Just back from touring a couple of “cottages” in Newport, Rhode Island. Built towards the end of the 19th Century, the larger houses there have ballrooms sufficient in size to secure entry into the “400 club”, for which one needed to have at least $3 million in ready cash (like $100 million today?) and a ballroom large enough to accomodate 400 people. More or less every week there was an enormous party in every house. This invites a comparison between Alva Vanderbilt and modern-day young people. Ask a member of an engaged couple any time within one year of the wedding to take part in an activity. “Oh no,” he or she will reply, “I am working on wedding planning.” But a woman like Alva Vanderbilt could plan a 100-person party in a heartbeat then go back to her work on women’s suffrage.
9 thoughts on “The mansions of Newport, the 400 club, and modern weddings”
Comments are closed.
Ah, but did Alva Vanderbilt have also a day job? Most modern-day young couples have to work to pay the bills, so their wedding-planning and other activities have to be carried in their scarce free time.
I doubt that Alva Vanderbilt had to plan the minute details of her parties. Her personal secretary and other members of her household staff probably took care of all the details. Alva probably just had to come up with the theme for her party and the guest list. She probably didn’t even have to send out the invitations.
However Alva did not have access to Mail Merges, EMail, Telephones (OK, she probably did), Cellphones, Websites, or any other modern conveniences for the scheduling of these events. I would bet you that any of us is at least 3x more productive than 5 of her assistants. Yet today’s young couples are involved in the planning of weddings with more elaborate planning than a shuttle launch. And then half of them get divorced, ostensibly over money issues (that may at least be reduced by having a simpler, less expensive wedding – but that’s another rant).
Or maybe using tools like these are a pat of the reason why things doesn’t work so well anymore. Alva did not have to spend half her party planning time playing hobby system administrator nor did she have to battle websites with dhtml, layers and buggy html that only barely works with one version of one browser at one screen resolution, and her invitations and the guests confirmation letters did not get mangled, lost or delayed due to spam.
I have a clear feeling that a few intelligent, practically minded and hardworking secretaries equipped with mechanical typewriters, fountain pens, plain old telephones (not even ISDN), envolupes, stamps, filling cabinets etc. are a lot more reliable and efficient than two such people with a full selection of “office productivity software” and websites.
In 1975 I was a student at Lahore American School in Pakistan. There were a variety of American schools in the area and we had various social events usually revolving around sports. The largest of these gatherings, held in the Intercontinental Hotel, and with an attendance of roughly 450 people (I was on the planning committee) got hit by a huge storm. We lost power, all the trophies blew into a pool. Thankfully one of my classmates – a Pakistani (which meant huge fees) – offered to move the entire thing to her basement. No planning, no nothing. 25 servants roused from sleep, 450 people, party till dawn.
“He or she will reply”? Uhm, no, wedding planning is for chicks, man. What’s wrong with you? Guys would be satisfied to be married by signing a webform; weddings are for women. 🙂
Oh, but don’t skimp on the bachelor’s party!
I thought this might be a good way to reach you, in case you dont check your email (at philg@mit.edu), but I’ve sent you an email asking permission to use a picture, its quite beautiful.
Philip does check his e-mail, but Mr. Alonzo’s post is a reminder that that particular form of communication is flying headlong toward uselessness.