Thursday, 30 November 2017

Small World

Small world we live in. That's the kind of remark you get when you run into an acquaintance somewhere unexpected or you find you know someone or have some place in common, but what if your world was that small. Not like Alice's after she's drunk the 'Drink Me' potion or a Borrower's but small as in closeted.
Your height stays the same, with a little give and take mornings and evenings, and your furniture stays the same scale, neither seeming too big or too small and remaining comfortable, but overnight something has affected one of your senses and so your world shrinks to a bubble, much like a snow globe or a Fortune Teller's crystal ball except everything, including you, is life-size, just contained. A circular force field that suddenly surrounds you and wherever you move to, and prevents you from normal interaction as the sound is not surround only partial.
You can hear yourself chew; you can hear thoughts being formed, but the world you live in sounds strange, as if a helium balloon, filled to capacity, has somehow got inside your eardrum, but finding it a tight fit begs to be popped with a knitting needle. However, there's no way you can get at it to relieve that pressure and it's too new to deflate, so you'll both have to sit it out.
Reduce all contact with people, as well as activities where hearing is necessary, unless the volume can be increased or your comprehensiveness doesn't need to be demonstrated and so your muffled participation won't affect the outcome. The same result will be achieved, though less enjoyed.
Any information supplied may be processed differently too. You might be unable to make out everything said, or indeed anything said, and veer off topic, without realising your blunder; your brain being quick to fill in the blanks, and only getting it right some of the time. Your responses might be curt or given in a louder pitch because you simply cannot hear what you're saying or even the tone you're saying it in, so that then you worry you're unintentionally shouting or causing offence. In most circumstances, you're not and you won't be, though you might imagine strange looks being passed.
Why hearing should affect how you read and respond to another's body language I've no idea, but it does if the condition's come on suddenly, as if the other senses haven't had time to learn how to compensate for this impairment. Like somebody whose far from fit expecting their body to adapt to strenuous exercise from the off: you want the back-up systems to kick in instantly. They do, but it's not smooth as these sensory perceptions are untrained and unused to the extra effort, just like muscles hidden under flab.
Compensations are tiring and mess with your brain. And did I mention they can make you emotional for very silly reasons. Anything that comes on top of and unrelated can set you off, because it feels like too much to contend with, in spite of you retreating to your shell. Which I know is ironic, seeing as the ear so closely resembles the homes of snails and crabs. I wonder if like a hermit crab I might find a replacement, because even they have adapted to tin cans where tourists have taken the larger shells as souvenirs. If only a interim solution was available, but at least I have the feeling this is temporary, not permanent.
You get weird thoughts with the loss of hearing in one ear. You can't not think, but your thinking is a little squiffy: sentences take more time to form and you trip over seemingly harmless words when trying to speak them. On the telephone, voices are tinny as if the calls are long-distance or the caller is holding the receiver at arm's length. And voices as if from beyond are disconcerting. But if you do happen to go out, then it's hard to hear anything: any bicycle, jogger or push-chair coming up behind or alongside you, and all passing traffic is a Whoosh! of surprise, which believe me can lead to some hairy moments.
The loss of any sense, altogether or partial, makes you feel and leaves you vulnerable because it's not always something others can see, or, if not experienced, comprehend. A small world is not a more forgiving one.

Picture credit: Conch Shell,  Fine Art America.


Thursday, 23 November 2017

A Patch of Green

Other people lead such interesting lives. Sometimes I think, and it has been pointed out also, that maybe I had my one shot and I decided not to pursue it. Is that it then? I get one chance whilst others get many more. Notch up more than one significant other and a handful of kids; legally assume different surnames and gain in-and-ex-laws. True, I didn't want that. I always thought I'd have a career and would ultimately choose that over partnership of any kind. Well, the career never materialised and I don't think it will in later life, so all that remains is this single unit in a one-bedroomed apartment, in the centre of town, whereas once I had a sniff of a more permanent tie. And it was just a sniff, but still it could have gone either way I suppose if we'd communicated better. If...for so many incommunicable reasons which had they been voiced he wouldn't have understood anyway. Probably. The split was mutual, so he said, but I broke it off, and so that doubt has always stayed because I was a cow to do it on Valentine's Day. And by phone.
I know, what a day to do it on and what a way to do it. I've felt a mild guilt about it ever since and it was years ago, and I mean years – almost nine years, just one year short of a decade, though I'm sure you can all do the maths without me typing it out.
He's not the one that got away or that I let go. No, it's not like that. Because it didn't last long enough. But I think it was a turning point or a crossroads, or something, because I distinctly remember seeing a life, there for the taking, flashing before my eyes and, at the same time, feeling my individuality was being threatened. I knew exactly how it would unfold if I allowed myself to go down that path.
Maybe, that's what you have to go through to get to somewhere different. Duh. Yeah, the path I get, but not the feeling of Whoa, this is too much! and wondering where in all this I actually was. So I strayed back to the grass where there was a sign which said 'Keep Off', and that's where I've stayed, keeping others away. Not, however, through stubbornness and now habit, well, maybe just a little, but largely so I can live uncensored. I wouldn't if there was another sharing the same living space. If I felt watched. Because then the shoulders would always be tight and the back tensed, and the mind wouldn't settle to anything. Reading, my one true love, would be curtailed, and attention given over to other arrangements or trivial matters. Worrying for two, or more and not one.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Certainly my own grandparents and parents managed, and stayed contentedly married in spite of any differences in their characters. Or maybe, they went through an alteration and made the best of it. Compromised. Perhaps, the problem is I'm just too unyielding...though I think it's more to do with ownership: of myself. Because I've never got beyond that phase of what's going on here? where your thoughts get a little screwy and your usual person gets imprisoned i.e. you react differently in order to please whilst inside you're thinking: what? why am I doing this? who is this person? It freaks me out. There's nothing silly-grin-happy about it, not that I can see. Because although I have my faults I like me. At home anyway.
This is my place, where I don't have to be vigilant, well, not about my person, because, yes, I am that self-aware amongst others, where I try hard to present as 'normal' and not as strange. It's gruelling putting on that kind of act. If there was no respite from everything and everyone, if I couldn't control who or what had access, for how long for and when, if at all, I'd cross that border to lunacy. And so a certain distance would be a requirement if partnered up.
There's that if again. Because I think if you've always been insular and perfectly content to forego a closer level of intimacy to safeguard that privacy then attempts to go against the grain are a mental and emotional strain. Unless, of course, you're either very wilful or lucky, and can put those self-medicating comforts aside. It's a big ask.
So, if you can't, should everything else, including you, fall by the wayside? Well, no, why should it? and yet, here I still sit on this same patch of green, concerned just not enough to flag passing cars.

Picture credit: Reverie, 1890, Robert Lewis Reid

Thursday, 16 November 2017

Lazy Sweets

Call me old-fashioned, though you don't actually need to now for I've saved you the task, and here comes the but, BUT what is happening to us as a nation? I don't know about anywhere else as I don't travel very far from my own front door (I don't have a back yard, or a balcony, or a box window where I could grow my own herbs) but, and it's not my imagination, some of us are goddamn lazy. Or getting increasingly and ludicrously so. And I think it's shameful.
I'm still somebody that goes out to the shops with a list of what I need for the week ahead. I walk there and back, returning weighed down with packed bags, the contents of which might have come from more than one store. I don't mean to make myself sound like a martyr because I think nothing of it: it's how I've always done things and known them to be done, and I do shop online, just not for food, nor items I can easily acquire through traipsing the local high street or shopping centre.
What really gets my goat (pardon the expression. Where does it come from anyway?), is the on-demand services. Note the following real-life examples: Person V fancies a yoghurt but doesn't have any in and so pays for a banana-flavoured pot to be taxied to her; Person X needs deodorant but instead of visiting the local pharmacy orders online (thank you radio commentator Jeremy Vine!) for a white van man to bring that item, that solitary item, to him; and Persons Y & Z want a fish and chip supper, but even though there's a shop across the road they place their order over the phone and get it hand-delivered. It's all nonsense!
Nobody is that time-poor! Yet more and more of us are becoming precious about getting our individual (and largely non-essential) needs met. What do I care if someone chooses to fritter their money away in this manner? I don't per se , but I do question what it says about us as a society: about our high expectations and lack of self-management, not to mention discipline. What exactly are we freeing up this time for? To sit in front of a box set, to check our Twitter feed, to upload selfies, and generally loaf. And why is it suddenly so difficult to a) get ourselves organised as in plan ahead and stick to it, and b) delay our gratification? How would we, the generations born long after the Second World War, cope in times of rationing should they come again? If suddenly one day all these add-ons got taken away?
Perhaps that's the issue, we've gone too far the other way. We have too much choice and too many firms willing to cater to our increasing demands which forces others to offer the same. And then there's our attitudinal change which is, to be blunt: I want what I want when I want it, and I'll get it too, that pressurizes and drives this supply model.
It's almost communistic in style, except instead of workers walking out on their owner-bosses and preventing trade, consumers are making trade by demanding zero hour workers save them more time and physical effort; both of which, you have to admit, have already been greatly improved by modern contraptions. Aren't we pushing it a bit wanting and expecting more? Because more labour and energy-saving devices is not necessarily good. Haven't we already seen proof of that, with us as the evidence, living as we now do against the clock? And what about skills? Okay, you might be able to code (I can't do that!), but can you cook from scratch? More to the point, can you use a tin-opener? Not all have ring-pulls and even if they do some of those fail.
Yes, I'm being facetious, but where's the satisfaction in these convenience measures? Where's the real gratification in any of it? It's too instantaneous. And none of it, by the way, saves time. You could walk to the shops and back in the time it takes you to shop online, or whip up a meal that's ready before your takeaway, ordered forty-five minutes ago, gets delivered.
What it amounts to is: minimal effort for a reward which won't keep on giving, because from the beginning you haven't been fully engaged with the process of acquiring that item. In a sense, it's meaningless; if it wasn't, you wouldn't immediately search for another gratifying hit elsewhere.

Picture credit: Tempting Sweet, 1924, Robert Lewis Reid