Doug and I have just got back from a three-week trip to Peru which, before flying out, had been labelled a "holiday". We arrived on the Tuesday and by the Friday (and our third pre-6am wake-up call in a row) this was no longer a word I was able to utter without a wry laugh to myself (yes, some people thought I was a loon but that's the beauty of travel, the next day they were gone).
Having abandoned all hopes of lazing, lounging or generally sleeping in past 9am, by the time we began the Inca Trail I was enjoying my "trip" and getting into the swing of every-other-day relocations by bus, train or plane and the resulting almost-alcohol-free early nights.
So imagine my surprise when one couple in our walking group casually unveiled the H word. Yes, they were on honeymoon. In a tent. Wearing thermals. Carrying walking poles. I was aghast.
Now I should qualify that I don't believe in fly 'n' flop travel and won't be sunning myself in the Maldives for a week post-wedding while someone brings me cocktails and fans me with palm leaves. However, I do think that a honeymoon should be relaxing, at least a bit luxurious and generally focused on romance rather than roughing it.
Planning a wedding is a full-time job which, more often than not, has to be fitted around an existing full-time job, it's stressful, involves mothers and mother-in-laws and usually results in at least one minor break-down at some stage. Therefore, surely recuperation should be the name of the game when it comes to boarding that first flight as Mr and Mrs?
But perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree. With travel increasingly accessible (and affordable) most brides and grooms have seen a fair portion of the world, be it together or separately, before the wedding – so is the honeymoon actually about exploring thusfar-undiscovered territory together? Is adventure more important than battery-recharging?
The average honeymoon now costs £3,860 which seems like a hell of a lot of money to spend on a trip which simply involves being horizontal (whether on a sun lounger or, ahem, elsewhere) so are there actually thousands of couples heading off on similarly adventurous honeymoons? And if so, why do we never hear about them? Every wedding magazine I've picked up in the last six months has focused on sun, sand and sea destinations usually found in either the Caribbean or the Indian Ocean. They are so samey and so obviously irrelevant to me that I actually skip the travel pages – and I'm someone who subscribes to at least five monthly travel mags.
Personally I'm planning a honeymoon which falls nicely between the two extremes: there won't be any hiking but there will be adventure, and although I don't intend to spend every waking moment on a sun lounger, we will be sitting on a beach, cocktails in hand, at least for the first day. Planning the honeymoon is every bit as personal as planning the wedding, and it requires exactly the same level of research, organisation and consideration – so why is it so often an afterthought, shoved to the back of the bridal magazines and relegated to last-minute decisions and pin-the-tail-on-the-map randomness?
Perhaps it's only this important to me. Am I the only bride pouring over travel guides and world maps just as much as dress advertising and floral arrangements? Or has the humble honeymoon become almost as important as the wedding?
Our honeymoon was a week in the Maldives and I can honestly say it was the most perfect way to recover from all the mayhem that had come before. Yes, we spent some time on loungers in the sun, but we also went scuba diving, sailing, dolphin watching etc etc and managed to make it a nice mixture of relaxation and excursion. I was so completely and utterly exhausted that for me, anything else would have been too much. Above all, the thing that made it most perfect was the fact that it was just the two of us, no friends or family around and we could finally concentrate on each other again. Some people wish for adventure, some for simply a beach, some for a mixture of both, but I think the reason why honeymoons in the Indian Ocean have become so popular is becuase they are not all the same.
ReplyDeleteWhen people get married they are (hopefully) thinking they will only do it once, so they should plan the honeymoon that they think will be the most perfect for them, and that may well be one the wedding magazine tells them is most popular or one that does conform to stereotype. It may also be completely different such as a couple I know who spent their honeymoon observing Limas in Madagascar. For Grant and I, the honeymoon was every bit as important as the wedding, and we had an amazing time in the Maldives, however we were not once fanned with palm leaves - maybe I should ask for a partial refund! ;-)
Well I guess we are happy in the fact that we love sun, sand, beaches and cocktails which for us is the perfect 'isolated' way to enjoy each other’s company. But what does a couple do that burns at the sight of sun, is scared of sea monsters and throws a tantrum for having sand in their bottom? Then again, not everyone is up for adventure however, what is a good alternative? The rocky mountains, Yellowstone? These trips tend to involve 'group travel' which surely defeats the point of being alone together. I'm pretty sure that if we did not like the beach then we would look for a log cabin in Lapland or a mountain retreat with a spa. The point is to avoid adventure, and just enjoy each other’s company without distractions...why do you need them? If you can't hack two weeks together then call the wedding off :)
ReplyDelete