I've been notorious for going stag to weddings, sitting at a table with couples or by the “other” single person, dancing slow dances with the cute little ring bearer, and being the only person over 20 to participate in the bouquet toss. (At my cousin’s wedding, it landed at my feet, and I just stood there staring at it... I think the flower girl picked it up.) I've watched one by one as my friends have planned this fabulous tradition, and there have definitely been some good ones - a touching ceremony, excellent food, great music, and the sentiment of an inspirational couple who are madly in love with each other. But, there have been others that, although most of the elements were in place, the sentiment perplexed me.
Now, being happily in a relationship, I’ve realized it’s not singledom, or the traditional bouquet toss, or even the wedding itself that's bothersome. It's the spectacle. Furthermore, it's the 1950’s expectation that everything should be perfect and the uncomfortable reaction (usually from the bride - sorry ladies, you know it's true) when it’s not.
If a wedding is supposed to be a happy event, why do couples (usually the bride) go so far as to make it an unhappy event for themselves? Should a wedding be sentimental or a spectacle?
I've been in the performing arts my entire life. I believe there is a major difference between art and spectacle. Art is real life - it's a Picasso, or a Bach Cantata. It has sentiment and its purpose is bred from life experiences. Spectacles are boybands and Cirque du Soleil - they are synthetic, made up forms of entertainment. Let me just say - it is very disappointing to go to a performance of Haydn's "Creation" only to see the choir lipsync. Not only is it difficult to watch, it also doesn't inspire me to sing in the choir.
No comments:
Post a Comment