Meghan Markle: Wedding Dress Suggestions and Musings


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Beyond horrible !
I wonder if she will give the veil and a long train a miss since it’s her 2nd wedding
I’m not saying she should so don’t all jump on me but she might think along the lines of Camilla and Anne hope not but I’m prepared to be surprised
 
Last edited:
Pranter said:
She's going to be covered...not going to see bare shoulders/arms, even if it's a sheer material there will be something there. That's more of a Traditional BRF thing than a CoE thing now days.



LaRae
Click to expand...

Her arms don't have to be covered, Zara is proof of that. Simply her shoulders.

Beyond horrible !
I wonder if she will give the veil and a long train a miss since it’s her 2nd wedding
I’m not saying she should so don’t all jump on me but she might think along the lines of Camilla and Anne hope not but I’m prepared to be surprised
Click to expand...

Why? How is she comparable to Anne or Camilla, other then second wedding?

Anne and Camilla were older women, both with semi grown or grown kids. Often when married older in life, even if first marriage, you avoid the more formal gowns and veils.

Anne had a church wedding, but it was a very small affair. Camilla had a civil ceremony. A veil and full gown at a registry office??? Even if she was younger, or first wedding, or both, it would have been over kill.

Both women had the huge church wedding. They both had the huge gowns and veils and trains the first time around. The reason many second time brides forego this kind of thing, is because they have already done it.

Meghan married on a beach and had none of this. She is not being married in a small private ceremony like Anne. She isn't being married in a registry office like Camilla. She is being married in a grand chapel (would be considered a cathedral if not part of the estate). All of this will obviously be taken into account.
 
Anne wasn’t actually that much older than Meghan is when she married Tim - she was 42, Meghan will be 37 next year.

It is common for second weddings to be less extravagant than first weddings, but I think a big part of that (now) is because of the cost. As this is Harry’s first wedding, cost is less of an issue than it would be for most people, and Meghan seems to have had a fairly low key first wedding, I think we can still expect a somewhat extravagant wedding. Maybe toned down compared to other royal weddings (as it’s not a state or semi-state event, and at a smaller church), but still fairly extravagant.
 
Ish said:
Anne wasn’t actually that much older than Meghan is when she married Tim - she was 42, Meghan will be 37 next year.

It is common for second weddings to be less extravagant than first weddings, but I think a big part of that (now) is because of the cost. As this is Harry’s first wedding, cost is less of an issue than it would be for most people, and Meghan seems to have had a fairly low key first wedding, I think we can still expect a somewhat extravagant wedding. Maybe toned down compared to other royal weddings (as it’s not a state or semi-state event, and at a smaller church), but still fairly extravagant.
Click to expand...

I guess older in the sense that she was already a mother of 15 and 11 year old. That puts her in a very different mindset and place in life, then a 37 year old who may have been married, but never settled down and had kids. Her short marriage was barely out of the honeymoon stage. That puts women in very different mind sets.

The cost often because traditionally second marriages are covered by the couple and not their families. There isn't the big financial support. Often couples, first or second marriages, when they pay for the entire thing themselves, often choose something smaller. I have also heard women say 'well I already had the church wedding, don't need that a second time'.

But as said these aren't things that effect Meghan and her approach.

A simple dress without train, veil, anything would not fit the grand location.
 
I hate to say this, but how old one looks is going to matter more than how old one actually is in terms of if a veil and wedding dress with a train would work. While Anne was only be 5-6 years older than Meghan will be in May, she did look quite a bit older. I’ve known brides that didnt wear the big dress and veil when they are older brides even if it’s the first marriage. It looks...odd.
 
In those Getty imaginings, I saw a lot of Victoria's Secret, My Fair Lady and Old Aunt Nellie's Closet along with a few that looked like Sewing Wedding Dresses 101 but absolutely none fit for a royal wedding or something I'd like to see Meghan in.
 
Princess Squirrel said:
Tbh ivory is the colour most brides wear in the UK. That has been the case since at least when I started my part time job in bridal wear back in 2000. Some wear white but ivory is much more popular.
Click to expand...

Could part of the dress be in white with other sections in ivory? By this I mean the shade of white should be something that would compliment the ivory, not contrast the ivory.
 
Bine221 said:
None of them is wearable for a Royal Wedding - sorry GettyImages
Bye Bine
Click to expand...

Many of them are horrid yes. But some of them aren't that different then ones I have seen posters here suggest. Including the cape one. So it seems a few (me on the cape one) had a similar mindset to Getty on a few.

Could part of the dress be in white with other sections in ivory? By this I mean the shade of white should be something that would compliment the ivory, not contrast the ivory.
Click to expand...

Possible, anything is possible within reason, but seems unlikely. If going to wear ivory, going to wear ivory. Using different shades of white in a wedding gown has to be done exactly right or looks like a bad art project.
 
CyrilVladisla said:
Could part of the dress be in white with other sections in ivory? By this I mean the shade of white should be something that would compliment the ivory, not contrast the ivory.
Click to expand...

That could be quite awkward. Just like you don't wear different shades of black in the same outfit.
 
I expect Meghan to go all out for her second wedding. It's Harry's first wedding, it's in a chapel and it's a royal wedding. Her first wedding wasn't in a church and was very bare bones (aka doesn't count - at least not to me :D) so I see no reason for her not to don the traditional veil, tiara and gown.

I don't expect her to do a "Camilla or Anne" simply because this is her first church wedding.
I expect (and want) the whole kit and caboodle.

And for those Getty Images gowns - most of them were ghastly.
 
jacqui24 said:
That could be quite awkward. Just like you don't wear different shades of black in the same outfit.
Click to expand...

For that very reason I was not very fond of the wedding gown of Princess Märtha Louise of Norway > two shades of white and gown and coat also in a different fabric.

Which different shades of black are there?
 
jacqui24 said:
I hate to say this, but how old one looks is going to matter more than how old one actually is in terms of if a veil and wedding dress with a train would work. While Anne was only be 5-6 years older than Meghan will be in May, she did look quite a bit older. I’ve known brides that didnt wear the big dress and veil when they are older brides even if it’s the first marriage. It looks...odd.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. I think I posted previously about a post-war bride who had a small wedding, it was in one of my real life story magazines that are very popular in the UK. She always longed for a big white wedding. Well for their 60th or 50th or one of those big anniversaries, her children gave her the huge wedding. She wore a full bridal gown including a veil. She was 80 and I'm sorry to say that she looked ridiculous. An evening type gown and fascinator would have been so much more elegant.

My sister nearly got married a couple of years ago. She was 50 and planned to wear a veil. Now she doesn't look her age, but I just thought 'No!' Although I didn't like to say. I just about got away with it ages 34 (just turned 34 less than a month before and my groom was 28).

And yes it was a registry office wedding, although neither of us had been married before and the civic centre that was the venue was called The Bishop's Palace. But yeah some may consider that I shouldn't have worn a veil for a registry office wedding.
 
Skippy said:
For that very reason I was not very fond of the wedding gown of Princess Märtha Louise of Norway > two shades of white and gown and coat also in a different fabric.

Which different shades of black are there?
Click to expand...

I can't really explain it, maybe FashionMaven or someone with much more technical knowledge of fashion could help me out here, but I've seen it. Some black are richer than others. Pretty sure it's not the purest black. Another thing is the material can make the color look different.
 
Just a quick FYI for non British members. Register Office weddings are not really the equivalent of a US court house wedding. Some register offices are beautiful old buildings and have capacity up to 80 people seated.
 
I thought registry office are sort of the English equivalent for the Dutch civil weddings ("burgerlijk huwelijk", aka the lawful part). And they can take place in many locations nowadays.
 
Skippy said:
For that very reason I was not very fond of the wedding gown of Princess Märtha Louise of Norway > two shades of white and gown and coat also in a different fabric.

Which different shades of black are there?
Click to expand...

those that I own are bluish blacks, brownish blacks (sometimes called reddish black) and neutral blacks. You only notice the blue or red undertone when you wear them with one another - then the undercast sticks out like a sore thumb. I think it has to do with the dye used on a given fabric.

I had a pair of brown/black pants once that made me crazy because they never looked good with anything my other black pants did! They fit great, but were a total fail.

The darkest of these black paint chips show how differently black tints look depending on what's in them: https://www.benjaminmoore.com/en-us/color-overview/find-your-color/color-families/bla/black.
 
If you want black it is best to buy all necessary pieces together so the dye lots match. If you are sewing get enough material at one time and the same dye lot. I've gotten stuck.
 
Princess Squirrel said:
Just a quick FYI for non British members. Register Office weddings are not really the equivalent of a US court house wedding. Some register offices are beautiful old buildings and have capacity up to 80 people seated.
Click to expand...

True. But there is still the same connotation with most registry weddings. Of a simpler, civil wedding, not the big fuss. Why such weddings are popular for older couples. We see on the continent, when they have both a civil and a church ceremony, the civil ceremony may be in quite fancy buildings but they tend to be in almost business dress.
 
Skippy said:
I thought registry office are sort of the English equivalent for the Dutch civil weddings ("burgerlijk huwelijk", aka the lawful part). And they can take place in many locations nowadays.
Click to expand...

Yes UK civil weddings can take place at your own location such as hotel, castle, stately home, or moored/fixed boat. But not outdoors or on the beach. The register office is just the local council offices, where you can have your wedding and only have to pay for the registrar to conduct the ceremony (about £230 currently I believe). Otherwise you've got to pay for the venue eg hotel, plus the registrar fee, plus an extra fee for the registrar to travel to the venue. Like I said, many registry offices are very nice locations, with different rooms to choose from of different capacities, so many couples choose this to save cash.

Countessmeout said:
True. But there is still the same connotation with most registry weddings. Of a simpler, civil wedding, not the big fuss. Why such weddings are popular for older couples. We see on the continent, when they have both a civil and a church ceremony, the civil ceremony may be in quite fancy buildings but they tend to be in almost business dress.
Click to expand...
In such countries, people dress down because they know they will be attending the church part of the wedding afterwards. Usually in UK weddings, the civil wedding is the only ceremony, so it's the only chance to dress up. Some people do have a church blessing if they can't have the actual wedding there. In which case a similar thing may happen as happens in European countries. I think that now the CofE is becoming more relaxed about second weddings, this may become less common.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I married for the second time, we had a simple civil wedding. $60 for everything in one shot. It was all arranged in the registrar's office but we then moved outdoors and married on the steps of an old Civil War courthouse in Virginia.

It wasn't an overly big deal. The majority of our families lived scattered across the US and we didn't want anything big or formal. We had my now sister-in-law and my then 5 year old niece as the "flower girl".

Meghan's situation is totally different. Hers will be a very formal, very well attended and publicized wedding and it will be a full on British royal wedding.
 
Princess Squirrel said:
I was thinking something like this with maybe a few less embellishments and not off-the-shoulder:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MEDIEVAL...372594?hash=item25e76b8272:g:wUcAAOSwVlVaA0UJ

Or this with sleeves:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/VINTAGE-...085135?hash=item488fbba6cf:g:y8oAAOSwepJXcWn3

Doesn't have to be silver trim, could be gold or any other colour, or even just ivory or white embellishments.

That's kind of the style I had but less fancy.
Click to expand...

Uh, I don't think either of those selections suit Meghan, nor are suitable for a royal wedding necessarily. I can see something similar to the first dress you linked in terms of a 'medieval' style, but not exactly like that particular dress.

On the page with your first link is the below which is rather pretty and probably more suitable but with sleeves and a more modest bodice. ?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-Whit...f54473f96b1c1710933f0d1&pid=100623&rk=1&rkt=6
 
Looking at wedding dresses brings back unpleasant flashbacks of obsessing over my own wedding dress. :nonono:
 
If Meghan would wear a dress with long sleeves, could an embroidered design be on the edge of the sleeves and the hem of the dress?
 
Yes no reason why not.


LaRae
 
:previous: Yes, why not?? Really the only restrictions are she needs her shoulders covered, and it cant be too sexy. Any other details are a personal choice of the bride. She certainly wouldn't be the first with embroidery included. Sarah's train was well known for the embroidery she included.

It would be a way to get around the whole fussy, old fashioned lace dress idea.
 
:previous: Pranter, Thank you for the picture of that dress. I can see where there would be areas to have embroidery done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CrownPrincessJava
Old Fashion Discussion Part 3
Replies
4
Views
1K
priyanka
P
Marengo
Tiaras and Jewels for the Next Generation, Part 2
Replies
13
Views
1K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
iceflower
Gender, names & godparents for Princess Beatrice & Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi's second child
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
JGio
J
Marengo
  • Locked
Charles III: Coronation Information and Musings - Part 2
15 16 17
Replies
501
Views
57K
Marengo
Marengo
iceflower
Princess Charlene's Fashion and Style Part 20: September 2024 -
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom