Maybe it isn't Californians in general. Maybe it is Ultimate players and co-opers who know what a party means.
I went to DC this weekend, to go to two very pleasant parties. The second one was an afternoon gathering, with interesting people and great conversation. The first one was a nighttime party, super smart nice people in their twenties, clumped into groups, talking away. I liked meeting and talking to people at the nighttime party, but I kept close watch until I was sure of what I was seeing. Then I went home and confirmed with the friend I was staying with. “Good party, neat people” I said, “But…” I paused and he filled in: “Not fun.” I asked how he knew and he said “That’s how parties are here.” Naturally, I have always pitied people who don’t live in California. But now that I’m worried that East Coast people don’t know what a party should be, my heart just breaks for them.
Chris and I think a lot about how to throw parties, although we have different goals. For Chris, a successful party ends in group debauch. I don’t aspire to inducing orgies, but there is a very specific feeling I want my parties to build toward, a sense of group exhilaration and abandon. At the apex of my parties, I want people dancing and lively groups talking, and maybe a project about to be finished that everyone will cheer for. There should be a lot of intermingling, with hugs getting passed along; since men can’t do that, they’ll be roughhousing, manly style. Maybe the group will jump in the pool or make an impromptu bonfire or throw things off the roof; I want everyone giddy enough that they will do something outrageous just for the fun. People should be cheering, chanting or howling at the moon.
It takes a lot of work to get people to that state. After critiquing a lot of parties, Chris and I have resolved some basics; you need enough people; they must be involved; and they must be slightly dissociated, out of their safe selves.
You need enough people:
I now believe that parties must be co-hosted. A party needs at least 70-80 people in a small house to ignite. Even with a large group of friends and a reputation for throwing parties, I can only draw 40 guests by myself. I need two more hosts to get us up into the right range; with multiple hosts, invitees will hear about the party from different sources. Also, multiple hosts will invite different social circles, meaning handsome strangers and new friends to make. Getting people to a party is work. I expect to invite people once and remind them twice if I want a decent turnout.
They must be involved:
You can’t force people to get involved (and that isn’t fun), but you can give them lots of ways to participate. First, the party should have a theme. I’m going to an Ugly Shirt party this weekend; just by thinking about what shirt to wear, I’m invested in the party. A theme gives people a chance to be clever, and you never know what you’ll get. When we said the dress code was “Dress to make Prince proud of you” we thought we’d get a lot of skank, but we never thought that Jack would wear Courtney’s tight red pants and frilly pink blouse. Three years later, we still talk about how incredible he looked. I put out romance novels for a Valentine’s Day party; I didn’t expect people to do readings and act out scenes. Lots of people won’t arrive in theme dress, so help them out. Have silly thrift store clothes at the party so they can join the fun.
People are scared to talk to strangers, but they want to join the animated circles. Give them a way to break in. At our OH! party, Roxie gave everyone half a picture; they had to find the person with the other half. Very easy, very helpful, a reason to approach people. At Greg’s parties, you draw a question out of the question box to ask strangers. (I’ve heard the questions range from “what do you think of abortion?” to “have you taken it up the ass?”. Foolproof.) I no longer do much anxious hostessing, where I make introductions and pull people into groups, largely because we build self-introductions into the party.
Have a collective project ready to go (like destroying the carpet before I took it up or feeding each other fondue), so that people can move between talking and doing something.
They must be slightly dissociated:
Yeah, yeah, yeah, booze. Whatever. Booze is necessary, but by itself it is only a crutch for a weak party. You can do better. Mood lighting is another minimal requirement; please remember to use colors that flatter your guests (reds, yellows, pinks, oranges) and to change the light up. Good music and beats are another basic requirement.
Even slight costume elements, like boas or glitter will help people out of their self-consciousness and give them a way to be silly. Half-naked people always improve a party, but I find that happens on its own.
You should arrange the space to slightly disorient people. Chris builds an arch or tunnel to his door, so that you physically move into party space. We both create mini-rooms and places to be. I’ve had good luck with pushing two couches together face to face; people like to clamber into them. Decorate the whole space in accordance with the theme; you can use labels to instruct people. Half the chairs in my house still have pink “lap dance” signs from the last party. Hang things from the ceiling, so you have to duck around them, or play with them, or set them swinging. Movies projected onto one wall of the house set the room in motion; Russ Meyer movies work well for that.
Parties like these are crafted and they take a good deal of preparatory work. They are worth it though. The fun starts with people’s surprised reactions to the space of the party and builds through a night of watching people relax into dancing and doing and laughing. On special occasions, a rhythm and momentum will gather and the party will make new fun, fun you never expected. If you are prepared and lucky, you can throw a party that becomes infamous. But you have to expect more of your party than standing around talking or raging drunkenness. Neither of those are fun or ambitious enough to be worth the work.
Tomorrow I'll go over throwing a smaller gathering.
Chris and I think a lot about how to throw parties, although we have different goals. For Chris, a successful party ends in group debauch. I don’t aspire to inducing orgies, but there is a very specific feeling I want my parties to build toward, a sense of group exhilaration and abandon. At the apex of my parties, I want people dancing and lively groups talking, and maybe a project about to be finished that everyone will cheer for. There should be a lot of intermingling, with hugs getting passed along; since men can’t do that, they’ll be roughhousing, manly style. Maybe the group will jump in the pool or make an impromptu bonfire or throw things off the roof; I want everyone giddy enough that they will do something outrageous just for the fun. People should be cheering, chanting or howling at the moon.
It takes a lot of work to get people to that state. After critiquing a lot of parties, Chris and I have resolved some basics; you need enough people; they must be involved; and they must be slightly dissociated, out of their safe selves.
You need enough people:
I now believe that parties must be co-hosted. A party needs at least 70-80 people in a small house to ignite. Even with a large group of friends and a reputation for throwing parties, I can only draw 40 guests by myself. I need two more hosts to get us up into the right range; with multiple hosts, invitees will hear about the party from different sources. Also, multiple hosts will invite different social circles, meaning handsome strangers and new friends to make. Getting people to a party is work. I expect to invite people once and remind them twice if I want a decent turnout.
They must be involved:
You can’t force people to get involved (and that isn’t fun), but you can give them lots of ways to participate. First, the party should have a theme. I’m going to an Ugly Shirt party this weekend; just by thinking about what shirt to wear, I’m invested in the party. A theme gives people a chance to be clever, and you never know what you’ll get. When we said the dress code was “Dress to make Prince proud of you” we thought we’d get a lot of skank, but we never thought that Jack would wear Courtney’s tight red pants and frilly pink blouse. Three years later, we still talk about how incredible he looked. I put out romance novels for a Valentine’s Day party; I didn’t expect people to do readings and act out scenes. Lots of people won’t arrive in theme dress, so help them out. Have silly thrift store clothes at the party so they can join the fun.
People are scared to talk to strangers, but they want to join the animated circles. Give them a way to break in. At our OH! party, Roxie gave everyone half a picture; they had to find the person with the other half. Very easy, very helpful, a reason to approach people. At Greg’s parties, you draw a question out of the question box to ask strangers. (I’ve heard the questions range from “what do you think of abortion?” to “have you taken it up the ass?”. Foolproof.) I no longer do much anxious hostessing, where I make introductions and pull people into groups, largely because we build self-introductions into the party.
Have a collective project ready to go (like destroying the carpet before I took it up or feeding each other fondue), so that people can move between talking and doing something.
They must be slightly dissociated:
Yeah, yeah, yeah, booze. Whatever. Booze is necessary, but by itself it is only a crutch for a weak party. You can do better. Mood lighting is another minimal requirement; please remember to use colors that flatter your guests (reds, yellows, pinks, oranges) and to change the light up. Good music and beats are another basic requirement.
Even slight costume elements, like boas or glitter will help people out of their self-consciousness and give them a way to be silly. Half-naked people always improve a party, but I find that happens on its own.
You should arrange the space to slightly disorient people. Chris builds an arch or tunnel to his door, so that you physically move into party space. We both create mini-rooms and places to be. I’ve had good luck with pushing two couches together face to face; people like to clamber into them. Decorate the whole space in accordance with the theme; you can use labels to instruct people. Half the chairs in my house still have pink “lap dance” signs from the last party. Hang things from the ceiling, so you have to duck around them, or play with them, or set them swinging. Movies projected onto one wall of the house set the room in motion; Russ Meyer movies work well for that.
Parties like these are crafted and they take a good deal of preparatory work. They are worth it though. The fun starts with people’s surprised reactions to the space of the party and builds through a night of watching people relax into dancing and doing and laughing. On special occasions, a rhythm and momentum will gather and the party will make new fun, fun you never expected. If you are prepared and lucky, you can throw a party that becomes infamous. But you have to expect more of your party than standing around talking or raging drunkenness. Neither of those are fun or ambitious enough to be worth the work.
Tomorrow I'll go over throwing a smaller gathering.
posted by Megan at 3:38 PM
44 Comments:
Hmmm, you make it sound like fun. But, I've been to a lot of parties, and I don't think I've ever really enjoyed any of them. I liked going to hang out with friends and talk. But, generally parties are far too noisy to talk. And, then there's dancing. I don't dance, ever, under any circumstances.
I suppose I could get behind a project. Though, once it was done I'd likely get bored again. Usually I go, if I didn't drive I drink a bit, I hang out with my friends, then I go find a quiet place to sit by myself and fantasize about doing more interesting things, until it quiets down, and people are ready to go.
Fortunately, this isn't a problem that comes up very often anymore. All of my friends are activity oriented, so I tend to only see them at their corresponding activities.
Justin
I throw different gatherings for people like you, Justin. But I'd like to think that I could get you involved in the fun.
Wow. I think I've now been thoroughly discouraged from ever trying to throw a party.
Whatever. As long as you aren't in California, people won't know better. They'll think standing around is a fine party.
Besides, Anand told me once that your types are rowdies, lots of cousins and music and dancing. You've already admitted to liking dancing so I bet you know how to bring the party.
Bring the party, yes. Organize the party? That sounds like a lot of work and planning.
I don't know. I'm very difficult about such things. Not very good with groups of people I don't know, and I have nothing in common with, and we're not really doing anything.
But, you put a lot more effort into your parties than the others I've been to, which are mostly just about drinking, and obnoxiously loud music.
Justin
I get a little touchy about this whole west coast-east coast thing. The best party by far I've ever been to was in NYC. And I've been to quite a few in California...
In that great party, even I was dancing on a table...
Hmmm. Who were the people who threw the great NYC party?
Your parties sound amazing, but I'm pretty sure I'd never accept other people's invitations if I thought they'd do anything like that.
Real parties have bonfires. Having lived among the Easterners for 18 years now, I have to agree with you on this.
I am going to a theme party in Virginia in a few weeks: Casablanca, and one must dress like Bogart or Bergman. It'll be OK, but there's not going to be a bonfire.
I saw those, and read them to try to avoid covering the same ground. I should have linked them upfront, but I got lazy. I'll bring them front tomorrow.
Alas, you are entirely correct about parties in DC, although I don't know if I would apply that to the entire East Coast. You see, in DC, people consider parties to be opportunities for networking, rather than opportunities for fun. That's why the first questions you are asked at any DC party are variations of "What do you do?" or "Who do you work for?" Combine that with a citywide obsession with getting up early and avoiding behavior that could get you in the newspaper, and it really limits the party potential. The only exception I can think of is Halloween--but that's because you're wearing a costume and people can't tell who you are.
The best parties I ever went to were at my college fraternity. Yes, there was drinking, and a lot of it--but any old fraternity can do that. Much like you, we put special effort into each and every occasion. Any fraternity house can have a party with 70s music, and most can even get a disco ball hanging from the ceiling, but we went the extra mile and had Elvis impersonators. You haven't been to a party until you've danced on a mantelpiece with Elvis.
What Justin said. Excessively loud music is anti-social given the way it inhibits conversation.
A second problem with large parties, not entirely unrelated to the loud-music issue, is the tendency of people to form small impromptu groups and therefore ending up interacting with just a few people all night. Some sort of group activity is a way of countering this tendency.
Peter
Iron Rails & Iron Weights
I continue to be impressed at how much thought you put into things most of us just do.
And Megan continues to wonder why her closest friends are in their early 20s and she isn't dating grown up men her age? Too bad Peter Pan was boy or we would have a final diagnosis and be done with it.
Do you want to get married and have children post haste or do you want to continue to be a child? Those are some pretty mixed signals that will alienate both groups of men. Which means pretty much all men who might want to sleep with/date you.
Sounds like some of the parties we throw down in the South. Bonfires, activites, themes, booze...good times, good times.
Whatever. As long as you aren't in California, people won't know better. They'll think standing around is a fine party.
no offense to your "my-California-style-is-just-so-much-better" parties, but ugggh. gross. Being a native Californian, may I please for the record state one - theme parties are uniformly terrible, and two, not all California parties are as you describe. I would have left the state alot sooner if they were. Frankly, "disorienting" people on purpose and making them participate in craft projects? I'll pass.
Wow. Controversial post, huh?
Justus's response is particularly concerning to me. I mean, for Pete's sake, MUST you perpetuate the idea that growing up means you should quite having fun toute suite? It true that most people DO quit having fun, but it's not by choice, it's because life is hard and people get old and bored and stuck. But it's not something to aspire to - this growing up that you espouse.
Megan is unfortunate in that she wants to be in an LTR and she's not. She wants to have kids and she isn't having them. But in the meantime, while waiting, she's making the most of it! That's what single people get to do, dummy. It's the temporary consolation prize for not having the kind of fun you get to have by having kids. Likewise, having kids is a consolation prize for missing out on all the bonfire party fun.
And in my opinion, the best parents are the one who figure out how to make sure their kids know that they are people, too, and they have friends and adult fun and the whole world doesn't revolve solely around their progeny.
Finally, I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but seriously... not all Californians are cool and not all DC peeps are uncool. But my observations have been shockingly similar to Megan's. Philadelphia is different (good-different), but when I lived in DC I went to some very staid parties. But maybe it was just that I had few real friends there.
Also, could be it's a co-op kid thing. Maybe it spreads across the country, and that any co-oper from Madison to Ann Arbor to Berkeley to Amherst would know a good party when they were at one.
I am sad that I haven't been to a good co-op style party in a long time. Even though some of those were kinda skeevy. What would be really fun is if the man featured in the "spit-roasting" post would have another Wyoming Stock or something, because 'stocks are always the best kind of party there is.
Well put, Julian. I'm not sure which state should be the metaphorical gay bar.
I've never felt disappointed about not throwing things off the roof. I honestly don't think everyone wants to have that much fun. It isn't poor planning but personal preference.
Of course I have the good sense not to throw parties so I don't have to worry about getting critiqued.
There's way too much here for me to answer well.
eDubin!:
Thanks for getting my back. I know you understand a good party, and any party thrown by that guy would rock 'til the sun came up two days later.
Justus:
Lots of hating recently. What's up?
Julian:
It felt exactly like wandering into a gay bar and wondering where all the hot chicks were. This should be exactly right, but something fundamental is missing. So many handsome people, all talking animatedly, but why weren't they taking the next step? Did they not know about the next step? Was there going to be no fun?
Megan: Because some adults enjoy themselves perfectly fine without taking the next step, and yes, still have FUN. I am really struggling to find out what is so wrong with that? Some people outgrow that kind of zany partying after undergrad, which is acceptable. Some people don't. Also acceptable.
But that doesn't make you right and them wrong.
Personally, I find nothing "fundamental" about jumping off the roof or painting chickens with watercolors or whatever. That just doesn't qualify as fundamental for a party for me. And I'm not even a political journalist.
So many handsome people, all talking animatedly, but why weren't they taking the next step? Did they not know about the next step? Was there going to be no fun?
Seriously, Megan, you're being obnoxiously presumptious. I hope you can see that.
There's nothing wrong with you leaving that party because it wasn't enough fun for you, not everyone likes the same cup of tea.
But saying that the people who were there are poor benighted souls who don't know how to have a good time, not to mention the aspersions you're casting on the hosts of the party as failing to do their proper jobs, is astoundingly arrogant.
It's quite akin to Ugly Americanism to assume that you know how things should be done and to pity those who don't see or do things the same way.
I'm curious, though, in the unfogged thread you say you throw a big party about once every two years and attend one about once a year. Was the DC party billed as some huge annual deal, a Party with a capital 'P'? Is that why it let you down? Or is it unacceptable to have a gathering that doesn't "take it to the next step"?
I've said again and again that I had a good time. I am also surprised that a house full of twenty year olds are happy with a stand-around talking party, especially when so many of them are already animated and know each other. That is ripe ground for a funner party.
I feel very bad about casting any aspersions on the hosts, who welcomed me and threw a good standing-around-talking party. I liked them when I talked to them and I am sorry that this has likely closed my chances of further friendship.
BUT - I will go a step further into Ugly American. Yes. I do think that maybe they do not know how to throw a party that turns fun. My host volunteered my exact thoughts on fun in DC and he has lived all over the country. So far, CharleyCarp, T_N and eDubin have backed me up; they also say that DC parties aren't fun.
If you don't like my kind of party, you don't. But I am surprised that a large group of kids will go to the trouble of having a very big party, and not want more out of it. Because the potential was there.
Wait. So, based on the opinions of your friends, you are casting aspersions on an entire city? Holy crap.
Dear Megan, CharleyCarp, T_N and eDubin: you aren't scoring invites to the right parties.
AS far as the potential being there, I think it's been pretty well established on Unfogged that they never planned on throwing a "Megan Party" in the first place.
Nope, they didn't mean to. But they had all the elements there, if they had wanted to take it in that direction. Venue, animated people.
I was surprised that they didn't seem to want to, because I forget and expect people to be like me. Then I realized that the party would be different and had a good time, liking everyone I talked to.
Then, I noted the difference, and wrote up instructions for the party I like to give.
If you don't like my kind of party, you don't. But I am surprised that a large group of kids will go to the trouble of having a very big party, and not want more out of it. Because the potential was there.
Your parties sound great, Megan. It's the thinking that people who don't do things the way you would are worthy of your pity part that's obnoxious.
Spare them your heartbreak, they don't need or want it. It's like feeling sorry for people who enjoy a good chess game because, during the game, they aren't experiencing the physical exhiliration of diving and just barely catching a frisbee.
Then, I noted the difference, and wrote up instructions for the party I like to give.
Nothing wrong with that. It's phrases like:
But now that I’m worried that East Coast people don’t know what a party should be, my heart just breaks for them.
and
So many handsome people, all talking animatedly, but why weren't they taking the next step? Did they not know about the next step? Was there going to be no fun?
that are the problem.
But I was JOKING about the heartbreak, because it is such a pretentiously Californian thing to say. I was making fun of myself for saying such a thing. If you got the arrogance from that, it was a joke. If you got the arrogance from the rest of my post and comments, well, that I earned.
Yeh, I guess I wasn't going to the right parties. But you have to understand, I'm not being facetious when I tell you that I had never even SEEN a political intern before I lived in DC for that year (1997). It was a distinct culture shock to see the young people in DC, they just dressed different and the whole place has a feel to it that I was unprepared for. All my friends from college were either architecture students or co-op people, and I literally didn't know ANY business majors nor anyone who was particularly headed to law school. The only potentially DC types I knew were the occasional P.E.I.S. majors (Political Economy of Industrialized Societies, yeh that's you Amanda) and even though I was friends with them I wondered how one would wind up picking that major as a young person.
So I get to DC and only started to sort of get it by the time I was leaving. I began to see that one could live in Adams Morgan or Mount Pleasant and have a life that wasn't all that different from the East Bay scene.
Anyway, I admit I wasn't socially connected in DC. But that's beside the point. The real point is that people here and at unfogged (holy crap) are arguing about what's fun and what's not fun and really the issue is that they're mad at Megan because they feel she was pretentious or presumptuous or snotty about California. They want to slap her down and put her in her place because her post implicitly dissed them, unlike Megan's usual posts, which are very inclusive.
So, all y'all can just quit arguing and pretending you don't "get it" and you "don't like fun" when really you're just giving our friend the slap-down.
(I admit, I am curious why Megan wrote the post knowing that people at the parties would read it, or that people in DC would get their backs up... guess it seemed innocent enough at the time...)
I'm not being facetious when I tell you that I had never even SEEN a political intern before I lived in DC for that year
And I had never seen a banker until I lived in New York and I never saw an Army general until I lived in Colorado Springs? Why is it surprising that certain kinds of people gravitate to certain areas?
It's like being shocked -- SHOCKED -- to find out that lots of hippies live in California instead of Georgia.
Megan: no hating intended. I was actually trying (and failing, obviously) to be more constructive than the unfogged thread. Someone over there raised the question about when these kinds of parties stop being okay. How many people honestly would feel nothing out of place with a group of 60 year olds throwing a Megan Party and burning stuff, throwing things off of buildings, and so forth? We can argue whether people have been brainwashed by society but the fact remains that very few "real adults" in America today find a lot of allure in those kinds of parties. They may even enjoy attending them once every year or two but actually dating the kind of person who plans them is a whole different matter, particularly for adults interested in "settling down".
(On a more snarky note, Megan's guidelines for a party clearly come from a "Who cares about my ecological footprint?" stereotypical western American. When you live in a Jane Jacob's wet dream dense urban area, Megan's prescriptions are well nigh impossible to follow. 70 people in a $200,000, 500-square foot studio apartment? Throw things off of roofs when there is no roof access and roofs in real cities are pitched anyway? Jump into a pool when even millionaires can't afford a pool? Build a tree house where? The public park six blocks away? Drinking outside when that's illegal? Sharing walls with as many as six neighbors who have families/have to work tomorrow/aren't interested in having dozens strangers possibly fuck up the common areas? Kitchens barely big enough for two people? And having to take public transportation to get most places make theme parties a lot less fun; unless you enjoy wearing costumes/schlepping supplies on a crowded Green Line trolley.)
eDubin!:
I wasn't thinking. I thought it might hurt their feelings, and I wrote to apologise for that. I should have left it be.
And!! They wore tweed and corduroy jackets! Like it was natural or something! It was all I could do not to gape.
Justus:
I live in the densest part of Sacramento, and threw stuff off the roof in densely packed urban Berkeley. I've written before about how much I envy parties in the park. I'm neo-urbanist to the core.
Could you email me? I feel like we've chatted before, way back when MR first linked me, but I can't find that email.
So I get to DC and only started to sort of get it by the time I was leaving. I began to see that one could live in Adams Morgan or Mount Pleasant and have a life that wasn't all that different from the East Bay scene.
But why would you want to move somewhere different, Dubin, and have the same life as where you just left?
I'll admit, I get my hackles raised when someone starts bad-mouthing anyplace, in such an overarching manner, DC included. You just brought up Adams Morgan and Mt. Pleasant, (which are nowadays overrun with those same interns btw.) It's not necess. your fault you didn't learn about NE, or U St., or Ledroit Park, or Bloomingdale; the thriving (thriving!) DC music and arts scene, Ft. Reno, etc. in time to enjoy the fun (!) of it all. Someone probably should have taken you under your wing and shown you these things.
But you can't then say "all DC parties aren't fun." It's just false reporting without any true research into the subject at hand; and therefore, by your own words, Megan can't really logically use you "a backup."
Totally nitpicky, I acknowledge, but I would never dream to say something like "all San Francisco parties are full of smelly hippies, because my 3 of friends say so." I know that's probably not true.
Lara:
I'm sorry your hackles got raised. You have obviously had lots of good times in all sorts of places in DC. I was just naming the people who've had similar observations to mine.
Also, you may not have been here a couple weeks back to see me get all worked up. Anyone can say anything they want about me here, but I require active kindness towards your fellow commenters.
I live in the densest part of Sacramento
Oh you west coasters (I say that because I was born and bred in California)....you say "density" but it doesn't mean what you think it means.
The wonders of the internets tell me that Sacramento has a population density of 1,617 per square kilometer. Numbers like that make me laugh. I lived in Somerville which has a population density of 7,278 per square kilometer. Granted those are averages but that holds true for both cities...parts of Somerville are more or less dense. I lived in the densest part of Somerville.
Take every single house in your "dense" part of Sacramento and quadruple the number of people living it and you'd probably get something close to where I lived.
The same holds true for Berkeley which is only half as dense as where I lived.
Your "dense" California city neighborhoods are what East Coasters call spacious suburbs. If you have a yard to get fined for not mowing then you aren't living in a dense neighborhood :)
Oh, jeez, Louise.
Lara: Defensive much? I didn't say that all DC parties aren't fun. I said I was socially unconnected and left before figuring it out. I also have no interest in going back to the East Bay, I just used it as an example of how places are more diverse than you can tell in 9 months if you don't meet the right people.
Justus: Enough with your Jane-Jacobser-than-though storyline. It's almost as pretentious and annoying as people think Megan is being. (I supposed here's where she kicks me off for being unkind.)
My suggestion is that this whole thing has gone on long enough, so I'm going to bag out. Maybe we should all agree to disagree and go talk to our friends outside the box for awhile.
YAY! for friends outside the box.
Megan : "fun" parties :: Bull Meecham : "friendly" games of basketball
i think it's mind blowing that a post about fun parties turned into something as not fun as people try to make it. hello, peeps. parties. fun. maybe i'm just being short because i went to a fun party last night (project runway finale viewing party, woo-hoo!) and i have a spot of a hangover and i'm tired. but i tend to be with megan on the california/co-op party pride. and i truly think that anyone who could actually say without irony that megan isn't going to meet a man because she still enjoys being a solicitous party hostess is himself doomed to a blah life of standing around. at 29 i've worked my bum off to have a grown-up life involving an on-track career and scheduling regular dental appointments--and even buying a treo last weekend--but shoot me dead if i don't still get to have fun now that i'm an adult and stuff. (by the way, soon i'm going to a pumpkin-carving party thrown by my best girlfriend who is a corporate lawyer who also happens to be married and eight months pregnant, but she still makes things fun and not boring and stand-around-talky.) what's the point? dang, people, by the way. lighten up. oh and ps: don't say anything mean about my sister and her comments on here because that will gnaw at me and then i'll get mean.
Megan--
Don't diss the courderoy blazer.
I do think some of this is East Coast/West Coast. I'm from Maine, went to school in CT, and live in DC now. Last year I was dating a girl who lives in DC but was from Lafayette CA. Her family is pretty similar to mine, parents similar age, similar type of jobs, similar town that they live in to where I grew up. I was there over the holidays and couldn't believe how different it was to what I was used to. I mean, her parents had a dinner party for their friends and us, and we all played charades afterwards. Went to a party at a family friends house and there was a giant themed holiday gift exchange. These things were fun, but never something I experienced growing up...and I've hung out with a pretty broad group of people.
I can't put my finger on it, it was just different. Parties I go to on the east coast with people my parents age tend to have conversations dominated by politics, work, travel, yesterdays NYTimes front page....definitely not charades.
I wasn't dissing the blazers. I've just honestly never seen young people wearing them. They looked handsome. It surprised me, is all.
aDubin!:
I am such a huge believer in staying fun when you grow up. And I love anything your sister says.
I feel so betrayed.
"Tomorrow I'll go over throwing a smaller gathering." you said.
I wait and I wait.
No smaller gathering. I've always liked smaller gatherings.
Can it be that you get so distracted about a minor insensitivity on your part becoming cause for a civil war that you forget your IMPORTANT COMMITMENTS? :-)
Are you cereal? I thought I'd beaten that one into the ground. Yeah, if you want tips on throwing smaller gatherings, I'll write those up.
Some call me Captain Crunch. Wait, I've been looking for Halloween costume ideas! Nah, too much like a pirate, did that last year.
Warning: I probably will never throw a smaller gathering, although it is more likely than a large party. Jocelyn doesn't want anybody else in the house unless it is spotless...and it is never spotless. I enjoy reading the theory, though.
For MY idea of fun, I pretty much throw myself on the mercy of the karaoke crowd...sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If I get a good dance, it usually works.
Yeah, if you want tips on throwing smaller gatherings, I'll write those up.
Let me be the first to say that Megan's tips for small gatherings suck because they do not conform precisely to my notion of a properly thrown small gathering.
I'm not saying; I'm jut saying.
Post a Comment
<< Home