my wedding dress inspiration board…
My dress form — her name is Beuhla — stubbornly refuses to grow 6 foot tall and stretch in the torso, hence the toile is a lot more squashed on her than it will be on me — see below. The finished version will also be less hot pink than this too 
Too sick to work this week. Instead I gently played at dress-up for an hour or so at a time, using calico and some cheap pink tulle to figure out the basic structure of The Dress.
This first toile, with its cut out piece of calico for a bodice, is simply to get some idea of how I like the style of dress on me (answer : a lot! hooray!). It’s three pieces: a skirt, a bow, and a sweetheart bodice. It uses a full circle skirt, which I am now reconsidering. I think there’s too much fabric at the bottom: that once it’s layered in tulle it will be ridiculously large, and crazy-expensive too as I’d like it worked in silk dupioni with nice tulle. I also have to learn how to construct a boned bodice. (Any ideas, sewing mavens?)
It made me happy to start building my wedding dress.
Something that has been making me sad, however, is the Australian wedding ceremony. We recently found out that our celebrant will be legally required to say that ‘marriage is between a man and a woman.’
I have very strong personal feelings about this meanness (I realise they will not be shared by everyone who reads this blog, but please bear with me, for I don’t often talk politics here). Dan and I are currently looking at options like going through the legal rigmarole the day before the wedding. In this way we can say what is in our hearts on our wedding day, not what is written in old man’s law, and hence avoid affirming unjust sentiments in front of dear friends and family.
This weekend, thousands of people marched in Melbourne for the right to do simple and joyous things like play with hot pink tulle and plan vows. And for the so important legal privileges that Dan and I will enjoy because he is a man and I am a woman. What’s more, my friend and photographer-to-be Jessie was there to commemorate the day for the over 65 (!!) couples who exchanged vows. Do have a look at her beautiful photographs. Some of them are just heartbreakingly lovely. Please go have a look. If you’re not convinced that this is the right thing, ask yourself what you would lose, and what the world would gain, if a few more people were allowed to say in public,
‘I love you: I do.’
August 3, 2009 at 12:05 am
oh how fun!
i read somewhere an account of someone going to a wedding in australia where the woman celebrant said ‘i am legally required to say that marriage is between a man and a woman, which the bride and groom think is crap’. i guess that got the point across…
August 3, 2009 at 12:23 am
Anne – you look hot! Love the style on you. I think it’s amazing you are making your own dress.
Maybe the law will change before Feb?
August 3, 2009 at 2:08 am
Lovely dress! It’s ridiculous to prohibit something as beautiful as two people pledging their love and making a legal commitment to one another. I’m the the U.S. and we’re struggling with the same issue, although they haven’t yet gone so far as to require the officiant to proclaim the law during the ceremony.
The photos at your friend’s site are wonderful – I’m crying now because of the love and joy that are so obvious on the faces of the men and women (or to be more accurate, the men and men and women and women) who participated in the ceremony. How can people see photos like these and not recognize the RIGHTNESS of equal marriage?
August 3, 2009 at 6:21 pm
We had the same issue with our wedding ceremony…
it was very annoying to have to have something like that, that we don’t agree with, inserted into our otherwise totally individual and funky (if I do say so myself) ceremony… but our celebrant handled it well – she has a little spiel that she does where she explains that (bride and groom) support everyone’s right to form a committed relationship, but that this has to be said, etc.
Loving the dress! although not so much the pink, heh
August 3, 2009 at 7:47 pm
it’s an awkward situation — we don’t want ‘our day’ to be all about politics, but $@$@@#$ politicians go and hijack it all the same. Which forces us to be political.
Dan suggested we get the celebrant to say something like: ‘marriage is between a man and a woman. Unless they’re ugly. Or disabled in any way. Or have green eyes. Or brown hair. Or do not conform to the values of the Liberal Party.” Yeah, I’m not keen! But it would get the point across
meli, I love your suggestion! “Anne and Dan wish it to be known that if a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a woman and a giraffe and a bright green alien would like to give each other gold rings and share their stuff, well so long as they’re nice to each other and the kids, they can bloody well do what they like without Anne and Dan getting in their way.”
August 4, 2009 at 3:24 am
LOVE your dress, the sweetheart bodice is well, …. a sweetheart…just like YOU. It looks better on you than the model, who seems to lack the grace that you have.
Re ideas about boning…you could try picking up one at an op shop and pull it apart to see how it is done. I have a Marianna Hardwick (not Carolines’s, mine was only $30 which I used to dress up as Eliza Doolittle) which you could pull apart if you would like to.
I like Meli’s suggestion re your marriage vows. But is not just the Liberal party …unfortunately, Mr Rudd is still in the last century on this matter.
cheerio
August 4, 2009 at 11:51 am
(blushes at nice comment!)
Ah, Rudd. He’s a frustrating one, so forward thinking in so many ways and so bigoted in others. What to do? I don’t wish horrible things on him like I do Howard. I’m just… disappointed.
Lorraine I would LOVE to have a look at the inside of a boned garment. That’s so kind of you! I have instructions on how to bone something but I’ve never owned a garment made this way. Can I meet you in the city some day? Or if meeting in the CBD wuold just make work for you, I’d be happy to drive out to you too.