I heard there were cookies.

posted by mudpuppie 24 July | 11:23

msali, for what it's worth, I took the video as intended. The discussion it's spawned really surprised me too.

*steals a plate of cookies and a pitcher of milk and flees*

posted by deborah 24 July | 11:52

deborah: I hope you took the plate of these cookies, which I was deeply disappointed by.

posted by crush-onastick 24 July | 12:06

I didn't like the video. Sorry.

posted by Doohickie 24 July | 12:10

I'm glad the video is real people- always think of this Mefi comment when wondering on viral videos.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 24 July | 12:11

Well, I always cry at weddings, and that was no exception.

posted by JanetLand 24 July | 12:42

Actually, I'm the most judgmental person, but about the least important things. So it's largely a wash.

posted by eamondaly 24 July | 15:37

I watched it and while I thought they all looked like they were having fun, I'm glad none of the weddings I've been party to were like that. That's no judgment of them, it's a judgment of me, and how I would feel dancing down the aisle of a church to pop music: I wouldn't like it, but I'd go along with it for my friends' sake, and I'd take pains to smile and let them know what a great time I was having and how comfortable I was doing it. In short, I'd lie.

But really, the procession doesn't matter, it's the vows that are the important part, that's when I well up, and anyway who cares what I think? It's not my wedding.

But I also don't like being told that I don't have a heart just because I have mixed feelings on the matter. Like what you want but get off my cloud.

posted by Hugh Janus 24 July | 16:06

My weird moment of today was when my co-workers went all ape-shit over it, had turned up the volume on a computer so they could all watch, and I'm all, "Meh, I saw that on Metafilter yesterday."

Of course that even sadder part is that my boss had just come back into the office, so I couldn't crowd around the computer and look at it again. Someone had to look like they're working on Friday afternoon.

posted by TrishaLynn 24 July | 17:19

23 July 2009