DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Manners and Brimstone
HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Weddings
*****************************************************
#Post#: 23518--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: camlan Date: January 7, 2019, 3:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The OP says the guests, all but one couple, will be "on-site."
Does that mean everyone is gathered at some sort of park or
resort or hotel?
My question in that case would be, how easy/expensive will it be
for all those guests to eat before the ceremony?
If it will be easy and not budget-busting for everyone to have
breakfast and lunch or brunch beforehand, then the reception
doesn't have to offer as many meal-like options. But if there is
no restaurant on-site, or the restaurant is open inconvenient
hours, then more thought has to be given to making sure people
will get an adequate meal after the wedding. Or if there is only
one meal option and that option is Chez Wicked Expensive, again,
the hosts will need to provide more food.
#Post#: 23525--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: NFPwife Date: January 7, 2019, 4:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=926.msg23507#msg23507
date=1546888034]
[quote author=Hanna link=topic=926.msg23505#msg23505
date=1546886726]
I would refer to most of the food the OP described as heavy
appetizers rather than snacks. Snacks to me are pretzels and
chips (or crisps!) or the mixed stuff you get in bars.
And meatballs and Mac and cheese are more than snacks, right?
Throw in bread to make a sandwich and that’s lunch.
[/quote]
This is what I was thinking. The OP is planning a meal even
though she called it snacks (perhaps because it's not a sit down
meal?) But veggie, fruit, cheese, and shrimp platters,
meatballs, and pasta is very filling as long as there's enough
food to go around. Although I agree a bread basket is a good
idea. Or maybe also add plain pasta so guests can make
spaghetti/penne and meatballs.
[/quote]
I agree. I'd consider the OP's lovely menu to be heavy
appetizers and I'd put "reception of cocktails and heavy
appetizers to immediately follow the reception."
Let me echo DaDancingPsych and say that as long as things are
clear, I can easily and happily manage my needs. DH and I were
invited to a wedding at venue known for it's gorgeous views and
food. DH expected a "full" meal and arrived hungry. Well, the
chef came out at the beginning and said they'd be offering a
"tasting menu" and portions would be "much smaller" than typical
so that everyone would be able to "get through" the courses. DH
started squeezing my knee at the beginning of the chef's remarks
and the pressure was increasing in pace with his incredulity.
(He didn't realize it, he was just trying to communicate "Can
you believe this? I can. not. believe. this!")
We had to stop at Taco Bell on the way home because it was the
only thing still open.
#Post#: 23526--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: QueenFaninCA Date: January 7, 2019, 4:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the 1pm start time is really iffy. It's late enough that
people shouldn't expect to be fed lunch. But on the other hand
it's early enough that it's not that easy to actually have lunch
beforehand (and then get ready and get there on time). I'd move
the start time to 2pm to move it clearly out of the lunch time
zone.
#Post#: 23528--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: jpcher Date: January 7, 2019, 4:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ctmichelle link=topic=926.msg23398#msg23398
date=1546728279]
I was going to go with
these:
HTML https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01MY052M7?pf_rd_p=c2945051-950f-485c-b4df-15aac5223b10&pf_rd_r=DBXZCH83KC0HKBPQ4XMS
I feel the silver is less formal than gold, but still fancier
than plain plates.
[/quote]
LOVLY! ;D
[quote author=QueenFaninCA link=topic=926.msg23526#msg23526
date=1546899100]
I think the 1pm start time is really iffy. It's late enough that
people shouldn't expect to be fed lunch. But on the other hand
it's early enough that it's not that easy to actually have lunch
beforehand (and then get ready and get there on time). I'd move
the start time to 2pm to move it clearly out of the lunch time
zone.
[/quote]
I disagree with the bold above.
The mac&cheese and meatballs make a substantial lunch entree.
With the addition of some bread and, as one poster mentioned
(can't find to quote), possibly some pasta to go with the
meatballs (?Maybe? Not necessary but nice? eh.) and it's a very
satisfying meal.
A few minor changes in the menu does make it a meal instead of
snacks.
Okay, OP . . . now you gotta add a fresh salad or two. Maybe
those mini quiche things, or . . . LOL! Not! Your menu sounds
delicious. ;D
#Post#: 23540--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: Winterlight Date: January 7, 2019, 8:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think this sounds like a decent meal, personally.
#Post#: 23545--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: mime Date: January 8, 2019, 12:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Aleko link=topic=926.msg23430#msg23430
date=1546802529]
[quote] Lunchtime (around here, anyway) is between 11 and
1[/quote]
Wow. Where are you? This puts into perspective the thread in
which a whole slew of American members said they wouldn't dream
of having dinner later than 5.
Here in the UK pretty much nobody eats lunch before 12 at
earliest, and in fact except in the kind of factory-food places
that serve all day, you just wouldn't be able to get lunch
before 12. Workers normally take their lunch break between 12
and 12, and 11 is traditionally the time for 'elevenses' - a
mid-morning snack.
Given that this is a board with international membership,
perhaps we need to be more careful to mark our queries
geographically. My response held good for a UK wedding - you
could not expect guests at a 1pm wedding to have had a decent
lunch before the ceremony, and if you sent them away
mid-afternoon with nothing but snacks they would not be happy -
but clearly not for everywhere.
[/quote]
Sorry I'm so late to respond to this: I'm in the Midwestern US.
Personally, I liked lunch at 1 but have gradually moved earlier
because meeting times and cafeteria hours at work really
accommodate lunch at 11 or 12 rather than 1. Maybe it's from the
history of "early to bed, early to rise" farmers here?
#Post#: 23558--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: Hmmm Date: January 8, 2019, 9:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=926.msg23545#msg23545
date=1546929147]
[quote author=Aleko link=topic=926.msg23430#msg23430
date=1546802529]
[quote] Lunchtime (around here, anyway) is between 11 and
1[/quote]
Wow. Where are you? This puts into perspective the thread in
which a whole slew of American members said they wouldn't dream
of having dinner later than 5.
Here in the UK pretty much nobody eats lunch before 12 at
earliest, and in fact except in the kind of factory-food places
that serve all day, you just wouldn't be able to get lunch
before 12. Workers normally take their lunch break between 12
and 12, and 11 is traditionally the time for 'elevenses' - a
mid-morning snack.
Given that this is a board with international membership,
perhaps we need to be more careful to mark our queries
geographically. My response held good for a UK wedding - you
could not expect guests at a 1pm wedding to have had a decent
lunch before the ceremony, and if you sent them away
mid-afternoon with nothing but snacks they would not be happy -
but clearly not for everywhere.
[/quote]
Sorry I'm so late to respond to this: I'm in the Midwestern US.
Personally, I liked lunch at 1 but have gradually moved earlier
because meeting times and cafeteria hours at work really
accommodate lunch at 11 or 12 rather than 1. Maybe it's from the
history of "early to bed, early to rise" farmers here?
[/quote]
I think there are lots of things that contribute to the standard
in the US but not sure if agriculture had much to do with it.
Both sides of my grandparent's were farmers but their meal
schedule was always a 8am breakfast after doing some morning
chores, noon meal (usually the heaviest meal of the day) and a
6pm "supper" that was a lighter meal.
As a child, local businesses would be closed for the "lunch
hour" but everyone expected them to be back open by 1.
I started working in corporate America in the late 80's when
companies were starting flex hours and many companies allowed
their employees to start their work day as early at 6:45 and
then leave by 3:45 and as late as 8:30 to 5:30. Most opted to
start before 7:30am (helped with traffic and child care) so
lunch at 11 or 11:30 became common (was also good to beat the
noon time restaurant rush). It was very uncommon to find anyone
starting their lunch hour after 12:30. Thirty years and 5
companies later, that is still the practice where I work today.
Even our cafeteria closes by 1pm these days.
#Post#: 23578--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: JeanFromBNA Date: January 8, 2019, 2:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ctmichelle link=topic=926.msg23375#msg23375
date=1546706757]
Hello everyone, Op here.
The wedding is going to be casual, hopefully, the ceremony
outside and the reception right after with tables and seating in
the cabin and little TV tables and chairs scattered on the 3
sided deck overlooking the mountains and some out in the yard. I
am planning on having at least 100 chairs, (renting them) for
people to sit on. Everyone, except one couple, will be local or
staying right on site, no one will have to travel more than 20
minutes. The two things I insisted on was indoor plumbing and
electricity; we and our friends are in our 50's and 60's and a
few have some disability, so no mountain tops or rustic meadows
for us.
We are catering this affair ourselves, and want to keep it
simple and other than maybe asking a very good friend to change
out the platters for a fresh one, and someone to help cut the
cake, I want everyone to mingle.
Thank you for the suggestions, keep any and all ideas coming.
I would worry about running out of plates if I didn't have way
more than enough and as one poster stated, they won't go bad. We
can use them again the day after as this will be a family
reunion for both sides to meet each other
[/quote]
If you have about 40 adult guests and 10 children, 100 chairs is
overkill, and will probably be in the way. I'd go with 50
chairs (which will still be more than enough), if there's
already some seating at the venue.
#Post#: 23600--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: ctmichelle Date: January 9, 2019, 12:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey again, ctmichelle here
Thanks for all the replies.
Let me clarify a few things that have come up.
This event will be at 2 cabins, with full kitchens. Our families
from out of town are staying at the cabins, and the wedding
will be in the side yard of one of the cabins. Everyone else is
local, except for the one couple that may or may not come
because the wedding is on a weekday. I have checked with the few
people that are working and they have said they will take off
work for the wedding.
Pasta with the meatballs would be nice, except who would be
cooking it? I have read a lot on this site about not having your
guests work at your event so I don't want someone to be busy
making multiple pots of pasta because how can it be made ahead
of time and kept hot.
I will look into some deli trays and buns. I was going to
provide juice boxes for the children, just forget to include it.
I was saying 'snacks' because it isn't scheduled doing a
typical meal time for this area, and want to have everyone
snacking on all the food whenever they wanted to eat, as much as
they wanted to eat.
I am getting 100 chairs, 60 set up for the ceremony and 40
scattered around on the deck and backyard for people to eat at.
Again, have read about people having to move their chairs from
ceremony to reception and how tacky that it. There are also
sofas and chairs in two common areas inside the cabin on the
upper and lower level.
#Post#: 23606--------------------------------------------------
Re: OK just to have snacks?
By: Rose Red Date: January 9, 2019, 7:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ctmichelle link=topic=926.msg23600#msg23600
date=1547013689]
Pasta with the meatballs would be nice, except who would be
cooking it? I have read a lot on this site about not having your
guests work at your event so I don't want someone to be busy
making multiple pots of pasta because how can it be made ahead
of time and kept hot.
[/quote]
I'm confused by this statement. How are you keeping the
meatballs and mac & cheese hot? I was imagining crock pots or
warming trays. Is this not the case?
Not that you should serve anything that you don't want to, but
it's easy to add another pot/pan of precooked plain pasta and
guests can spoon meatballs over it, so it's not much different
than assembling a deli sandwich. Unless warming trays are not
involved?
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page