Post # 1
I absolutely love my wedding dress and it has a slight train. However, I’m not fond of how bustles look and not sure how to even bustle my dress since it has a top organza layer and a bottom satin layer (it looks similar to the ball gown dress worn by Hepburn in My Fair Lady except with a slightly longer train). Now I’m leaning toward not having a bustle at all for the reception- I would just carry my train when walking so it doesn’t drag on the floor and get in the way. We’re having a small wedding (50 people) in a private room at a restaurant and will not be dancing so no need to worry about tripping on it while dancing.
Is it a bad idea not to have a bustle during the reception?
Post # 3
If you’re not dancing and you’re opposed to bustles then I don’t see the harm, you’ll just have to remember to be careful when walking around so no one steps on it by accident or so you don’t trip. The only reason I think bustles are truly necessary is if you are dancing, but as you said, you aren’t.
Post # 4
- Wedding: March 2012 - Pelican Grand Beach Resort
I think you can leave it unbustled if it is important to you, but there are some things to consider, even if you aren’t dancing. Be very careful about people stepping on your dress. It happens a lot, and it can ruin the dress if the fabric gets pulled too much.
Regarding the fabric, it can be bustled. A seamstress will know which types of bustle are appropriate for your dress. You may want to consider a ballroom bustle, which folds the train under the skirt to make it look like there was no train at all.
Post # 5
My friend had a dress that had just the bottom half of the train that was tulle so the seamstress told her she couldn’t bustle (top half was satin). She carried her train, but then after dinner, she changed into a reception dress so she could dance.