Wendy Whelan Weds

[carbro]

Today's "Vows" column in The New York Times traces the romantic courtship of Ms. Whelan and David Michalek and describes their September 3 wedding, including two photos.

He . . .  proposed a hike in Joshua Tree National Park in California. Ms. Whelan showed up in high-heeled sandals. "We got up the mountain, but she broke a heel on the way down, and I carried her the rest of the way on piggy back," Mr. Michalek said. His wariness faded as they spoke about how their artistic paths had become more similar over the years they had spent apart. . . .

At their wedding on Sept. 3, officiated by the Rev. Alfredo Balinong at Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Church on the Upper West Side, the bride glided down the aisle in an ivory silk Vera Wang gown, her ballerina's bun loose at the nape of her neck. The reception, at Industria Superstudio in Greenwich Village, included Ms. Whelan's teachers and City Ballet colleagues like Pauline Golbin, Tom Gold, Megan Fairchild and Nikolaj Hubbe. A few dancers tangoed between bites of a Spanish feast prepared by Jock Soto, Ms. Whelan's longtime dance partner, and his boyfriend, Luis Fuentes, a chef and sommelier.

All best wishes to the bride and groom!

[Old Fashioned]

Congrats to the happy couple!

[canbelto]

Aww, what a sweet love story. Here's to many years of wedded bliss for Wendy and David.

But I was surprised at the photos of Wendy. She looks much softer and prettier offstage. Onstage she has this magisterial, about Grecian-statue look about her.

[perky]

Ain't love grand! Congratulations!

[oberon]

Having had the honor & pleasure of meeting Wendy several times, I can attest she is just as lovely as the pictures and her personality is as extraordinary as her dancing.

They seem to be made for one another and it's so sweet reading how David took care of her during the big injury. That's what love is all about, in my estimation. I wish them both a long & joyous life together.

[violet]

I didn't know Jock Soto had a boyfriend.

[richard53dog]

I didn't know Jock Soto had a boyfriend.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was sort of surprised by the way the NYTimes put that. In this day and age I wouldn't expect a serious publication to use the term "boyfriend"

OK, polical correctness is out of control, that's a given, "domestic partner" just sounds stupid to me; but I don't see anything unreasonalable in the term "partner"

Am I splitting hairs?

Richard

[carbro]

I think because Wendy was described in the same sentence as Jock's partner, another term was used to differentiate Mr. Fuentes' role in Jock's life. While the Times scrupulously checks even pro forma wedding announcements for accuracy, aren't they freer, style-wise, in the society pages than in the news pages?

[richard53dog]

I think because Wendy was described in the  same sentence as Jock's partner, another term was used to differentiate Mr. Fuentes' role in Jock's life.  While the Times scrupulously checks even pro forma wedding announcements for accuracy, aren't they freer, style-wise, in the society pages than in the news pages?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ha! You make a good point. (But I don't read the society pages anyway).

I can see the confusion of too many partners in a single sentence.

Still I hate the term "boyfriend". Even in opposite sex contexts it just sounds too "high school" for me. I guess it's just one of those quirky things I have.

Richard

[dido]

Heck, I'm a woman with a non-legally bound, long term, live-in male companion and I can't stand the term "boyfriend" and despite its long and honorable use in popular culture refuse to refer to said male companion as such.

Sadly, I have not come up with, nor have I seen anything but sickmaking substitutes. Shall we start a competition?

[zerbinetta]

There is also the possibility that the NYT asked Jock how he wished Mr Fuentes to be described & Jock answered "my boyfriend".

[dirac]

That may well be. I understand these wedding announcements are vetted pretty closely. Some time ago at my place of employment, one gentleman whose wedding was announced in NYT's pages provided some information that caused much merriment among his co-workers. I think carbro's observation about things being a little freer in the society pages is also on the mark.

dido writes:

Shall we start a competition?

Not on this thread, please. (Although I could never see what was wrong with plain old "lover" myself. I guess it's too sexy.)

[Jacqueline]

Well, not to veer too far off topic, but the Times has MANY interesting practices in terms of their wedding announcements. I have always been taken aback by the way they insist on publishing the bride and or groom's previous marital history, if any -- e.g. "the bride's previous marriage ended in divorce." Really, who cares and what does that have to do with the new and joyous occasion?

[carbro]

I understand these wedding announcements are vetted pretty closely.  Some time ago at my place of employment, one gentleman whose wedding was announced in NYT's pages provided some information that caused much merriment among his co-workers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I actually know of a case where the Times discovered some, uh, inaccuracies in the groom-to-be's bio, leading the prospective bride (who'd been given the same info) to call the whole thing off.