Saving the Date - what to include?

mountainofdebt

Personally I think STD cards/magnets/whatever are another invention of the whole wedding industry trying (and succeeding) in making every bride think that unless they have x. y or z the wedding will be a complete disaster. can think of other things as well that money is simply wasted on all in the name of keeping up appearances..

If you really wanted someone to come to your wedding and you knew they may have issues, when I got married you told them of the date though if someone couldn't make it then it wasn't the complete end of the word.

As an example we've been told of a friend's 50th birthday party date - but I'll be blown if I'm cancelling plans just to go.

Emmylou_2

I made mine myself - black & white printed labels stuck onto postcards. And then posted (second class, of course).

They said:

Me and OH would like

*space for name to be written in*

to save the date/evening of

15 September 2012

to join us at/celebrate our wedding in Bristol

Formal invitation to follow

(day guests/evening guests) and gave our contact email.

We did this because (a) we knew a lot of people who book hols for that time of the year - still warm but kids gone back to school and (b) because I was super dooper excited.

minerva_windsong

mildred1978 wrote: »

Unless its happening within the next 9 months, I wouldn't advise sending out save the date anything.

I get it if your wedding's at a busy time of year, such as December or around school holidays when people might be away or have other commitments, but for a standard weekend I'd just tell the people you really want there when it is and leave it at that.

That said, in answer to the OP's question, I'd say keep it simple, especially as it's for a magnet - just something like:

Save the date!
(day)th (month) (year)
for X and Y's wedding
Formal invitation to follow
(your phone number)

Torry_Quine

Idiophreak wrote: »

Perhaps I might have phrased it more delicately nonetheless, I think there's a definite generational shift whereby marriage used to be a "prerequisite", if you will, to a certain way of life...it enabled you to "get your leg over", as I put it, and to "set up home together" as you put it, and to start a family...

Yes sadly this has changed.

Personally, I think it's a great thing that attitude has shifted. There's only one reason to get married these days - and that's because you want to. It's not a practical decision anymore, it's a romantic one...and that, for me, just can't be a bad thing...


I really hope that you aren't saying that marrying without living together isn't romantic! I would say quite the opposite actually, It seems anything but to me to do it the other way round. People who marry without living together are still doing it because they want to!


I also think, and I know you'll disagree, that it allows you to take marriage more seriously - or if not take it more seriously, then make marriage a more worthwhile institution...the idea you might "meet someone, fall in love, get engaged and then get married" as you put it fills my heart with sadness...to me it means one of two things:

I do disagree. Marrying first shows you are taking it immensely seriously. To me the sadness is the reverse of you.

a) You're not taking a life-long commitment seriously enough if you're really willing to dive into it without "knowing" your partner in all ways, without seeing what they're like to live with, without weathering some storms with them...Don't get me wrong, I believe in "true love", "love at first sight", the whole "your soul's recognition of its counterpoint in another" business...But I also believe in "loving moderately" and working at your relationship.

I too believe I have found my soul-mate and take my commitment very seriously. To me marriage is about growing together in love and knowledge through good and bad times.

b) You're so committed to the idea of marriage that you'll dive in to this marriage and "make it work" at any cost - and here we account for the millions of women who continue to suffer at the hands of domestic violence "to keep the marriage together", all the women who live (imho) fairly empty, sad lives with a man they don't really love...And a statistician somewhere ticks them off as another "successful" marriage. *shudder*.

I don't agree with marriage at any costs. Domestic violence is truly awful and should never be condoned. Where I do disagree though is that all too often people are not willing to go the extra mile and work through problems. A developing marriage will change as the years go by and you should be prepared for this.

Just to say I really thought I'd answered this already so apologies for that.

Idiophreak

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I really hope that you aren't saying that marrying without living together isn't romantic! I would say quite the opposite actually, It seems anything but to me to do it the other way round. People who marry without living together are still doing it because they want to!

No, on the contrary, I can well understand the romanticism of a whirlwind romance and the sense of excitement / adventure you must feel when you're about to set out into life together.

Sadly I feel that, like most good things in life (;)) the reason this is exciting is because it's, ultimately, risky.

I think my concern is that people should marry because they want to marry...not because they want to live together, start a family or anything else. If you make the conscious decision not to live together before marriage, it's only natural that wanting to live together puts pressure on wanting to get married - seems weird to me.

Torry_Quine

Idiophreak wrote: »

No, on the contrary, I can well understand the romanticism of a whirlwind romance and the sense of excitement / adventure you must feel when you're about to set out into life together.

Sadly I feel that, like most good things in life (;)) the reason this is exciting is because it's, ultimately, risky.

I think my concern is that people should marry because they want to marry...not because they want to live together, start a family or anything else. If you make the conscious decision not to live together before marriage, it's only natural that wanting to live together puts pressure on wanting to get married - seems weird to me.

I don't think that getting married 18 months after we first met can be described as whirlwind though which was my case.

I did marry because I wanted to and don't get why you seem to be saying that if you aren't already living together you aren't? To me living together and being married are the same although I wouldn't call anyone 'weird' who thought otherwise.