the new york times question

I would have photoshopped our faces in, but ... no.


Back in the halcyon days of Mrs. Astor's 400, a true lady's name was only to appear in print three times: upon her birth, her marriage and her death. While the first and the last were most certainly out of her control, the patrician set as a whole considered (well, considers) announcing one's nuptials in the The New York Times somewhat of a birthright and, frankly, a necessity.

Thankfully, for those of us who can't seem to find our relatives' names on the manifest for the Mayflower (I'd have better luck on the Nina, the Pinta or the Santa Maria), the Times has loosened its strictures fairly significantly. Now, instead of battling scions of the Rockefeller and Kennedy clans (although they obviously make their appearances), my biggest competition are all those adorably dressed and pedigreed gay couples. It is REALLY hard to compete with two handsome men in matching bow ties and Warby Parkers, guys.

Caveat: I know that this is not an issue that all couples deal with, nor is it press that every couple wants on their wedding day. I totally understand that and I have a lot of friends who would have been shoe-ins for this and very politely declined. I also understand that this is an infinitesimal issue not only of wedding planning, but in my life, the world, the universe, etc. etc. etc.

But.

Have you met me? Obviously I want to be in the Times. I'm writing a blog about my wedding; you don't think I wouldn't want the extra press? When people first asked me if I were going to try or not, I'd kind of give this coy look and shrug and say something like, "Oh, I don't know. I think so, but we'll see!" OK. This was obviously a lie. I have wanted to be in the Times since I learned how to read, which was exceptionally early and probably another reason why Michael and are such a perfect fit for the column. Also, I'm calling him Michael from now until the wedding because I think that sounds more patrician.

So, here is what we've done so far in terms of our application.

1) Take the Times-specific photo. As our photographer Lilian noted, this is not a flattering angle. The instructions on the Times' website say that your eyebrows should be in alignment. Are we Muppets?! But, luckily, since I am such a BAMF at wedding planning, this was on our shot list for our engagement shoot. Is it the best picture of us ever taken? No. But my hair and makeup had been professionally done and the lighting and composition is wonderful because Lilian is a BAMF at taking pictures.

2) Fill out the online application. If this is too reminiscent of applying to colleges, I apologize now. Unfortunately this process includes the same hand-wringing and waiting period followed by an event that costs your parents or you a pretty penny. I make this sounds awesome, yes? Thankfully you can save your application and fiddle with it until you're ready to submit.

3) If you want to be considered for the Vows column rather than just an announcement, you have to fill out the application in its entirety. This means writing up something pithy about how you met, how you fell in love, whether you registered for Hermes china or went for something more classic and so on and so forth. If I were so inclined, this is where the phrase "meet-cute" would appear, but I still don't understand exactly how to use it and I find it rather annoying.

Anyway! It's all a work in progress. Once we actually submit (which I hear should be no less than six weeks before), I'll update everyone with any details. Until then, just keep frantically refreshing the blog.

how we're hashtagging the wedding

friday surprise: wedding-themed mini cupcakes