My wife and I just got a big
delivery of pictures from our wedding photographer. She asked us to look them
over and mark any shots that we didn’t want in the final albums that she’ll
print for us and our parents. She did an excellent job capturing the day—many
artfully lit shots of people dancing, cramming high-fat foods into their
face-holes, and slamming beers, as we wanted—so we didn’t have many notes for
her. Only one, actually: Please remove as many shots as possible of the two of
us kissing. Our own pictures had creeped us out.
It wasn’t that our photographer
had an unusual fixation on PDA. Compared with the other engagement and wedding
pictures that show up in my mailbox, our photos were fairly discreet. Many
couples apparently consider it normal to have themselves photographed kissing,
gazing deeply into each other’s eyes, spooning in the standing position favored
by high school kids who figured out that it allows them to press their areas
together under the guise of “hugging,” and otherwise posing like people who are
15 minutes away from having, as they say, marital relations. And then they send
these pictures to their grandparents.
Many couples apparently consider
it normal to have themselves photographed kissing, gazing deeply into each
other’s eyes.
I seem to be an outlier for
finding the practice unusual. In an informal survey of the six couples I know
who remembered posing for wedding or engagement smooches, five said it hadn’t
made them uncomfortable—including one woman whose uncle was her photographer.
(Another said she was largely fine with everything asked of her until the
photographer suggested her dad kiss her on the cheek.) Two of my male friends
smugly told me they complied with kissing requests because they enjoyed kissing
their wives, as though they were going to earn extra marriage points for
sending me an adorable answer. I refused to convey this pandering to their
spouses.
Only one friend wrote back that
he’d been somewhat skeeved by his own wedding pictures, and he made a
perceptive point. “It was uncomfortable,” he wrote, “because of the sheer
volume of kisses required in addition to them being extremely passion-less.” He
identifies exactly what I find unnerving about posed PDA photographs: They’re
performances. They’re not candid moments that tell you something about a
couple’s affection for each other. (Let it never be said that I object to
capturing a spontaneous smoocheroo.) Nor do they document the wedding—what
people were wearing, who was in attendance, what the venue looked like—for
posterity. Posed PDA exists to formally insist on the physical connection
shared by two people whose physical connection I never questioned in the first
place.
This is still true to some
extent, of course, as it’s the rare reception that doesn’t include a joke about
the bride and/or groom’s parents looking forward to grandkids. But as gender
roles loosen up and individuals wait longer in their lives to wed, Coontz says,
weddings have become culminations—the celebration of two mature adults who have
found their match. A marriage is the payoff for years of perfecting oneself and
searching for just the right partner. Says Coontz: “It’s the highest step you
can take. It’s absolute confirmation that this relationship has reached the
point where it’s just where you want it to be.” This form of modern marriage is
the outcome of maturity, not the beginning of it.
Top
Comment
I
am in favor only of pictures where people pose like they did in the 1870's.
Unsmiling, looking straight ahead, nothing to look forward to but death. More... -TheDude
Join In
In this environment, documenting
your own PDA might make sense, Coontz observes, though she notes that she’s
never formally studied wedding photographs. We now think of wedded couples as
having found an ideal match, and physical compatibility is part of that match.
Looking at it this way, sending your grandparents a borderline-sexytime photo
of you and your fiancé is not much different than giving those same
grandparents an optimistic take on that fiancé’s job prospects. Both have the same
message: “I know I waited a while to do this, and I know a lot of money is
being spent on this ceremony, and I know I’m still in grad school, but don’t
worry: I made the right choice. We are so perfect together.”
I bet most couples who’ve been
engaged could do without this kind of perfection anxiety. There is too much
pressure to come across as blissfully relaxed and confident—happy, successful,
well-adjusted—during the culmination of a very unrelaxed engagement and
wedding-planning process. Our weddings could stand to be less performative,
less like a job interview in front of hundreds of relatives and friends. You
don’t have to have life—or relationships—completely figured out to know that
you love someone. If weddings tilted back some toward what Coontz describes
(sans gender stereotypes)—a celebration of two promising rookies starting their
marriage career—we might feel less stressed about them. And, more importantly,
I’d open fewer envelopes to find pictures of two of my friends humping each
other. Gross, guys.
No comments:
Post a Comment