Angela Cook7 said:I know, I’ve been telling myself the same thing lately... though I am fully aware that a few resident killjoys will probably pop up just to lecture me on "saving money." But honestly, I’m just not the type who wants to spend my entire day prepping mashed potatoes and playing host. Now I find myself wondering: should I be catering to those critics, or should I just do what makes me happy? 😢 That is the million-dollar question, isn't it? Personally, I’d much rather get up, do my hair, put on some makeup, and head out for a photoshoot. Trying to play hostess all day sounds absolutely exhausting to me. I was curious, though—what kind of feedback did you get regarding the "not hosting guests" approach? I know a lot of people are doing that now, and I think it’s a fantastic idea! There's no frantic rushing around, and everyone shows up to the venue feeling refreshed and ready to go..
Don't waste your energy worrying about what people think, or you'll just burn yourself out... there's always going to be that 10% of people who complain no matter what you do.
I think it's definitely worth avoiding if they're both in town—especially if you have to barricade yourself street by street just to manage things.
Or maybe just a small reception before the service, or having people arrive right at the start. People are much more lively when the wedding starts at 6:00 PM instead of 2:00 PM.
On the flip side, fewer guests might wander off to a nearby Starbucks while you're getting married if you invite them directly to the church.