Mr. A and I got engaged over a year ago (February 15, 2009 to be exact). For the average bride, picking a wedding date would have involved a one-year engagement, which if we had gone that route, would have us getting married about now. But, I’ve always wanted a fall wedding, for a few reasons. Mostly because fall in the Midwest is G-ORGEOUS. The colors are fantastic (see: engagement photos).
Images courtesy of Lisa Hessel Photography
While we could have gotten married in Fall 2009, a 9 to 10 month engagement was too short for me.
I wanted some time to enjoy the engagement and time to plan without pulling my hair out (because I totes would have). The Mr. was game for what I wanted, so there were no complaints from him. The obvious decision? Wait until fall the following year (fall 2010). Not only did this give us time to really plan, it gave us time to enjoy our engagement, and get first pick on a lot of the vendors in town. Most places in St. Louis book up fast within a year. So, with a 17 month engagement, we had quite the lead time ahead of most engaged couples in the area.
I’m not gonna lie ”“ it has been a long ride, but it’s one I have fully enjoyed. We’ve really had time to comb over any big decisions. And, I’ve had time to meet with our booked vendors on multiple occasions to get a lot of the details taken care of early on, all adding up to practically no stress.
Yes, we’ve had our highs and lows of wedding planning (and I’m not referring to goods and bads, arguments and make-ups. I’m talking being really busy at times and bored out of my mind at times). The entire process has been pretty bipolar (okay, mostly bipolar). We spend a few months really hashing out details and vendors, and then spend the next few doing absolutely nothing at all. It’s a bit confusing, but I would not change it for anything.
Was your engagement long or short? Were the seasons a factor in your decision to wait?
- St. Louis
- Project Coordinator
- Wedding Date:
- September 2010
- Jewel Box in Forest Park and Windows on Washington