Pea Shooters and Curtain Material: The 'Perfect' Wedding

Today is our 15th Anniversary.  In many ways this has flown by and I can remember July 25th 1998 like it was yesterday! But on the other hand, so much has happened in those years and we have both grown and changed so much as well.  We are completely different people really. The pictures show what people around us saw at the time, but I didn't: we were SO young! But here we are 15 years later, still happy, still married, still in love.

At the time I had just graduated from University, literally a few days before the wedding, in fact. I was about to go on for one more year of study; teacher training. Andrew had worked for 2 years. During the time that I was doing my final exams, we were completing the wedding details and also buying our first house. So for the actual wedding, we had no big savings account or massive budget.

In Ireland today, despite the recession, the austerity measures and all the accompanying woes and misery, the average cost of a wedding has actually risen! This is according to a 2012 article I read, which puts the number at 21000-ish Euro. Twenty One Grand? Wow!  The 3 biggest costs are generally the venue, the honeymoon and the wedding party's clothes, at over 6 grand, over 3 grand and over 2 grand respectively. Not unrelated to this is the fact that the average age to get married in Ireland at the moment is in fact 33, a full ten years older than Andrew was at our wedding. This may account for some of these figures - I guess you can do a lot of saving in those extra years! I should say at this point, that I would absolutely not criticise how anyone chose to spend their money or what they wanted their dream day to include. It's a day people plan for so long and it is a unique occasion for every couple. 

Over twenty thousand Euro though, that is a LOT of money. Having said that, if you go on to Pinterest and do a search for Weddings, there are an unbelievable amount of ways to get through 21 grand and more, easily! Embellished Vintage Heels anyone? Or a Rustic Distressed Chalkboard Sign for $100 telling people to grab a drink while they wait for the couple? Personalised Wine Sets as the Wedding Favours? This is just the tiniest glimpse of the multitude of ideas on Pinterest - google Pinterest Weddings when you have some time to spare, like 5 hours.

Many of the ideas are actually very cute and some of them are cost saving ones also.  But they are often hugely elaborate as well: ideas for cute photos with your bridesmaids (of which there generally seem to be at least 6 in the pictures) before the wedding, customising the bridal shower, super creative and unique invitations. Of course, none of these things are necessarily silly or bad!  And some of them are brilliant and very fun ideas. But the pressure to have this perfect day and capture all these perfect moments, with perfect hair, just seems immense.  If I was a bride-to-be now, I think I would find Pinterest overwhelming and very intimidating. 

In our case, we didn't have a bean. We hadn't been living together yet and any money we did have was going towards the house really. I don't remember exactly what it all cost and who paid what, but I do know we cut a few corners and spent as little as possible.

So, the dress and the suit: The best man wore his own suit. Andy got a suit from M and S. We got my sister's bridesmaid dress on sale in Debenhams, for about 20 pounds, if memory serves and I guess she wore her own shoes.

I was in Germany for the third year of my degree when I got engaged. At the end of the summer term, my parents picked me up and we drove to Switzerland to visit a friend. I hadn't yet really thought much about the logistics or cost of getting a dress, apart from the usual daydreaming and sketching that every woman, if she is being honest, will tell you she has done since she was 6. I was chatting to our hostess and she told me she had bought material for curtains in Thailand, but it hadn't turned out to be right for the purpose. Perhaps I would like to have the material for my wedding dress?

Um, curtain material for my wedding dress? I stayed polite and said that was very kind and I would love to see it. Well, she appeared with a roll of cream raw silk and just gave me the whole lot. It was stunning! Once I was back in England for my final year, I found a dressmaker, drew her a basic sketch and the whole thing was done for 200 pounds sterling. Mind you, I did have to argue with the dressmaker, who wanted me to wear a hoop and who wasn't at all pleased when I had her take out a whole layer of petticoats.  She might have been happier working for the dressmaker in My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding...

The car: Andrew's fiesta was the carriage for the day!  Not very glamorous, but completely fine!  Andrew's uncle was the photographer; he did a fantastic job. And the pictures were taken in his Grandma's beautiful garden.

The cake: my Mum made it!  And iced it, and decorated it with flowers, which we got alongside my bouquet on the Wedding Day. It looked amazing - and she loved doing it! Especially as she had been in a different country for most of the lead up, so this was a way for her to be a big part of the day in the end.

Our main costs were the venue, the food, the DJ and the flowers. One important cost was also the peashooters.  Yes, really. We had been to a few charity balls together and they always had these colourful tubes on the table and pint glasses full of small balls.  Andrew was eager to have these at our wedding, and they were loads of fun! It took some people a while to work out what they were for, but once they did, all hell broke lose! In the end my Dad had to stand up and get people to stop so the food could be served. Friends of my parents mentioned this to me the other week as a memory they have of the day, so it made an impression! Mind you, I don't think I've seen this on Pinterest...

It was a great day. Not a picture perfect, super glamorous, Pinterest worthy day perhaps, but a very very happy one! We were absolutely blessed with the weather, the service was lovely, the speeches were witty, the food was nice... And then: the honeymoon. Friends of my parents offered us their little cottage in Yorkshire, for free.  It was such a perfect gift from them and we had a wonderful week.

So I look back on a happy day. I don't think it could have been any happier, had we spent an extra 15 grand on it! And here we are 15 years later and ultimately it doesn't matter what car we drove or whether I really did have a dress made of curtain material - none of those things make for a happy marriage in the end. That comes through love, communication, trust and effort. And while we didn't have a massive wedding budget, so far, we've never been short of any of those assets.

Lurkers, Likers and Other Facebook Species

So, Facebook. At this point, most people are on it, aren't they? Not everyone, admittedly.  Like, not my Dad. But I think he would actually enjoy Facebook, as a Lurker/Liker (see further down). But almost everyone else.  At this stage many people not on Facebook, are virulently anti-Facebook. Like a lady I recently asked. She is someone who I see as a potential friend, but we don't get to see much of each other. Perfect for a Facebook link, surely... We can get glimpses of each other's lives and comment and share accordingly. But her response when I asked if she was on Facebook was almost comical! You would have been forgiven for thinking I had asked her if she regularly took cocaine. 'No!' she exclaimed in horror, 'and I never will be!' 

It never ceases to amaze me how radio stories or newspaper columns which mention social media seem to be hosted or written by people who have no clue about it! They often imply that you are opening yourself up to having your whole life exposed and your security compromised by using it. If you based your view of Facebook on the news, and had no other experience with it, you would probably think it was for folk who liked connecting with hundreds of people they didn't actually know in real life, giving a wildly unrealistic impression of their daily lives and engaging in a fair amount of cyber-bullying. And getting fired all the time for posting things about their job. Yes, of course all those things do happen, but in a limited way, surely, and only because Facebook can't prevent stupid people from using its services.

I recently read an article which asked the question if social media is leading to further isolation of people, or in fact, lessening this isolation. One quote which really struck a chord with me was comparing someone's perception of social media with that of tv: '... if all you watch is reality TV, you might come to the conclusion that it’s a shallow form of media. But if you change the channel, there’s the History Channel or the Discovery Channel, and all of a sudden your perception is very different.' (http://www.usatodayeducate.com/staging/index.php/campuslife/social-media-doesnt-mean-social-isolation) That is a brilliant example! Just like with tv, social media is as good or as bad as the people consuming it.

Well, I am a huge fan. I have found Facebook a brilliant addition to other socialising. Not a replacement, but a great extra. I am in touch with people that I do know in real life, absolutely. But these are in many cases people I used to work with or went to university with. I wouldn't get to see them often and wouldn't be likely to email or phone them. But I love seeing what they are doing in their lives and being connected with them. In one case, this is someone I have never actually met.  But she is a friend of a friend, and in an online discussion of books, it became apparent that we have a ridiculous amount of tastes and thoughts in common. With the notable exceptions of sewing and the Tour de France. I feel like I could meet her for a coffee, which makes her pretty much a genuine friend, even if we haven't officially met.  Except it would almost certainly end up being lunch and dinner as well.

It is fascinating to me how people use Facebook differently! I think it's safe to say that some people are very good at Facebook. The friend I have who is one of the best at it is someone I last spent time with as a teenager, when we both lived in Holland. Now she lives in Philadelphia and I live in Ireland. Yet I see pictures of her kids almost every day and laugh out loud (but only using the 'lol' acronym ironically of course) at their brilliant phrases and jokes. I love that we can keep in touch so easily! She posts a lot, but not too much - as the content is generally witty, well phrased and real. She is SWGF: Someone Who Gets Facebook. 

Here are a few other users:
The Lurker: I have quite a few friends who I just assume don't bother to log on and check their posts, ever. That is, until I meet them in a different context, and they say: 'Oh, how did Matthew get on at his goalie camp?' Or 'Your holiday looked terrific!' and it turns out they read absolutely every last post but never ever comment on anything. Or even like anything.

The Liker: They share certain Lurker characteristics - they rarely post anything themselves, but enjoy reading what others share. The difference is that they join in to an extent, by liking things they have found good.  I am not sure why they never post anything themselves, but at least they aren't hiding, like the Lurkers.

A sub-species is the Periodic Liker. This is someone who is only ever on Facebook every 14 days or so and then has a frenzy of liking all kinds of things that have happened in that time. You suddenly get a mad influx of notifications, all from one person liking things you posted ages ago. I have a friend who does this - she has two very young kids and I guess she just literally doesn't have the head space or time to check Facebook very often, however she does like updating herself with what is happening, but in catch up mode.

Another sub-species to the Liker is the Gullible Liker. This is someone who likes all kinds of crap. You know the posts I mean: 'Like this if you think bullying is A Bad Thing.' 'I know only 10% of my friends will bother to read this, so Like this to show that you are one of the good people in life and that you think flowers are nice.' Or something. You know the kind of stuff...  I personally don't understand how anyone could think that liking something on a website will end world hunger or child abuse or whatever. Maybe I am missing something! Some of these are funny, see below, but I think we can all agree that there is an awful lot of dross out there!

Of course even worse than the Gullible Liker is the Gullible Sharer - less is more sometimes! But then I guess it depends what you are in to and someone else's dross is my amusement and vice versa... Perhaps half of those on my friends list have limited what they see from me cause they think I share and post way too much rubbish. But here's the thing - more power to them! It's so easy to change settings and vary what you see from people that I guess it doesn't really matter what they like or share. 

 A personal bugbear of mine is the Text Speak Poster. This is someone who hasn't quite worked out that phones no longer limit you to a tiny amount of characters and that No1 txts like dis NEmor unless dey R well over 40.  Never mind posts like this on Facebook. Please stop.

So who are you on Facebook? A Lurker? A Liker? A Periodic or a Gullible Liker? A Gullible Sharer? A Text Speak Poster? Or, as I am sure you all are, or hope you are at any rate: SWGF. 

Have I missed any categories? And can we all agree that the first picture below is cute, but the second one is genius?

Summer Poem

Came across this today. I think it's a good summary of how the whole country feels in this glorious and entirely novel weather.

Sunshine!

Helium in my head,
I'm high on sunshine,
Winter has fled!
To be pickled in brine.

Let's get our pollen fix!
And watch the flowers grow,
It's time to be hippy chicks,
To go with the flow.

I want to float in the sky,
Somersault in the clouds,
Take my hand and we'll fly!
This addiction is loud,

Scream of green life explosion,
Whisper of soft balmy nights,
Join the winter erosion,
Usher in the dizzy heights

Of poetry, wine and sun,
I like me this way.
Come on, it's begun! 
Let's jump into the day!

Screen Sanity

After a few days on our holiday in France, Adam came to me looking sad. 'I miss our house in Ireland...' Before I had a chance to feel kind of touched by his sweetness, he followed this up with: '...because I want to play FIFA on the Wii.' Right. There we were in a beautiful campsite, on a gorgeous sunny day, about to set off for a day at a stunning lake, and he wanted to play fake, indoor, computerised football.

Both boys now have the requisite level of dexterity needed for quite a few computer games and love playing FIFA or bowling on the Wii. They also constantly demand time on the iPad or on our phones to play Angry Birds, Minecraft or a random succession of racing games. 
On a busy day, when I am tired or when I am trying to get something done, it is very easy to just say yes, and guarantee myself some peace as they are quite self sufficient when playing these. The house goes quiet apart from the electronic beeping and chirping. It's bliss! And then you realise that they have been quiet for over an hour and that they have been slumped over the iPad firing birds at pigs or gaining a completely false idea of their bowling prowess by getting strike after strike by accurately flicking their wrists. If they then have a bit of tv time as well, and you then add up all the time they have been looking at a screen, it can be fairly alarming.

Cue parental guilt and the inevitable overcompensating: nature walks and baking. Not that these aren't brilliant things to do. But the kids could also just play with their toys, read a book or use their imagination when building a fort. Some time ago I began to realise that my kids expected to be entertained, by something I had organised or by a screen: tv or otherwise.

On a parenting course we took last year, there was a section on how much screen time kids get. On the dvd, a range of experts spoke about this and expressed concern at how much tv kids were watching nowadays and discussed the amount of time that was considered acceptable.  Dr Aric Sigman had a lot to say about this; in fact if you google his name, quite a few articles on this topic come up. He stated that kids of a young age, like my two, should spend no more than an hour, and preferably less, watching tv. In fact, he said that children under 3, should not watch any tv.

One of the interesting things he explained, was the danger of a child coming to understand the world virtually, before they experienced it genuinely. It is much healthier for a child to have a new experience for themselves, such as going to the beach, or going to a birthday party, before they see a version of this in a cartoon.  Of course there are things they may only ever see on tv, like outer space or the Great Wall of China. But in terms of everyday life, it is much better for them to do things for themselves before they have a version of it in their minds that is fictionalised and probably American and will therefore not really correspond to their eventual experience. (I am extrapolating somewhat from Dr Sigman, as I apply this to my kids, at their ages and stages.)

In conjunction with this, he said that many kids were no longer left to their own devices, to just 'play', in the purest sense of the word. He states that it is very important for kids' imaginations that they are left, with no input from adults, and no organised activities, to just choose their own form of play and begin to make up their own fun.

This made a lot of sense to me when I heard it. Although, I don't know how realistic it is for kids under 3 to watch no tv. It certainly helped a great deal when I had a very young toddler and a newborn baby, that I could put on cbeebies and have a bit of space for ten minutes while the baby napped. However, I certainly agree with him that it is far too easy to ratchet up the screen time, especially when computer time is added to tv, and that kids generally spend too much time just gazing passively. And I know I can be overly concerned about the kids getting bored and organise too many play dates and activities to avoid this , giving them little time to just mooch and find their own fun. So, how to implement all of this?

Here's one thing that worked: I tried to get as late in the day as possible before we turned the tv on.  On a good day, this was after dinner.  But there were days when there was a sick child, or endless rain or a frazzled me, when this was just not feasible and a movie was the best option for general sanity and harmony.

Here's something that didn't work: having a general sense that the kids were best limited on computer time, but not really timing it throughout the day. The result: endless whining and grousing and Mummy being a policeman and constantly saying no and being seen as very mean and unfair. If the kids play this one right, they can actually get a lot of screen time, if they reach the whining tipping point where Mummy would agree to almost anything if they would just STOP WHINING. Cue more guilt. Not a happy house.

So, here's what we came up with to resolve this whole issue: 

This chart has been a real winner with everyone.  Here's how it works.  Each boy is allowed 45 minutes per day of screen time, which will entail computer, Wii, iPad, phone and even Matthew's little camera that has games on it. There is a further 45 minutes of tv time available; the bottom white line for each boy.  It is completely up to them how they spend this time, and 'spend' is the operative word.  As I had hoped, they treat the 45 minutes like credit and run it down. They plan how to use the time, and have been really positive towards this. There are little pictures of every available device and they all have velcro on their reverse, which is what the white time line of the chart is also made of. The boys play on whatever they choose, having planned before hand what they will do and for how long. The key tool here is the oven timer. 

Example: Adam decides he will play on the Wii - he knows he wants to play two matches on FIFA and decides to allocate 20 minutes to this.  The oven timer is set and play commences.  The oven beeps and he stops.  They have both been surprisingly good about stopping play when their time is up.  Having their sibling keep them in check is useful! They can of course play on, but in the knowledge that they are losing more time on the chart. Then they choose the correct picture, place it on the timeline and, job done.

It is generally working out that they are spending half an hour each on the Wii in the mornings, maybe 5 minutes on the iPad later and then choosing to save their remaining ten minutes for Daddy's phone, which has a cool new race car game.  They are really learning to plan their time and delay their gratification in this way and I have been impressed by how they have stuck to this and been completely accountable to it.

The tv one is easier to monitor as our home made system is not easy to use and they generally need me to turn the whole thing on for them. Incidentally, we have put in place a caveat with the 45 daily minutes allocated to tv and that is sports.  They are such enthusiastic sports watchers!  There are no glazed over eyes or couch potato positions when sports are on.  Both boys are generally commenting avidly throughout, asking endless questions, and often charging out to the hall or garden to recreate the goal, try or lap they have just seen. So we felt this was a different kind of viewing, and limiting it wasn't as necessary.


When they have used up their screen time, that is that. No negotiation.  The exceptions to this would be a hospital visit, travel or something similar. Then what? I am much more hands off now when suggesting what they do next.  They have started to drift off and play brilliantly with random toys, and I have overheard great race commentaries as Adam lines up his cars or been suddenly confronted with 'Mr Neymar', one of the boys in a cunning disguise, who has decided to visit us. If they do get bored, then there is always the 'I'm Bored Jar'.  I can't take credit for this, but you can read about it here: http://sarahkeene.blogspot.ie/search/label/%27I%27m%20Bored%27%20Jar

As for me, I am just so relieved not to be the bad cop all day long!  Everyone knows the limits and has full control over how they use them, so I am not having to say no any more - there is a visual cue in the hall, and no need to ask. The only thing I still check is that they are accurately placing the pictures on the chart and of course that the games they are playing are ones I am ok with. 

A bonus: they can also lose viewing or gaming time through bad behaviour. Warning them of this is generally very effective and will usually curtail whatever naughtiness is happening. 

One reason this is all working so well is that they are very young and we are still in control of the games they are choosing and the programmes they watch.  Of course as they get older, they will push against this, have their own laptops etc and this will have to be dealt with differently as they change, want to start using Social Media, having their own phones and so on. If I can help it, they will never have their own tvs; we will never have more than one tv in the house in fact. But of course this means less and less as viewing is increasingly done through Netflix, youtube etc. 

In the main however, I would like to think we are at least putting good practises in place and teaching them not to just be screen robots. It's a big issue for this new generation - they are surrounded by gadgets and see adults on them all the time. And here is the challenge for me - it's all very well making this fancy chart for them , but what am I modelling to them at the same time? This is an ongoing thought process and I will no doubt report back on it in due course...