Thursday, December 31, 2009

It ain't broke

I'm feeling particularly farsighted this week and am having trouble focusing on close objects, so I'll be getting an eye exam. Apparently, it is also time to get a new pair of glasses. B has never been super fond of my current prized Moscot Nebb clear frames (they don't even make that color anymore), complaining that I look more like a librarian-type. I get it.. it's the ugliness/ironic fashion factor. Nerdiness doesn't go that far in terms of attractiveness. But I have never gotten so many compliments on my eyewear before, from people my age to people my dad's age. Heck, I made it through my own wedding with those things on. Everyone was so used to them it wasn't a big deal, sigh of relief.

And I blanking at what frames to get next. Maybe some thin metal ones, but anything rectangular is too modern for me. Plastic again? But I can't find plastic frames I like better than my current ones. It'll have to be a compromise. To me, there are only three categories of frames: vintage, 1990s/2000s, and modern/futuristic. Vintage has been making a solid comeback for the past decade. Modern is for people who want to really stand out, regardless of fashion sensibilities. Think highbrow designers. And 1990s/2000s is for everyone else not too particular about their frames; they're very "eh" and don't stand out at all, which most people prefer. You all should know that I greatly fear falling into the "eh" group, as I have always been finicky about my personal style. I call for more variety! I never really thought eyeglasses made women seem more attractive, but maybe more professional or intelligent or votable (Sarah Palin?). Since I'm not really aiming for those labels, I like to have fun with it and wear something more playful. Wood frames? Very unique, but probably not. Shurons? Cheap, but I'm going to steer away from the female octagenarian, Atticus Finch, or child molester look.


On another note, B and I saw Up in the Air last night at the Drafthouse. I've been unenthusiastic about watching new movies for the past year, because they have mostly been disappointing. And this one didn't look any better, wearing its "life lessons" heart out on its sleeve in the trailer. George Clooney is all over the box office these days. (True, I also did enjoy Fantastic Mr. Fox). And I thoroughly enjoyed this one. Clooney plays a confident, middle-aged businessman who travels 250-ish days of the year to avoid his home and having to construct a real life. To him, relationships and possessions are heavy baggage that drag you down. As he says in his seminars, "movement is life," which explains why he never wants to get married or have kids, why his condo is barren, and why he make a huge effort to avoid family matters. But then through his interactions with a fresh-faced, perplexing coworker and a potential love interest, he begins to reveal the vulnerability in his views. It's a thoughtful film that had me smirking at some scenes because they truly resonated with me. It made me hurt for older people like the main character who are misanthropes and completely toss aside the idea of relationships. They'll never get that lost time back. Later in the film, Clooney makes the point that if you think of all the best times in your life, you notice that you were never alone. So true.

B practices this philosophy. He is always calling people up to see what they are doing so we can come over and hang out. For the longest time, this really put me off. Why should he constantly be putting himself out there for people who seemed like they didn't give a damn or were impossible to reach? I was personally offended for him. And I was contemptuous of his behavior. He employed this persistence on me that resulted in us dating, and eventually getting married. Having 0 relationship experience, I was more into the supposed rules of romance, informed by cinematic sources, such as making yourself desirable, not seeming too eager, creating a back and forth pursuit, crap like that which B totally rejected. Even if I didn't prefer it at the time, as it was much less thrilling, it definitely worked. It's so hard these days to see people on a regular basis. People are too busy, too lazy, too distracted, etc. But all the more reason to strive for communion with others in this ticking clock of a life. B remarked that at the end of the day, it doesn't matter who called who, but that we all got together and enjoyed ourselves. I think I subscribe to that now. I tend to get pretty stubborn and give up easily on "friends" who are hard to meet up with. But I should really try harder. Life's too short to be so proud. Other people may be hell, but I would argue that being alone is probably even more terrible.

No comments: