RSVP
I would be interested in comments to this question. I received a recent communication expressing surprise over the few people who respond to an invitation that has "RSVP" written on it. I have had the same experience. Why has it become common that few people will respond to an invitation with RSVP? I wonder if the initials simply don't trigger the mind to think about it, at least among the younger generation. I've determined the next time I need a response to write out, "Please let me hear from you, so I will know how to plan." RSVP is too subtle.
What do you think?
What do you think?
posted by M Clark at 8/16/2006 09:37:00 AM
29 Comments:
I think it is only partly that it doesn't register with people. I think it is also partly that we live such busy lives that we are juggling multiple commitments and possibilities making it harder for some people to keep track of what they need to respond to and whether or not they have responded to something. Unfortunately I think there are also anumber of people who procrastinate RSVP's because they are worried that a "better offer" may come along and they will already be commited and not have an easy way out so it is easier not to respond till the last minute or just to show up anyway trusting that it will be overlooked. the synic in my says our invitations might need to start saying no admitance without RSVP, though I don't suppose that is the Christian or charitable approach it might wake people up a bit.
Sylvia Duggan
Sigh . . . Definitely further evidence of the breakdown of contemporary society :).
Susan
It's rude, plain and simple.
Well, once you parse the acronymn, you still have to speak French. Not many people, particularly of our younger generation, are French savvy. Sure, they can order a nice side dish to a hambuger, but the parlay-voo-francious simply doesn't register when it comes to an invitation. I have to agree with Marion's not-so-subtle English approach. I have one, too: "This invitation costs money, so please reply."
Susan is absolutely correct, too.
I still assume that people know what it means... even if they don't know what it stands for... but people are just too lazy to do it, and don't think about the fact that their hosts need to plan. But as much as it bugs me, I have a sneaking suspicion I've been guilty of the same lately. (I didn't RSVP to Tiffany's wedding partly because I was IN it so I figured she knew I was coming, and also because we didn't know until that week whether or not Chris would be able to come with me, so I couldn't tell her anything definitively. But I've probably also just misplaced things).
When I planned my wedding I kept track of who had sent and RSVP and who hadn't, so when it got closer to the date (and past the RSVP request time) I knew who to contact to find out if they were coming or not.
But I still agree it's just part of a breakdown of politeness in our society. Don't get me started on the other things people don't care about. ;-)
A lot of times these days, people will say "RSVP only if unable to attend," so if that's what people are used to reading, they might just tack the caveat on automatically even if it only says "RSVP."
From time to time announcements in the church bulletin include an "RSVP" number; I suspect the intent is not to have everyone in the congregation call regardless of whether they plan to attend. On the whole, I suspect failure to RSVP is due to a mixture of ignorance and rudeness.
There's no excuse folks, it's plain rudeness in this Me generation!
Changing of the guard between generations, busyness, selfisness, rudeness. I agree with each of these suggestions that have been offered so far.
I also think that as technology becomes more transparent in society that digital forms of communication will not simply be an alternative - but, except for "traditional" events (like weddings) - digital communication will be a *required* form of communication.
My observation is that the church tends to lag significantly behind other entities in technology adoption. (I read a funny post on the Ref 21 blog once that the church still hasn't gotten over the invention of the automobile.) Eventually, the church will adopt digital communication in ways we have bcome accustomed to in most other spheres of life.
Changing of the guard between generations, busyness, selfisness, rudeness will all be alive and well then, I am sure - *BUT* a mouse click beats an RSVP any day.
:-)
citychurch uses e-vite invitations. Although members of the mailing list could delete the email without reading it, it is more likely that their curiousity will be aroused, and that they will open the evite and click to RSVP, since that is so easy to do online. I usually click the "maybe" option. I try to stick a post-it to my computer so that I can come up with a real response later on. e-vites are also handy because you can explain your "maybe" more in detail with a few taps on the keyboard.
RK
Yeah, I've used evites for a few events over the years and it's very good. There's no reason why a church could not use this type of thing that we as individuals use in our normal day to day lives routinely.
There's nothing wrong with snail mail RSVP's, but in 2006 in many of our lives time is a scarce resource and anything that allows fast communication is most welcome.
I realize that not all people have access to technology, but that's changing rapidly. Surely there are people that do not have telephones or who lack sufficient literacy to write letters. We still employ those methods of communication, nonetheless. Digital communication has more than hit critical mass now and warrants consideration. Just my 2 cents...
oh, city church has a great website, btw. I almost stopped by last weekend to see "Do the Right Thing". Good stuff.
Marion, I think you hit a nerve. Haven't seen so many replies since you asked about singles ministry at Tenth!
1) We are too busy and forget
2) We are not sure if something better will come up so we wait
3) Does not apply just to younger folks; older ones are also negligent
4) E-vites don't solve it: they still require a reply. Even w/ a written invite, you can email someone your reply or make a phone call; it's just a minute of effort either way
I am embarrassed at the number of times I've called someone to apologize for not RSVP-ing in time.
My take on this is that people don't consider what the host is doing: planning a wonderful time for their would-be guests. Buying food & drink, planning activities and rearranging furniture, cleaning the bathroom, shopping for edibles and preparing terrific food...if you had the inclination to be hospitable, you would empathize with the host, consider their efforts, and show courtesy by responding so they could plan.
Do you think era that spawned RSVP is just part of history? Is there some social interchange better suited to 21st century life? Would you expect The Church to demonstrate more familiarity w/ community-relationships-interdependence (that is, shouldn't we be different)?
...and ALL of those comments for the Singles blog posting were removed from the blog. That kind of stung, frankly. Felt rather invalidated.
Yeah, we have to figure out a way to "do church" (sorry, for the buzzword) at 120 miles per hour...
Hmmm, a nerve has been hit, indeed. Here's a suggestion: if someone sends us an RSVP thingy, we should take approximately 5 (that is, five) minutes out of our Overload Syndrom lifestyles to simply reply, even if we do not speak French. It is accomidating and polite. We, as a church, need to know when to say "no"- politely and promptly. You see, people are twitchy and self-centered, AND always ready to blame someone for a hangnail. When someone doesn't reply to an RSVP, the host may be bombarded with a number of thoughts: "Well, I'll not invite THAT person again," or "How rude!", or "This cost money, Bubba! You could at least reply!" And so on. Do you see what has happened? A person (in our case a brother or sister in the Lord) who is looking forward to some sort of informal or formal fellowship has been left feeling slighted because we have been too lazy to fill out the "Unable to Attend" box and mail back to them our response (which I might add usually comes with a stamped envelope provided by the host). Sure, "e-vites" are different. But I am sure it takes less time to click a button than to lick an envelope.
With all of that said, I suggest that we change the French acronym to American. For example, "Please Respond by 00/00/00" Now, if we are from Philly, we have a box for "Yo, I'll be there." Or, "Yo, Forgetaboudit."
Therefore, let us consider the person who sent it, the time and effort they put into the presentation, and be a brother to them, considering them more important than ourselves.
DJB
:-)
I like the "Yo, Forgetaboudit" box idea.
With regard to those who have suggested evites - let me share the following experiences from my use of evites--
a) some people love it
b) anyone older who is not internet savvy have a hard time with it
c) even those who are internet savvy with slow connections have a difficult time seeing the invitation
d) sometimes those who I've "evited" never receive the invitation (this has happened enough times that if I use evite, I also send an email from my own account to make sure that they get it.)
I have been struck by those who have returned from Turkey about how much relationships are valued and how much hospitality is practiced there. I think we have a great deal to learn from them. At the Missions lunch, team members shared how they were challenged to see relationships as more important than their individual agendas. This is a good reminder for all of us.
While I can appreciate the posters who have talked about the convenience of just clicking to reply - I would ask you to consider that desire in comparison to having received a gracious invitation to some event (which may have a paper RSVP or a phone RSVP or an email (non-evite) RSVP). Your concern for convenience seems somewhat petty in comparison to the much more significant effort that is being made (on your behalf) by the host or hostess.
Type A people
Type B people
The Type A people will RSVP.
Plan ahead for your Type B friends - on the date of the RSVP,set aside some time, call the Type Bs and ask if they have received your invitation ( or leave a message). Then, you will have your answer and know how much to prepare.
There's also type C people.
These are the people to whom you send an invitation for the only reason of not insulting them. You don;t really want them to come, you know they won't reply, and you may actually feel uncomfortably surprised if they do.
Now, as for the Type B folks, for them we must institute the American language, as suggested above. (The same shall apply even if they are Type B-French.)
Seriously, the original RSVP Invitation is enough. No phone calls, no follow-ups, no smoke singnals. If they don't reply, assume they aren't coming. If they show up at the party, smile, look sympathetic, and then hand them a bag of pretzels.
(I'm only kidding)
Now, if we are the host and have targeted people to be RSVPers then send out a reminder mass email (assuming we are email savvy).
If we have been targeted to RSVP then simply do it, folks. It doesn't matter of we are Type A or Type B.
However, if we are suspicious that we are targeted as Type C people, then take the opportunity to have fun and send it back to them with a big old YES!!! That ought to take care of any PC issues!
(I am only kidding)...
There are also Type C people.
These are the folks to whom you send an invitation for the simple PC reason of not insulting them. You don't want them to reply, you know they won't reply, and you might actually be uncomfortably suprised if they do.
As for the Type B folks, I think the original RSVP request is sufficient. No follow-ups, no phone calls, no smoke signals. If they don't reply simply assume they are not going to show up and plan accordingly. Now, if they do show up, smile gladly and hand them a bag of pretzels. After all, you planned accordingly (that is, responsibly)
I'm just kidding.
Now, if we have been targeted to be the RSVPer, then simply do it. It doesn't matter if we are Type A or Type B. It's a courtesy thing.
However, if we have the suspicion that we are considered to be Type C people, this would be an opportunity to have fun with the host. Reply with a big YES!!! and ask if you can bring the kids.
Sorry for the repeated response- my computer froze in mid-send and I assumed it didn't work.
RSVP if you understand.
Evites have the added advantage of allowing guests not only to wait to see whether a better offer will come along, but to base their final decision on what other guests will be attending.
I'm glad that there will be no Type C invitees/attendees in Heaven.
:-)
Seriously, if you knew that you were invited, but not welcome to a party - why in the world would you attend? What's the point of that? Sounds unhealthy. Sounds like a good sermon title. :-) Are there any Type C invitees to your party?
I beginning to think that the issues here may have nothing to do with **how** the invitations are sent or RSVP'd to...might it be that there are heart issues going on here...
I am well aware that in my flesh, I have Type C people on my party list, but I know that the gospel opposes that. God is very good.
Amen, brotha'! Actually, there may be more Type C people in heaven then we might like to think about. And, if you're honest with yourself, according to someone out there you are a Type C person. It's good Calvinism.
Luke 12:32 (ESV)
"Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom."
That's one invitation I have been happy to RSVP!- being a hybrid of Type A, B, and C, that is.
Oh, is that bad Calvinism? What I really mean is that I'm happy that I was invited and picked up by the Host Himself to enter the kingdom banquet. ... whew, there you go.
Dear Marion,
Your blogsite is becoming. And all you did was ask a simple question.
some observations:
1. Social invitations are presumably from and for people who are in community or relationship with one another. Refusing to rsvp effectively mangles the relationship.
2. People do not have less time now than they used to. Everyone has the same amount of time every day. The 'no time' excuse is lame. Everyone manages to find time for what they enjoy, or need, or deem important. What is lacking is not time, but self discipline.
3. It always amuses me that those people who neglect rsvps habitually are usually incensed when their wedding invitations receive no replies. Wonder if they then turn over a new leaf about rsvping to others after that.
4. It is not possible, nor biblical, to do church at 120 mph. The 4th commandment is for the whole day of the sabbath. Sabbath is meant for refreshment and rest. And you know, God knows best. Even if He is an old-fashioned kinda guy. :)
Hi Meredith,
Your observations are well recieved here, but I still think that there are a lot of American adults who are being asked a lot of in terms of our time. I personally carry a Blackberry and it's not by choice. I also have to respond to that Blackberry whether it is 3 am or 5 minutes before worship service. I don't think I'm the only American adult with that type of job. I think that there are more of us with significant time demands in the church than the church may realize. Sure, we can quit, but that's a rather big hit to the budget.
I also think that there may be heart issues here between hosts and invitees. You seem to tune into this dynamic when you suggest reciprocity in RSVP failures. It has to be more than merely the mechanics of sending an invite, laziness, or ignorance of French. :-)
I will pray about this for my part.
hot topic, yes, but notice the hot topics have so much anonymity!?
the internet is the new confession screen ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home