I dunno. This may or may not be the brave smiling face of buyer's remorse. It's certainly the face of trying to figure out where to look to see what I want to look at, and how far away exactly to hold the book this time around. I think they're kind of too wide and wish I had pushed the woman to let me try on kids' frames, but maybe I will get used to them. Well: I will certainly get used to them. I don't think I get another frame allowance until 2015.
Wearing glasses is good for you in more ways than one, I will say that, especially if you can't take them off. They're the mortification through which you see the world -- without which you can't see the world. That is, they're a mortification unless you're Epiphany, whose new little half-rim glasses are so cute that I can't stop looking at them. Or couldn't, while she was here to be looked at. Now I just have to wait for her to post pictures of herself in various ecclesio-classical locales, and then when she does I tend to notice her, and then her surroundings, more than I notice her glasses. But they are awfully cute. They came from the kids' rack, and somehow still worked with her no-line bifocal thing, which is what you get when you're nineteen and have my genes.
I really liked my old glasses. Wah, just a little. No wonder I don't go to the eye doctor very often. The outcome is always a minor life trauma. But I'll probably be over it in a day or so.
7 comments:
I like them! I just got my first pair of glasses. Since my last eye exam (in...*ahem* middle school...) I have degenerated from well-above-average vision to astigmatic with a narrow escape from bifocals. Which is to say, I probably should have gotten bifocals but I didn't think about eyesight until there wasn't enough time to get them before I left. Reading glasses could be managed if the office put a rush on them.
The good thing about readers is that you can pick up cheapies -- and often cute ones -- at Dollar Tree. After losing two pairs of prescription readers within six weeks, my daughter went to drugstore readers and had many pairs of them, for variety and because she lost them all the time. Finally her distance vision went, too, hence the bifocals.
So if you can manage the taking-off and putting-on, you could just grab readers for when you need them.
And thanks! This truly was a vanity post.
Vanity posts entirely allowed. I think they're adorable (the glasses, that is). Thankfully my vision is still serving me well: but my teeth, oh my. I don't visit the dentist unless the cavity has already burrowed into my gums.
Ouch. Well, you've just reminded me to be really, really thankful for my teeth. At 48, I'm holding steady at two cavities, ever.
I was told that reading glasses must be prescription in order to cure astigmatism. Is that wrong?
Hm, well, I guess it would depend. In my own case, it's the distance lenses that correct the astigmatism; the reading bifocal segment is just +2.00 strength magnification, such as you'd find in readers off the drugstore rack. My daughter has astigmatism -- actually, one of her eyes has the distance problem, the other the close-reading problem -- but until her distance vision started to go south, she got by with just non-prescription readers. I'm not an eye doctor, though, so I won't make diagnoses or prescribe glasses! But you might look at your prescription, if you have it, and see what they have written for the bifocal segment -- on mine, there's a box for "segment power" in each eye -- and see whether or not it's just a power of magnification, rather than a corrective curvature.
Anyway, it was our eye doctor who told the daughter in question, after she'd lost two $50 pairs of prescription glasses, to go to the drugstore and just get a cheap pair.
Post a Comment