As Allie at Hyperbole and a Half says, it is disappointing to feel sad for no reason. But this is the state in which I find myself again, so I might as well write about it.
Possibly the most disappointing aspect of feeling sad for no reason is that one always has memories of the days when one did not feel sad, when one got out of bed wanting to do things, and it is disappointing to feel rising terror every time anyone suggests doing Big things, such as leaving the house.
I have long suspected that I was designed to hibernate for most of January and February. Some year I may try this. I can re-appear in March, with the daffodils and snowdrops and so on.
Sunday, 1 January 2012
2012: A Preview
Now here at WhyNotSmile, we're not into New Year's Resolutions, because we have neither willpower not sticking power, and see no need to introduce one more inevitable disappointment into life.
But there is no harm in breaking with one's own traditions once in a while, so here goes.
This year I will:
Be prepared. It seems to me that there are few crises which cannot be improved (however slightly) by enduring them at home with a cup of tea. Therefore, wherever I am this year, I shall always have enough money on me to get a bus home, and there will always be tea bags and milk in my house.
Be organised. I need to stop using Facebook as a reminder system, however successful it may be. There is a point in everyone's life at which one must take responsibility for one's own daily schedule, and it is possible that this point has been passed. I will figure out how to use the calendar thing on my phone, and stick to it.
Blog more. I have quite a number of half-finished posts. I will try to finish at least some of them by the end of the year.
Apart from this, I will do everything exactly the same as I have always done it.
But there is no harm in breaking with one's own traditions once in a while, so here goes.
This year I will:
Be prepared. It seems to me that there are few crises which cannot be improved (however slightly) by enduring them at home with a cup of tea. Therefore, wherever I am this year, I shall always have enough money on me to get a bus home, and there will always be tea bags and milk in my house.
Be organised. I need to stop using Facebook as a reminder system, however successful it may be. There is a point in everyone's life at which one must take responsibility for one's own daily schedule, and it is possible that this point has been passed. I will figure out how to use the calendar thing on my phone, and stick to it.
Blog more. I have quite a number of half-finished posts. I will try to finish at least some of them by the end of the year.
Apart from this, I will do everything exactly the same as I have always done it.
Saturday, 31 December 2011
2011: A Review
So, 2011. Turned out to be quite the year, here at WhyNotSmile. It started inauspiciously enough, with an extended stay at the parents', due to the Water Crisis in Belfast. Nice and cosy, I was, as I sat there all clean and with full access to basic sanitation, watching the news to see how many people I knew in the queues. Good times.
Rapidly, however, world affairs took over, and it is thus that 2011 will go on record as the year I stopped understanding the news. I've been losing my grip on it for several years now, what with the financial thing that I understood none of, but this year, finally, the Arab Spring tipped me over the edge (I still don't know if 'Spring' refers to the season, or to the sudden rising up of the people in the manner of a tightly-coiled length of pliable metal, or to the refreshment offered by a newfound democracy, such as is found by a lonely wanderer who happens upon a small steam).
Then they promised the end of the world, and when THAT didn't happen, well, there we all were with our empty diaries and no milk in the fridge.
Of course, giving up on international affairs has left me with nothing but my own so-called life. Or, in summary, has left me with nothing.
Sister Smile got engaged in June, and was married just before Christmas, but I'm not allowed to speak of her here. I assume the same goes for Brother-in-law Smile, which is a shame, as he could have been worth having on the radar.
In more interesting developments, however, I am pleased to introduce Boyfriend Smile to my dear readers, and to report that, as I specifically requested, he made the application for a first date in writing, and, as all was correct with the spelling and grammar, I had, of course, to accept. He hasn't written a word since then, probably due to sheer terror.
It was also a year in which various things happened which were utterly tragic, in the actual sense of the word (not in the wearing-a-tweed-jacket-and-thinking-it's-cool sense). A respected, good and gentle friend is in heaven too soon, a family devastated. Other friends stopped work at Christmas, not knowing if they have jobs to return to in the new year; those they work to help don't know if anyone will be there for them in 2012.
And depression has come calling at my door again. I tried not answering, but it freaking leaned on the bell until it was easier to give in, stick the kettle on, and crack open a packet of French Fancies.
Happy new year, y'all.
Rapidly, however, world affairs took over, and it is thus that 2011 will go on record as the year I stopped understanding the news. I've been losing my grip on it for several years now, what with the financial thing that I understood none of, but this year, finally, the Arab Spring tipped me over the edge (I still don't know if 'Spring' refers to the season, or to the sudden rising up of the people in the manner of a tightly-coiled length of pliable metal, or to the refreshment offered by a newfound democracy, such as is found by a lonely wanderer who happens upon a small steam).
Then they promised the end of the world, and when THAT didn't happen, well, there we all were with our empty diaries and no milk in the fridge.
Of course, giving up on international affairs has left me with nothing but my own so-called life. Or, in summary, has left me with nothing.
Sister Smile got engaged in June, and was married just before Christmas, but I'm not allowed to speak of her here. I assume the same goes for Brother-in-law Smile, which is a shame, as he could have been worth having on the radar.
In more interesting developments, however, I am pleased to introduce Boyfriend Smile to my dear readers, and to report that, as I specifically requested, he made the application for a first date in writing, and, as all was correct with the spelling and grammar, I had, of course, to accept. He hasn't written a word since then, probably due to sheer terror.
It was also a year in which various things happened which were utterly tragic, in the actual sense of the word (not in the wearing-a-tweed-jacket-and-thinking-it's-cool sense). A respected, good and gentle friend is in heaven too soon, a family devastated. Other friends stopped work at Christmas, not knowing if they have jobs to return to in the new year; those they work to help don't know if anyone will be there for them in 2012.
And depression has come calling at my door again. I tried not answering, but it freaking leaned on the bell until it was easier to give in, stick the kettle on, and crack open a packet of French Fancies.
Happy new year, y'all.
Saturday, 3 December 2011
On Why I Am Not Married
In a worrying move, Claire-who-is-married-to-Creideamh has declared me to be a wise woman, and has asked (via Facebook) for an opinion on a thing. So here goes.
The article in question is http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/nov/27/kate-bolick-women-marriage-relationships. It's quite long, so I'll summarise it for you. The basic point (i.e. the title) is that "marriage is a declining option for women"; it is a little hard to establish from the article exactly why the author believes this to be the case, but her reasons seem to boil down to the following:
First of all, let me say that I do not view marriage as a non-option; indeed, it is very much an option, and if only it were as simple as ticking a box on a survey, then married I would be. I speak, of course, as someone who is apparently chronically incapable of attracting anyone of the opposite sex, and from time to time I have given some thought as to why this might be.
The main reason (and one which is, I suspect, 99% of the problem) is that I am chronically incapable of flirting. I just cannot do it. Perhaps this stems from my utter lack of self-esteem which leads to me believing, at heart, that there is no conceivable reason why the other side would be flirting with me; whatever the reason, anyone who wishes to be considered as a marriage prospect would do considerably better to state the fact clearly and outright (perhaps in a letter, because face to face I might throw up) and to directly request my own opinion on the matter. If I am interested (and provided the letter is grammatically reasonable and the spelling is good), then off we shall go; if not, I shall politely decline and it will never be spoken of again. This seems to me a much better course of action than me pretending to be all 'damsel in distress' or him making corny comments about how my dad must be a thief because he stole all the stars from the sky and put them in my eyes. Seriously.
But there may be some truth in what Kate Bolick says (let's be nice to her; she has an unfortunate surname). I have, I suppose, no particular need to get married, in terms of my survival. I earn enough money to get by, I'm quite handy with a hammer, and frankly, I see no need to enhance my house by having someone playing an XBox in it.
On the other hand, I would very much like to have children; I like them, I think I might be an ok parent, and it would a change from spending most evenings watching re-runs of the X Factor. For this, I would need a man.
Fundamentally, however, I think she may be closest to the mark with the point about couples being too couple-y. I don't want a lot of what is often held up as the ideal of marriage - the nuclear family, mum, dad, 2 kids and a spaniel, living in a nice home in an area with good schools, hosting pleasant dinner parties and always having the latest TV.
I don't aspire to much of that - if it happens, it happens, but it doesn't represent the things I value. If I marry, I want it to make a difference not just to me, but to the people around me as well. I want to marry someone who makes me be a better person; who enhances who I am and who is a better person for having married me. I want him to value me, but I also want him to value the things that matter to me - my friends, my community, my interests - and I want to do the same for him. I want us to love each other for who we are, and to push each other to be the best we can be. It might sound ridiculous, but I want the part of the world I spend my time in to be a better place because I've married the man that I have. I don't want to be in a marriage which only looks inward, to how we can get more stuff or impress our friends; I want to be in a marriage which also looks outward to bless other people, and which ultimately looks upward to God.
But I like to think that that's something that I get, in some measure, from all my close relationships - my friends inspire me to see things differently, to be creative, to hang in there when things are tough, and to do lots of other day to day things that make my life better - and I hope I sometimes inspire them in similar ways. If I marry, I want my husband to become a part of my community, and I want to become a part of his - I don't want being in a couple to pull me away from people who matter to me.
I don't know whether this is in any way part of the wider issue raised in the article, that marriage (particularly marriage for life) is declining; maybe it is that women everywhere have rid themselves of the need for a man, and are getting along just fine, thank you very much.
After all, it is not unheard of for me to not think in exactly the same way as other people.
The article in question is http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/nov/27/kate-bolick-women-marriage-relationships. It's quite long, so I'll summarise it for you. The basic point (i.e. the title) is that "marriage is a declining option for women"; it is a little hard to establish from the article exactly why the author believes this to be the case, but her reasons seem to boil down to the following:
- Us 'post-boomers' "value emotional fulfilment above all else", rather than needing to get married so we'd have help with the lambing
- Men today are useless fecks who either don't earn enough to impress us, aren't smart enough to impress us, or are to geeky to tolerate; in any case, they don't like to commit and we no longer need them to pro-create, so why would anyone bother?
- Couples nowadays are way too couple-y (I'm not quite sure how this supports the actual argument, but it made for an interesting tangent)
First of all, let me say that I do not view marriage as a non-option; indeed, it is very much an option, and if only it were as simple as ticking a box on a survey, then married I would be. I speak, of course, as someone who is apparently chronically incapable of attracting anyone of the opposite sex, and from time to time I have given some thought as to why this might be.
The main reason (and one which is, I suspect, 99% of the problem) is that I am chronically incapable of flirting. I just cannot do it. Perhaps this stems from my utter lack of self-esteem which leads to me believing, at heart, that there is no conceivable reason why the other side would be flirting with me; whatever the reason, anyone who wishes to be considered as a marriage prospect would do considerably better to state the fact clearly and outright (perhaps in a letter, because face to face I might throw up) and to directly request my own opinion on the matter. If I am interested (and provided the letter is grammatically reasonable and the spelling is good), then off we shall go; if not, I shall politely decline and it will never be spoken of again. This seems to me a much better course of action than me pretending to be all 'damsel in distress' or him making corny comments about how my dad must be a thief because he stole all the stars from the sky and put them in my eyes. Seriously.
But there may be some truth in what Kate Bolick says (let's be nice to her; she has an unfortunate surname). I have, I suppose, no particular need to get married, in terms of my survival. I earn enough money to get by, I'm quite handy with a hammer, and frankly, I see no need to enhance my house by having someone playing an XBox in it.
On the other hand, I would very much like to have children; I like them, I think I might be an ok parent, and it would a change from spending most evenings watching re-runs of the X Factor. For this, I would need a man.
Fundamentally, however, I think she may be closest to the mark with the point about couples being too couple-y. I don't want a lot of what is often held up as the ideal of marriage - the nuclear family, mum, dad, 2 kids and a spaniel, living in a nice home in an area with good schools, hosting pleasant dinner parties and always having the latest TV.
I don't aspire to much of that - if it happens, it happens, but it doesn't represent the things I value. If I marry, I want it to make a difference not just to me, but to the people around me as well. I want to marry someone who makes me be a better person; who enhances who I am and who is a better person for having married me. I want him to value me, but I also want him to value the things that matter to me - my friends, my community, my interests - and I want to do the same for him. I want us to love each other for who we are, and to push each other to be the best we can be. It might sound ridiculous, but I want the part of the world I spend my time in to be a better place because I've married the man that I have. I don't want to be in a marriage which only looks inward, to how we can get more stuff or impress our friends; I want to be in a marriage which also looks outward to bless other people, and which ultimately looks upward to God.
But I like to think that that's something that I get, in some measure, from all my close relationships - my friends inspire me to see things differently, to be creative, to hang in there when things are tough, and to do lots of other day to day things that make my life better - and I hope I sometimes inspire them in similar ways. If I marry, I want my husband to become a part of my community, and I want to become a part of his - I don't want being in a couple to pull me away from people who matter to me.
I don't know whether this is in any way part of the wider issue raised in the article, that marriage (particularly marriage for life) is declining; maybe it is that women everywhere have rid themselves of the need for a man, and are getting along just fine, thank you very much.
After all, it is not unheard of for me to not think in exactly the same way as other people.
Sunday, 20 November 2011
An Open Letter To Northern Ireland Water
Dear Northern Ireland Water,
I noticed that you seem to be running a radio advert at the moment, in which you take the opportunity to tell us how bad it is to not have water, and to have burst pipes, and all manner of other Water-Related Bad Things which can happen when it gets cold outside. I assume this is costing you a tidy sum, so I'm sure you will appreciate some feedback on how it's going.
Here's the thing.
We KNOW all about having no water, because last year you fecking left most of us without it for the best part of a week (and in many cases, you allowed the demonstration to go on for even longer). We therefore KNOW that having no water is a Bad Thing, and that it means you can't flush the toilet or make a cup of tea, because we practiced having no water last year, and we practiced really really hard.
So, I have an idea. Rather than spending lots of money telling us how bad it is to have no water, how about you spend the money in ensuring that this year we actually do have water?
Just a suggestion.
Thank you kindly,
WhyNotSmile
(who admittedly did not go without water at all last year, due to staying with the parents, who had water throughout, but who nonetheless heard one or two people mentioning the inconvenience on Facebook, and the news, and on the phone and things)
I noticed that you seem to be running a radio advert at the moment, in which you take the opportunity to tell us how bad it is to not have water, and to have burst pipes, and all manner of other Water-Related Bad Things which can happen when it gets cold outside. I assume this is costing you a tidy sum, so I'm sure you will appreciate some feedback on how it's going.
Here's the thing.
We KNOW all about having no water, because last year you fecking left most of us without it for the best part of a week (and in many cases, you allowed the demonstration to go on for even longer). We therefore KNOW that having no water is a Bad Thing, and that it means you can't flush the toilet or make a cup of tea, because we practiced having no water last year, and we practiced really really hard.
So, I have an idea. Rather than spending lots of money telling us how bad it is to have no water, how about you spend the money in ensuring that this year we actually do have water?
Just a suggestion.
Thank you kindly,
WhyNotSmile
(who admittedly did not go without water at all last year, due to staying with the parents, who had water throughout, but who nonetheless heard one or two people mentioning the inconvenience on Facebook, and the news, and on the phone and things)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)