3447 Rabbit skins.

Sunday, January 21, 2012

If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried.
-- Steven Wright --

------------------------------------------------

I wear bifocals. The old style, with the visible line at the top of the bifocal section. People have been telling me I should get the progressives, where the division is not apparent, that the line "ages" me.

When I ordered these new lenses, I asked for progressives. They cost more, and the rep would get more sales credit for selling them, but I have to admire her honesty. She strongly recommended against them. She said I would hate them.

There is a large difference between my far and close prescriptions, so the "progressive" part, where the two blend, would be large. In that "shading in part", there would be a wide area of distortion, both at the top and the sides of that area. I would lose a significant amount of peripheral vision, and the close vision area would be much reduced. Right now I go from far to close with little eye or head movement. With the progressives there would be a jump where neither close nor far worked and I would have to move my head more.

If you get progressives when you first start needing bifocals, the difference is small, and the distortion is minimal. You get used to it. Your brain learns to ignore that area. And as the close correction goes up and the far correction goes down gradually as you get older (which is what happens), each increment is easy to absorb. But to suddenly jump into progressives now, she said, I'd never be able to adjust. They'd drive me crazy. The blur in the middle of my field would have me tripping over curbs.

I had already made it clear to her that I like a wide and deep visual field, and that I watch TV and do needlework at the same time, and therefore the looking down required by those skinny weasel glasses, as opposed to simply dropping my eyes slightly, would quickly make me seasick. She heard me and understood.

So, I'm staying with the little old lady visible lines. I like seeing well better than looking good. Vanity is a sometimes thing with me, easily tossed when not advantageous. If I really want the illusion of youth, I'll get a neck and face lift.

*******
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_lens#Disadvantages] It's explained there, in almost the same way she said it.

---------------------------------

Here and there and everywhere I'd been hearing about "Say Yes to the Dress". It's on Friday nights on one of those high-number cable channels. There's not much else on Friday nights, so I watched it three or four times.

It takes place in a fancy wedding dress store, where consultants help you find the perfect dress. The most common phrase from the brides is, "I want to feel beautiful". And then there's frustration, tears, pushing or snorts from their "support" - bridesmaids, sisters, mothers and future MILs - until finally The Dress makes her Feel Beautiful.

I don't understand. Your man doesn't make you feel even more beautiful?

Then there's the whole enormous cost of fancy weddings, which I don't understand. I've already ranted about couples with three kids who haven't gotten married yet because they "can't afford it".

But mostly I don't understand the dresses the consultants put on these women.

An apple-shaped woman (read big round belly) should have a fitted bodice, then a high empire waist that flows smoothly straight down in a soft flowing fabric with slight gathering, and narrows just above the ankle. It will make her look taller, slimmer, regal, and plays up her best features, which are her face and bust. Most heavy women have great lower legs, so she could even go to knee length. But over and over, they come out in dresses that are tight tight tight to mid thigh, then poof out into a tulle mermaid bottom. Worse, the tight upper part is "ruched" (I hate that word - whatever happened to gathered!) which is supposed to be "slimming" but never is and that makes her look even bulkier.

I don't understand why all the dresses these days seem to be strapless. I thought a bridal dress was supposed to look virginal, or at least modest, especially for a religious ceremony. I went to the David's Bridal website to check, and yeah, dresses with sleeves or even just covered shoulders are rare and special order. Aren't long lace sleeves beautiful?

I don't understand why so many dresses have that bunched up look to the skirts, you know, those random tucks.

Most of them look like if you dyed them pink, they could be '60s prom dresses.

I dunno. Maybe my age is showing. (Hey! You! Get off my lawn!)

Me? Three weddings. The first had one week's preparation. Ex#1 was in the army and had come home on leave for my college graduation, and declared he was not returning, was going AWOL, until I married him. I didn't want to, but I was incapable of "being responsible for his going to jail". I looked to my mother to say no (I wasn't 21, the legal age), but it was like she translated "he wants to elope" into "we're gonna have a wedding!" and went into action. I was married in a knee-length straight-skirted sleeveless cocktail dress, white lace over satin, and a short veil. There was even an official reception, my mother's side of the family and my parents' friends. I invited no friends. Nobody said anything about my inviting friends. I think my mother thought it was her party.

Ex#2. I wore a pale blue dress, suitable for the office, and a blue Jackie O pillbox hat with an eyebrow veil. Church ceremony followed by a dinner with friends of ours from the office, and members of his family.

Jay, the one that really counted. Judge's chambers. I wore a turtleneck sweater and jeans. Jay wore jeans, too. The "reception" was Jay and me, and our two witnesses: Daughter and a friend of hers, dinner at a local steakhouse.

I think maybe someday I'll pretend I'm getting married, and go to a fancy bridal shoppe and try on dresses. Just to see if they do have some kind of magic. No way I'd ever pay for one, even if I were getting married, but ... just to see if I suddenly Feel Beautiful(er).
.