Saturday, 2 November 2013

Second thoughts already!

After all that positive stuff in yesterday's post about my new glasses, would you believe it? I'm now having second thoughts.

I've worn the new specs for two days without a break, except when washing and sleeping of course. It's been easy and pleasant - they are certainly a good fit, and very comfortable to wear. And I have loved the new lenses. The difference in vision has been subtle, but I can definitely see more clearly.

But - and it's a big but - somehow they look wrong. My eyes now look different, somehow sunk away behind glass. It has something to do with the rounder frames, and the fact that the metal is very, very slightly thicker, or just more prominent. When I glance in a mirror, I am chiefly seeing the frames, and not my eyes. This is not what I wanted at all. My old frames didn't do this.

And there's another thing. The roundness of the frames, which is rather egg-shaped, is - I now see - slightly at odds with the squareness of my face. I'd previously thought these frames flattering, but I've now decided that I was deceiving myself. The more rectangular ovals of my old frames were a much better match for the face that was actually there.


Well, I'm not slow in admitting my mistakes once I recognise them. Nor will I dither about putting this right.

Today's Saturday. I have two nights to sleep on the matter. On Monday morning, if I still feel that I've made an error, I'll go into Brighton and see what Specsavers can do to help. They must have customers now and then who can't get on with their new specs, and return (maybe in tears) to order another pair in a different style. They might just give me something off another pair. They certainly would if I were spending enough - I have a voucher entitling me to a 50% discount on a second pair of glasses, if the frames cost at least £69. I will be spending only £45, but I will try to get them to stretch a point.

If need be, I'll cough up another £234, and have new lenses in my old frames. Well, not literally the same frames I've been wearing for the best part of four years (those are almost worn out, with dodgy screws holding the arms on), but exactly the same style (which is the one named 'Krissy'). I know I'll be happy with them.

I hate making mistakes where money is concerned. This will be such a waste. I will now end up with two pairs of brand-new glasses, one of which will simply be an unused spare - handy to keep in Fiona, 'just in case', but probably never to be worn at all.

£234 is the price of a new tyre for Fiona. It would almost cover my house insurance for a year, or my caravan insurance for a year, or my mobile phone contract for a year. It's what my five-night caravan break in the East Midlands cost me: pies, cheese, posh meal, site fees and travelling around all included. It's a significant sum of money that ought to be better spent. But being happy about my personal appearance is vitally important. I was thinking of having another week away in early December, but I've now scrubbed that from my diary. That's how I will find the £234.

Who is to blame? Myself, of course. Entirely.

More than one friend, when I spoke of having a sight test and getting new glasses, urged me to try another style. Nothing wrong with that idea, perfectly reasonable, but I shouldn't have listened. Deep down I was very happy with what I already had. The old glasses were simple gold metal ovals, plain and functional and easy on my face. They were unobtrusive. Not once did they ever look anything but good in photos. They didn't look in any way special, but they went with all my clothes and with every occasion. I should have listened to the inner voice that told me the glasses you wear look fine, and have plain and simple styling, the sort you like - stay with them! It's my fault if I didn't pay attention.


  1. Women are so fickle aren't we?

    Shirley Anne x

  2. I predict that you will have a pleasant surprise when you return to Specsavers. They are very good at helping customers who are disappointed with their purchases.

  3. May Madame Angela's predictive powers fail not. By noon I'll have found out.



This blog is public, and I expect comments from many sources and points of view. They will be welcome if sincere, well-expressed and add something worthwhile to the post. If not, they face removal.

Ideally I want to hear from bloggers, who, like myself, are knowable as real people and can be contacted. Anyone whose identity is questionable or impossible to verify may have their comments removed. Commercially-inspired comments will certainly be deleted - I do not allow free advertising.

Whoever you are, if you wish to make a private comment, rather than a public one, then do consider emailing me - see my Blogger Profile for the address.

Lucy Melford