Sunday, December 9, 2007

Just a quick break...

Well, this post is going to be quick, but I can't tell you how long I've been perusing wedding blogs instead of studying (at least an hour?!).

Over on Style Me Pretty, they featured an inspiration board from a real wedding whose main color was green -- but what's that? Purple bridesmaid dresses? That officially makes that a green and purple wedding, and me not a crazy bride anymore!

Yay for purple and green! And go check out Matthew Mead's site for more purplishiousness.

What else have I/we done?

  • Went to a Mori Lee trunk show in Cincinatti to try on *the dress*! (But didn't buy it)
  • Decided on a venue! The deposit hasn't been put down, so it's not official yet, but as soon as I can tell you I will!

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

To Be Safe, Call the Bride by Her First Name

To Be Safe, Call the Bride by Her First Name

Should we organize a softball game to decide whether or not I take Eric's last name? We played a kickball game at his sister's wedding weekend cookout, but there wasn't anything at stake. If I were to do this, we couldn't have any young uncoordinated cousins participate. Or most of my bridesmaids. No offense to them.

I haven't addressed this issue much since my last post on the topic. But I think that means I'm just going to be Dr. CurrentLastName and Mrs. WhateverOtherPeopleWantToCallMe. No big deal. No paperwork.

I did find out that it is possible to exist with multiple names, though. My friend who got married in May exists as Maiden Name on her social security card, and Husband's Name on her driver's license and most other paperwork -- she just hasn't gotten around to contacting social security. And another friend who got married in March is "Melissa Ann Maiden Husband." Since there's no hyphen, she informed me, she can go by Melissa Maiden or Melissa Husband. Her driver's license has all four names.

But here's a good tip I read on WeddingBee: when making honeymoon reservations, be sure to book them under the groom's last name, even if the bride is the one making the arrangements, because if the hotel/cruise/etc is going to give you any little greeting cards or gifts in celebration of your honeymoon, they're going to address them to "Mr. and Mrs. WhateverLastNameYouBookedUnder." Unless, you know, you like a good laugh.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Engagement Photos Are In!

Well, things could certainly have turned out much worse.

One of the first pictures. The photographer said, "Well, why don't you maybe possibly sort of walk toward me and we'll see what happens." (OK, not those exact words, but with that little conviction.) I was smiling out of sheer nervousness.

This one is cute, if you can see that Eric is looking at me with his cute "oh yeah?" look and not with some other strange look. Plus, you can't tell what that thing behind us is (it's the lines of a parking space; we were up on a hill along the side of the road that runs through the park).

The requisite ring shot. Too bad it was the only ring pose he did -- I don't particularly like it all that much.

Another gripe: The photographer suggested we shoot in Cherokee Park, but wasn't really that familiar with what the park had to offer. I was the one to suggest "that fountain thing at the next intersection," which turned out to be a stone dragon boat fountain. I have no idea why it's in the park, but we have a similar photo from our Hong Kong trip two years ago, which is kind of funny:

The more I look at this photo, the more I like it. Eric's totally gangster.

We're pretty hot here, I have to admit. And my hair actually looks nice for once (you'd think that would make me want to do my hair more often, but no).

We were the ones who decided to run. Out of a lack of direction from the photographer, and being tired of just walking toward him or away from him.

I like the setting of this shot -- it's really pretty. And we're far away enough from the camera that any weird faces we're making don't ruin the shot :)

We look pretty silly when we kiss. Good thing people don't see us do it that often. Well, except for that one after the officiant says, "You may now kiss the bride." Crap -- am I really going to be nervous about that for the next 18 months now?

You can see the rest of the photos here.

Overall, I can't complain, since we didn't pay anything for the photos. And there are a few good photos, which should have been worth a small fee if we had paid it. But the reason the whole experience left me with a bad taste in my mouth was because the photographer did not take control of the photo shoot and seemed so nervous himself. He's weird on the phone, too, so I think his "nervousness" is just his personality, but it totally rubs me the wrong way. I've read reports from other brides who say that "getting along" with your vendors is so important, and I never really believed it. As long as the product is good, what does personality matter, especially if you're on a budget, right? Well, now I know that I need to find a better balance, because if I had to work with someone like this guy again, I would have a nervous breakdown. That's part of my personality -- if I'm not 100% confident that someone else can take charge, then I feel like I need to take charge, and there's no way I have any authority or expertise to be taking charge of photo shoots, so I'd rather pay someone else to do it.

You know what would have made the whole experience a million times better? If he had just taken two minutes at the beginning of the process to say, "Most of my shots are going to be candid, so I want you to pretend I'm not here unless I ask you to look at the camera. Just act like the two of you are spending the day in the park, and ignore me. I might ask you to turn a certain way or make certain actions, but let me know if you're not comfortable with any of them and we'll try something else." And then during the process he should have said, "OK, now sit on that bench," not "Hmm, do you maybe want to sit on the bench?" Argh.

Anyway, the final product is here, and it's not a total loss, and I didn't pay anything, so I'll stop complaining now. He even gave us a set of proofs of all the shots, which wasn't part of the original deal, and that was really nice. Watch for these to reappear on save the dates or Christmas cards next year or something like that.

(I haven't mentioned our photographer's name on purpose. Since we didn't pay for the session or photos, I don't feel it would be fair to name him. The guy is trying to make a living, and I think his photos are pretty good, so it's possible he'll adjust his demeanor as he works with more clients.)

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

A book for him

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've had wedding magazines for a few years now. Back in early 2004, when my friend Karen got married, my other friend Marjorie and I (both bridesmaids) were in charge of favors for her bridal shower (thankfully, her mother recognized that we could not afford to throw even the most modest of showers, so just put us in charge of the favors). We decided to meet in Hartford, Conn., one day -- me driving up from Philadelphia and she taking a bus down from Boston -- for a bridal show. It was a pretty fun day -- we wandered around to the various vendors, answering the question that every vendor asked us, "So, who's the bride?" with a sad, "Neither of us, actually...", looking for fun decoration and favor ideas. We actually ended up finding two projects for inspiration, one of which had us grabbing a phone book and driving to every Michaels craft store in the greater Hartford area searching for clearance Valentine's Day cookie cutters, as well as calling everyone we knew and sending them to all of their nearest Michaels to find the same clearance cookie cutters. I told you: I'm really good at bargain shopping.

Anyway, I digress. I also entered a sweepstakes drawing for something or other -- a honeymoon, probably -- and ended up winning a one-year subscription to Modern Bride magazine. And while the magazines caused some raised eyebrows from my friends (remember, this was three years ago, when there was no ring on my finger), I justified their presence in two ways: 1) I was getting ideas for my friend's (and future friends') wedding, 2) they were free. I marked some pages for future reference, and saved all those issues. But when the subscription ran out, I didn't renew (aren't you proud?).

But the day after we got engaged, I made a point to walk over to Borders and buy all the magazines I wanted -- A Modern Bride, Brides, Martha Stewart Weddings, and Louisville Wedding. After all, why not? I had to figure out which one(s) I might want a subscription to, right? Well, I ended up getting a joint subscription to Modern Bride and Brides (they're really the same magazine, published by the same company, in alternating months) for a really good price, but decided against MS Wedding. It's just too expensive for so few pages, I think. Although the craft ideas are really, really good. Maybe if I find myself with some extra cash after the holidays...

I've been pretty happy with my magazines. There isn't a whole lot of substance in them, but I'm more likely to go to the gym if I have one to read, so that's a good thing in my mind. I also read a few wedding blogs, including Weddingbee. And on Weddingbee a few weeks ago, I read a post from a contributer who recommended this book:

Well Groomed: A Wedding Planner for What's-His-Name (And His Bride)

And I immediately put it on my online library request list (which, by the way, is the best thing in the world, especially for an under-funded library system that doesn't carry all books at all locations). I got it last week and immediately started reading it -- and immediately started laughing. I read the whole thing in just a few days, and have convinced Eric to read it as well -- and believe me, it didn't require much convincing, because it's that funny.

Basically, it's a wedding how-to for the groom, but it's completely irreverent. Well, much to my surprise, the first chapter hit surprisingly close to home:

Chapter 1: How can a magazine cost $12.95 and not have pictures of naked people in it? An introduction to bridal magazines

Immediately after you become engaged, and in some cases as you are putting the ring on her finger, your brand-new fiancee will celebrate the commitment you have just made to her by leaving you alone at home while she goes off to buy bridal magazines. This isn't to suggest that she doesn't already own several bridal magazines. She does. But she's hidden them, just like you've hidden your porn. Now that she's officially engaged, though, it's time for a new crop of magazines that can be proudly displayed in public. (Your porn, however, should still remain hidden.)

... [Your] new bride-to-be ... will proceed to buy every bridal magazine in the store, for a total cost of $409.83. Even if your bride isn't particularly interested in bridal magazines, this is her one big chance to buy them and she feels obliged to do so. Not getting them would be like going all the way to Egypt and then skipping the pyramids because you decide it's too hot outside.

The chapter ends with a comparison between wedding magazines and porn. Surprisingly accurate, I might add.

Well, it could have been worse. I spent much less than $409.83 and only bought 4 magazines -- there are a lot more on the rack at Borders, including British ones that are very, VERY expensive. I haven't been tempted to buy any of those yet, probably mostly because I don't have much free time (thankfully!). But I was still pretty amused that what I thought was a fairly unique reflex to getting engaged is, in fact, a universal one.

But I highly recommend this book. If you are engaged or have been married in the last five years or so, you would get a pretty big kick out of it. Besides, if you read it yourself, I won't have to risk plagiarism issues for copying the whole thing into this blog.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Top 10 Most Daring Wedding Gowns

As determined by The Knot via MSN.

Top 10 Most Daring Wedding Gowns

Most of them are way out there and definitely not for me, but one in particular caught my eye:

Oh purple Vera Wang, how I love thee. The perfect color, a beautiful silhouette... and yes, it's apparently a wedding dress and not a bridesmaid dress.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Talk about bad photos...

I guess I can't be too nervous about our engagement photos, because I'm pretty sure there were no situations that would set themselves up for anything like these:

Wedding Photos We'll All Remember (Part 1)

Yes, it will be worth it for you to open up another tab and look at those pictures. You'll laugh. I promise.

Please, if you own a red flowered hat, do not wear it to my wedding.

Saturday, November 3, 2007

Engagement Photos

We had an engagement photo session today. About a week after we got engaged, I was browsing around on Craigslist (the Louisville site is MUCH smaller and less active than the Philly one, but it's gotten more active over the last couple years) and noticed an ad for a photographer willing to provide free engagement and wedding photography. He said he was just getting into the business and needed to beef up his portfolio, so in exchange for signing a model release, he would do an engagement session and give us the digital images on CD for free. If we want him to print any images for us, he'll charge us for them, or we can take our files somewhere else. Good deal, right?

Well, I haven't seen the pictures yet, but after that experience, I'm glad we didn't pay any money for the photo session. He was a nice guy and all, but he's definitely a novice when it comes to directing models and suggesting poses or actions. We met at Cherokee Park, and it started off badly when he couldn't suggest a good place to park and start the session. At one point, we were driving about a quarter-mile behind him as he sort of looked out the window to see if any of the landscapes struck his fancy. I was a little surprised, because he told me he and his wife had their engagement photos taken at Cherokee Park, so I thought he would have been a little more familiar with the location, or maybe would have scouted it out ahead of time. He was also very vague when it came to suggesting what we do. "Um, I'm just trying to remember what we did at our engagement session." I would have thought that to prepare for a new experience (we're his first engagement photos), he might have looked over his own photos for inspiration. I guess not. So there was a lot of us standing around, sort of with our arms around each other, sort of looking at each other and trying not to crack up, and a lot of wondering what we were supposed to be doing.

But, I don't mean to be mean. He was a nice guy, and I've seen some of his other photos and they're pretty good, so there's still hope. He just needed to be a little more in-charge of the session. And he said he had wanted his wife to be present to help with posing, and she couldn't come. Oh well. I'll post photos when we get them, assuming any of them turn out well (and that would be the fault of the goofy-looking models, not the photographer :)

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Nope, we didn't register it. We've sort of decided not to do our own wedding website, although that was based on theoretical cost and effort and it might not actually be that expensive or effort-full, so we'll see. We haven't set up a free website, either, yet, but that's beside the point right now.

If you would, please open up a new tab (or window, if you're not using Firefox or even the newest version of IE), and click on over to And then click on "wedding."

There's another set of us?!!?!? And Eric actually knows the other Eric -- they're from the same part of Pennsylvania and went to high school together, apparently. I do not know the other Holly. But they got married in Princeton (Massachusetts) and I'm from Princeton (New Jersey), which is near Worcester (Massachusetts), which is where my dad did his reserve training the whole time we lived in Princeton, NJ, and where my good friend (and bridesmaid, although she doesn't know it yet) Karen lives with her husband and their new daughter, Lily (the prettiest newborn baby I've ever seen in my life).

Talk about crazy coincidences! And grr to them for stealing our domain name.

What do you think about We both think it sounds better the other way around, but it looks like that's not an option. (It's available and suggested!), or maybe

These are not necessarily serious inquiries for your opinion. We may do nothing at all.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Target Bridal?!!!!

Sorry for two posts in a row, but when I pulled that picture of my Target shoes off the Target website, I found this:

Target Bridal

Wedding dresses by Isaac Mizrahi (for less than $200!!), bridesmaid dresses, tuxes by Merona for $190 (jacket, pants, and tux shirt), veils and headpieces, and "regular" Target items like shoes and accessories pulled from the other parts of their website.

WOW! My favorite store just got more awesome.

I bought shoes... already?!?!?!

I wrote the post below last week, but never published it. I thought I would wait and maybe check out some more shoes first.

Then I went to Target on Saturday. And bought these:

Only $19.99 -- how could I resist? They're totally cute, tall enough (we did a test dance in the Target shoe section), and definitely able to be worn again. Or even before the wedding...

I might keep looking. Or I might not.

Original, unpublished post:

I went to Off-Broadway Shoes last week and found these candidates:

Kenneth Cole Reaction -- "Rags to Riches," silver, 3" heel

Steve Madden -- "Martha," purple (but I can only find a picture of it in black), 4" heel

And finally, a GREAT pair of purple pumps by Michael Shannon, style name "Anna," which seems to be a discount brand that only Off-Broadway Shoes carries, which means they do not exist on the internet at all apparently, but they were ADORABLE. If you see an Off-Broadway Shoes commercial, they're the first pair they show -- peep toe with striped purple fabric... hard to explain, but very cute. And I think because they are so difficult to find, I might just have to buy them. Sigh.

Check out what Target has!
Isaac Mizrahi for Target -- Laurel, silver, 3.5" heel. I can't usually wear slingbacks, though -- they always slip off. They do share their name with my sister, though.

Mossimo -- Heulwen, silver, 3" heel

Mossimo -- Hailey, silver, 4" heel -- a very strong candidate, and only $19.99! Also a slingback, though.

The Nordstrom's website offers a few candidates as well:
Nina -- Gordie, true silver or deep plum, 3.5" heel

Calvin Klein -- Riza, silver satin, 3.5" heel

Nina and Chinese Laundry have many other options as well.

I'm not hard to please -- a tall, strappy sandal with a d'Orsay heel or ankle strap in silver or purple is all I need. Thankfully, price constraints are going to make these decisions much easier.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

A Bride Sues Her Florist Over Pastel Hydrangeas

Wow, brides ARE crazy.

A NYC bride has sued her florist for breach of contract for a "series of faux pas at her wedding on Aug. 11." "In the most 'egregious,' ... the florist substituted pastel pink and green hydrangeas for the dark rust and green hydrangeas she had specified for 22 centerpieces."


I guess when you pay over $27,000 for your flowers you'd better get what you want. I'm going to ignore for the moment the idea of paying $27,000 for flowers -- even in NYC.

I guess I should use this opportunity to announce that I intend to do some of my own wedding flowers. Not all of them. Just some. There are plenty of places to order wholesale flowers from, and I definitely have the ability to do centerpieces and some bouquets. I could do boutonnières also, but I'm not totally crazy, don't worry. There are some logistical issues to consider: when you order flowers wholesale, they're closed and you need to give them a few days in a cool place to open -- florists use walk-in refrigerators, which I don't have. One solution is a ceremony/reception site that will let me use their catering refrigerators, but it depends on the site. Anyway, these are issues for many months from now, but I am excited at the prospect of getting to play with flowers again.

Thursday, October 4, 2007


You definitely need to have your wedding shoes before you get your dress altered. But me? I think I need my shoes before I even buy my dress.

At 5'1", I'm on the short side of things. I like wearing all types of shoes, flat and heeled alike. Eric, on the other hand, is 6'2", which means if we're going to be doing something like dancing, I need all the help I can get. I have a great pair of 3" black strappy sandals that I wear for most fancy occasions, and I've taken a couple looks at Zappos and Piperlime to see what similar things I can find in white (that would be not much, at least, not in my preferred price range).

But after going dress shopping with my mom and sister last month, I realized how important it really is going to be for me to find shoes before I settle on a dress. A lot of dresses come in a few lengths that you can choose from, and I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up with a dress that doesn't have a lot of room for length alterations -- that is, dresses without waistlines where waists can be pulled up, and with detail at the hem, so skirts can't be cut at the bottom. So I need the tallest shoes I can find and then the shortest-available dress I can find.

The dress that -- at this point, anyway -- I'm pretty sure I'm going to buy (I wrote the post about dress shopping, but I'm not going to post it yet, because it's pretty ridiculous that I found it on the first day of shopping, only a few weeks after getting engaged) comes in lengths of 55", 58", and 61". My own hollow-to-hem length barefoot is 51" -- so I either need 4" heels or a shorter dress.

I haven't been impressed with the shoes I've seen in white so far, and if I really need to find the shoes first, I need to find them (relatively) soon. But you know what? When am I ever going to wear white shoes again? Probably never.

But look! Not all brides wear white shoes!

Her feet look pretty damn cute in red. And this bride is on the prowl for red shoes as well. So silver is definitely a possibility (the dress I'm eyeing has silver embroidery). As is now purple, as well. Yay!

So as soon as all this surgery craziness is done with, I can start shopping for purple shoes :) And a venue, but you know... accessories first.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Purple is the new... pink?

If you know me at all, you know that purple is my favorite color. Because I was in charge of things back in high school, purple became my graduating class's color, as well. Never mind that the school colors were blue and white; every Homecoming week the Class of 1999 sported purple "P's" on their faces, and we girls found glittery purple eyeshadow to paint our eyelids with. The year I planned prom (junior year), everything was purple (and silver); our senior yearbook cover was purple, a fitting tribute to (I like to think) me. Among my two best friends from high school and I, we can pretty much count on the fact that purple anything will be a well-received gift.

So, of course, purple is a natural choice for my -- sorry, our -- wedding colors. After just a few weeks of casual (I promise! Only casual!) browsing through pictures of invitations and bridesmaid dresses, it's pretty clear that the mainstream wedding industry is not going to be easy to work with. Brides today are obsessed with pink -- usually in combination with brown -- and at best, I've found things in pale lavenders. Not horrible, but not ideal, either.

For instance, these invitations would be totally adorable in either a pale or vibrant purple, but it only comes in pink or blue:

So imagine my delight when I picked up a newspaper today at the grocery store and found this article in the Features section: The color purple: Fashion's bright idea for fall. I'm glad the fashion world has finally caught on, because purple is pretty much the best color in the world. It's slated to be popular this coming spring as well, so maybe the wedding world will catch on. The front-runner in this industry is J Crew, which has gorgeous wine-colored bridesmaid dresses in its fall collection:

Ignore the astronomical prices of these dresses; maybe I can find them on clearance in December.

Purple is also my go-to makeup color. I have to say that purple eyeshadows complement my eyes and skin pretty damn well, and since I recently ran out of most of the purples in my makeup bag and had a day off last week (and because it's well-established that when I have a day off I like to go shopping), I somehow acquired a whole bunch of new purple eyeshadows:

Estee Lauder Pure Color eyeshadow in plum pop and rose confetti, part of a free gift-with-purchase (I bought a new eyeliner I've been lusting after ever since I got a sample in another free gift a couple years ago, in charcoal, and a lip gloss in tender berry):

Clinique Colour Surge Eye Shadow Trio in come heather, which I bought to get the Clinique gift-with-purchase:

And an eye shadow duo in mochaberry, which came in the free gift:

I probably should have thought about all my purchases a little more, because the come heather and Estee Lauder freebie are very similar, and the mochaberry is enough in that same color palette to take the place of either one, so if I had planned a little better I could have bought something else completely different instead. But that's OK, because these will all still get plenty of use, and they are all strong contenders for wedding-day makeup.

So here's hoping that other people start to think of purple the way I do, and that I have many more purplish things to choose from in the next year and a half. Although even if there aren't, I won't be too upset, because I already have strong intentions of designing our own invitations (wedding theme/motif is already decided on and is to be unveiled in a future post). All I really need are the purple bridesmaid dresses.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Name change?

In the four weeks we've been engaged, the three questions I've been asked most frequently are:
1. Have you picked a date?
2. Where are you going to get married?
3. Are you going to change your name?

The answers to 1 and 2 are May 2009, hopefully Memorial Weekend, somewhere in Louisville.

The answer to #3 is a bit more complicated, and I'm surprised by how often people ask me about it.

Growing up, I had mixed feelings about changing my name when I got married. I don't have a problem becoming Mrs. So-and-so, because I think it's ingrained enough in our society (and so many other societies) that it's a natural thing to do. I don't have a problem with women who keep their names either, but it's low down on my own feminist issues list. However, whenever I've imagined my name as a physician, I've always imagined becoming Dr. MaidenName, because when I was 12, I didn't have any other last name to put behind the title Doctor. So now I'm stuck. Do I become Dr. So-and-so or stick with Dr. MaidenName?

Right off the bat, I have to tell you that I don't like the idea of hyphenating. Especially not with our last names, which are both two syllables and eight letters long. What a pain for bubbling into Scantrons! I knew someone in high school whose parents combined their names to make a new family surname, and it worked pretty well, I guess mostly because I didn't know either of her parents before they were married so I didn't think it sounded weird. There are a couple iterations of combining our names that don't sound horrendous, but I'm still not a big fan of the idea. My paternal grandfather is really involved with our family genealogy (traceable back to 1635, when Isaac MaidenName came to Ipswich, MA), and I'm glad no one in the family changed their surname between then and now to make tracing our roots more difficult (although, yes, records of those things always exist). FH's (geez, am I really using these wedding abbreviations already?) family name is also easily recognizable as having come from a particular country/region, and I respect that as well, so I wouldn't want to combine our names into a new one and lose those heritages. Bottom line, it's just weird.

It used to be that it was very difficult to get your name changed on your medical license, so that women kept whichever last name they had when they graduated, to avoid licensing hassles. I don't think this is as much of a problem now, but I'm not sure. I've also heard the argument that it is very difficult for female physicians to re-establish themselves if they change their names. Thus, if they begin their careers as Dr. MaidenName and then get married and become Dr. So-and-so, they tend to lose a lot of peripheral referrals and professional contacts. Similarly, women who start out as Dr. So-and-so and then get divorced often keep their former husband's last name for the sake of their practices. So I used to say that if my career had gotten off the ground by the time I got married, that would be reason enough to keep my maiden name professionally. Needless to say, I never did publish my master's thesis, and even if I had, I'm sure no one would be looking it up on PubMed and trying to correlate it with my future publications, so that argument is out.

In all likelihood, I will graduate from medical school before we get married, so that might be argument enough to keep my maiden name professionally, but in reality, I probably will not have applied for my medical license by the time I get married, so there would still be time to make a change if I wanted to. And if I did change my name, right after graduation would be a perfect time to do it, because I would be known as Dr. So-and-so beginning with my first hospital. (And obviously, I'm not planning on getting divorced.)

In the setting of the field of medicine I think there are other factors to consider. My friend, an internal medicine intern getting married to another medicine intern in April, says she is going to change her name so that people always know that her hot husband is married to her, another physician working in the same hospital, who hears the same gossip everyone else does. This will decrease any chance that a nurse might try to make a move on him, thinking that his wife would never know. OK, that's a little silly, but it is nice to instantaneously tie yourself personally and professionally to a colleague by way of the same name. "I just met Dr. Tim Williams. Is he by any chance married to Dr. Jennifer Williams in medicine? That's what I thought!"

On the other hand, two Dr. Williams can create confusion. "Do you mean Dr. Williams the internist or Dr. Williams the gastroenterologist?" (This often happens with father/son physicians. "Dr. Johnson-the-ENT senior or junior?") At my school, we refer to "Dr. Mr. Lastname" vs. "Dr. Mrs. Lastname." In any case, I don't need to worry about this, because FH is not going to be a physician.

But what if FH becomes a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter or White House correspondent, and I actually do run for public office? Is there any sense in keeping our names different just to make it that much harder for nosy people to link us together? Probably not. It will still be pretty obvious that we're married, so what does it matter which names we have? And any potential conflict of interest posed by the fact that I'm a politician and he's in journalism would have to be addressed regardless of our names, so it's a moot point. (This paragraph is a little facetious. I talk a lot about running for public office someday, but I really don't know if that's a serious threat or not.)

A lot of women move their maiden name to their middle name when they take their husband's last name, but I don't really like the idea of that, either. It works well when your given middle name is just another "regular" name without any family meaning, but my maiden name is my mother's maiden name, and I am one of the few people who can pass it on (I have one male cousin who will be passing on the name to his children, but that's it). It also ties me to that side of my heritage, so I don't want to give it up (it's essentially the only proof I have of being half-Chinese, because I don't look it at all!). So making my maiden name my middle name is out of the question. And so is having two middle names; let's not be ridiculous, people.

Now, in case you're wondering, I definitely want our kids to have their father's last name. I don't have a good argument for or against it, but it just seems right to me. So then do I want to be the only one in the family without the same last name and be left out? Probably not.

So I think I've come up with a solution. I'm going to be Dr. MaidenName, which has been my goal and dream for 26 (by then, 28) years. But socially, I'll be Mrs. So-and-so, and introduce myself that way. Letters can come addressed to Mr. and Mrs. So-and-so (or Mr. So-and-so and Dr. MaidenName if the addressers feel so inclined). Our kids' friends can call me Mrs. So-and-so when they come over to our house. But most importantly, if people mix things up and call me Dr. So-and-so or Mrs. MaidenName at cocktail parties, I won't throw a fit about it, because that's the most annoying thing about women who keep their names.

The only weird thing about this is that essentially, for all intents and purposes, I am simply keeping my maiden name from a legal standpoint, so mortgages and bank statements will have to be in my maiden name, right? I'm making only a very tiny concession to FH and taking his name in the weakest way possible -- that is, socially but not legally. I know there are women who keep their maiden name professionally but legally assume their husband's last name for all other aspects of life, but due to the nature of my profession I don't think I can do this.

I've posed this solution to FH a few times over the last few years, and again in the last four weeks, and I think he's OK with it. He's not adamantly against it, anyway. I'm not sure if I should accept his OK-ness and not bring it up again, or if I should keep pestering him for his real feelings.

I'm going to be brave and open this topic up for your comments, but there are no guarantees that I will listen to any of them. :) So, what do you think?

Let's hope it doesn't get this bad.

But if it did, it would be pretty damn funny.

Gartner's associated website is pretty cute, too. I was already thinking of DIY-ing the invitations, so I'll definitely take a look at them when the time comes.

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Catch-Up Posts

From the past month on my regular blog.

Can you believe it?!?!

Not that I thought it would NEVER happen, but more that I had no idea WHEN it was going to happen.

Blog title stolen from dsyin, who used it on her blog when she got engaged. I thought it was one of the funniest things I ever read.

I'm starting this blog because I'm sure there are plenty of people who occasionally read my regular blog who do not want to be bothered with details of color schemes, DIY craft projects, and hunting for bridesmaid dresses, but I still need to vent/share all of that information, as I do with the rest of my life. Read along if you like.

All we've decided so far is a sort-of date and a sort-of location: May 2009, after I graduate from medical school, in Louisville, KY.