Carolyn Hax: Boring talk of wedding details only temporary

Dear Carolyn: My friend is getting married. She’s organized, planning ahead, and easily communicating and compromising with her fiance. As a member of her large wedding party, she wants me to feel included in her special day and informed of every wedding detail. She calls me at work to tell me about her planning, and when we are together, she brings every conversation right back to her wedding. Her special day is nearly a year away. Is there a polite way to tell her that I miss conversational diversity? – G.

The general rule for constructive criticism is to say something genuine and complimentary first and then follow it with your suggestion.

“I am so happy you’re happy about this wedding, but damn you’re boring these days.”

Which is why your friendship might be better served by your biting your tongue and reminding yourself that this is temporary; the “special” tomorrow will pass into yesterday; and her inevitable emotional letdown will so dominate the conversation that reading this – “Centerpieces: Above or Below Eye Level? A Roundtable Discussion” – will make you misty with nostalgia.

There is a third choice. Let her serve as a warning not to take any of this too seriously. Change subjects theatrically, beg her not to let wedding details eat her brain, volunteer bravely to be the one who lets her talk about something else. Be real, be light, be her friend.

You also can remind her, and everyone else populating your personal life, not to call you at work just to chat. (Your boss and contiguous cubemates all chipped in to pay me to write that.)

Dear Carolyn: What do you think of in-laws who want to be called “Mr. and Mrs. Smith”? I’m not saying I want to call them Mom and Dad, but I find their current version cold and impersonal. My husband thinks it’s “polite.” Any thoughts? – Washington

I think your husband sounds a lot like a guy who was raised by two people who want their daughter-in-law to call them Mr. and Mrs. Smith.

Surrender to it. Call them Mr. and Mrs. It’s their choice; it’s who they are; it’s who they’d still be if you won a bet and got to call them Trixie and Mel. It’s the family you married into, mother, father and son.

Dear Carolyn: What do you think about dating someone with whom there is interest but not so much a “spark” at first? I think it’s just fine, as I think the attraction can build over time, and also, why cut someone out prematurely? A friend argues that if there is no “spark” at first it’s doomed in the end. – Chicago

I think your friend should talk to all the people whose sparky relationships turned out to be doomed once the sparks ceased to fly.

This isn’t to argue that all instant physical attractions die out eventually. Attractions can be instant and enduring, instant and ephemeral, gradual and enduring, gradual and ephemeral, or doggedly nonexistent.

It’s simply to argue that all absolutes die out eventually – usually with a force roughly proportionate to the certainty we demand from them.

You let your expectations reflect reality. Your friend wants reality to reflect expectations. Maybe that’s enough said.