Well then, as to that qualifying as the social wedding event of the year of the would be members of ‘society’, I can only observe, God help society!
It appeared to be a motley collection of those with more money than sense or taste and those minor royalty who would attend the opening of an envelope. Don’t some of them even own a mirror? I’ve seen better looking hats on Wurzel Gummidge in fields! The aristocracy were notably absent.
Apart from the obvious futility of trying to compete with Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace and RAF flybyes, vulgarity appeared to be de rigeur.
The real question has to be since when did it become acceptable to invite guests to the evening do only, or the church only? Specify they bring two outfits and no mobile phones etc etc. It really does strike me as quite extraordinary that hosts should be quite so insultingly prescriptive. One wonders how many shudderingly declined the invite with alacrity.
Somebody needs to remind the bridezillas that weddings are public events and all are entitled to witness the event. Not that long ago it was traditional to be married in the church entrance so that all could witness the event. Which is why so many small churches have a fairly large covered entrance. If it was good enough for John of Gaunt it is certainly good enough for those who’s loot has been acquired selling dubious tat to the stupid.