Monday, September 15, 2008

When Butterflies Attack Part II

Ok, so now that we’ve established that our ceremony getaway can’t involve projectiles or flames, it’s time to chat about what it will involve.
My first thought was kazoos. Seriously. (Wow – I never thought I’d use the words “kazoos” and “seriously” right next to each other. That’s weird.)

source

Anyway, kazoos are fun and silly and just what people need to let loose a little. But they’re kinda expensive for about thirty seconds of use. Also, have you ever been trapped in a car with a five year old and a kazoo for any period of time? It’s torture. Since I do have friends with kids, into whose hands the kazoos will inevitably fall, I nixed that idea.

Next I thought about ukuleles. Seriously.

source

There’s a group of school-aged kids who play in an awesome ukulele band in my town. They’re really upbeat and fun. Unfortunately, I have given the Mister limited veto power over wedding decisions, and he chose to exercise it on the ukulele band. I mean, where is his sense of adventure and folly for heaven’s sake?! Also, the uke band was a tad expensive for thirty seconds. So I couldn’t really put up a fight on the veto.

What do kazoos and ukuleles have in common (other than the obvious fact that someone utterly insane thought of using them at a wedding)? They’re both noisy! (Am I the only person who likes tap better than ballet, because it’s noisy?) So! If I could come up with something loud that would not offend the Mister’s delicate sense of wedding suitability, we’d both be happy.

Enter . . . the bagpipes! Talk about LOUD! And they have the added benefit of jiving with our shared Scottish heritage. Our Presbyterian church has its own Scottish heritage, so they practically have a bagpiper on retainer. She (yes, SHE!) is a talented cute lass who agreed to play something upbeat for us as we run from the church to the getaway car.


source

But I was worried – without something to throw, would the wedding guests feel cheated? Should they have something to hold to make our escape more festive? Tune in to our next installment for the shocking conclusion of
When Butterflies Attack . . . .

3 comments:

Aimee said...

You gave your fiance "limited veto power" on wedding decisions? So if you really want something and he is ardently against it, you win because you are the girl?

I'm sorry but this bridezilla attitude that the bride is the end all be all most important thing in any wedding has got to stop. Isn't it about the two of you? Shouldn't the day be one that you create together, full of things that you both want instead of things that one of you wants?

It seems so backwards to "allow" him to nix only a "limited" amount of your decisions. Why aren't all decisions made together in the first place?

Jules said...

Whoa, Aimee!

In case you hadn't noticed, much of my blog is tongue-in-cheek! We do make the decisions together, which frequently involves compromise -- on both our parts. He didn't like my crazy ukulele idea, and that's why we nixed it.

I completely agree that decisions should be made together. Sometimes I think the Mister would rather like me to go all 'zilla on his arse, so that he wouldn't have to be so involved in the details.

Thanks for reading and commenting! I appreciate the discourse.

redframe said...

jules you're such a diplomat. okay, really leaving now... 2.05 already!