Saturday, 20 March 2010

Five

I've realised what caused the slight eye problem.  The other day, I put in my contact lens and it was uncomfortable, so I blinked a few times and forgot about it, until I realised that I couldn't see any better with than without it.  I poked around for a minute, but it was no good, it had disappeared to the back of my eye.

It stayed there all day, until after 10pm.  It wasn't at all comfortable.  Fortunately, I didn't need to do anything in particular that needed sharp sight - I could have put in another lens at the front in an emergency, but I imagine it's not recommended. Anyway, I eventually felt it move around and took it out and thought no more about it.  But it's very likely that it set up some irritation and bits and pieces moved around a bit, to be seen by me a few days later.  It's lots better now - and thanks, Dave, for your warning.  The possibility of a detached retina did occur to me and I was prepared to go to the doctor at once if it continued.

I didn't have a particularly comfortable night, so have decided, if that's what driving does to me, that I won't start cycling much for a few days yet.  Maybe down to the church tomorrow.  I'm due to play the organ, which is something I haven't done since December.  Not touched the keys.  I haven't received hymns yet, so I suppose I'll have to choose them.  The other organist is down as sidesman tomorrow - I'm awfully tempted to get him to play instead, but I suppose I should get back in harness.  As it were.

Anyway, today is Squiffany's birthday, and she is five.  I talked to Dilly about a present and she reminded me that I'd already got one, that I had meant to give her for Christmas and forgot.  Yes, I know - thing is, she bought it and Ro brought it in and squirrelled it away to his old room, where I rarely go, and I'd hardly seen it.  Anyway, it's a doll's cot - the bedding is pale blue and yellow so it's not irredeemably girly and it's nice enough, being wooden and well made, for me to quite approve of* - so that's all right.  It's quite large and, as it swings, is in two pieces, so it was impossible to wrap and I went and bought ribbons and have put it in a duvet cover and have tied the ribbons on decoratively.  She can use them in her hair.  Or her dolls' hair.


*Good job Dave doesn't mind bad grammar, isn't it?

12 comments:

Dave said...

I imagine Barbie will love it.

Z said...

I expect she will, Dave. I will smile at them and tell her how lovely they are, because that's what a granny is happy to do.

Marion said...

I had one of the original Barbie dolls. I sure wish I had it now, as they seem to be valuable. But I probably cut her hair off and painted her some odd color.

lom said...

yak, yak. yak, where glasses you can't lose them round the back of your eye

Z said...

Of course, a child's toys are most valuable if they've never been played with -in money terms, that is.

I love my contact lens, LOM and I hate wearing glasses. Even when this sort of thing happens I'd rather wear the contacts.

mago said...

Lenses can be a nice and comfortable thing, but a real paine in the eye too.

Z said...

Usually, it's very comfortable and I can see better than with glasses. But an occasional pain in the eye - you're a fellow wearer, Mago?

mago said...

I had lenses for some years until my eyes reacted a bit and I switched back to glasses.
But I will have lenses again. I enjoyed it, especially when riding a bike. My eyes changed a little for the better, the short-sightedness became a little better - let's hope at least - but I realize that I have difficulties to focus; the light, set of lights, illumination, is more important now.
I wear glasses since my twelveth year and it deteriorated very fast in those years. Without glasses I am helpless ... no more faces, just areas, regions ... very helpful when one wants to listen, to music, a speech, a witness.

Z said...

My father was very short-sighted and Alex has inherited that - my mother, my husband and my other two children had/have excellent sight. I'm slightly short-sighted (-2). I wear only one lens which gives me the slightly fuzzy sight I am used to and rather like in my left eye when I want it, but good long sight in my dominant right eye. I read with my left eye. I don't know when or how I switch eyes. It's brilliant.

mago said...

Wait a minute - you are correcting just one eye? With a lense for reading and your right eye goes without lense for long sight?
That would prohibit me from just getting up, just send my to the floor vertiginous. You are really a special person.
The worst value was some years ago at the beginning of my forties, when I had twelve and nearly eleven. Take my goggles away and one has to lead me by hand.

Z said...

Well, the other way round - my right eye has the lens in, as I'm short-sighted and my uncorrected left eye reads. But yes, I can do that. Alex is about as short-sighted as you are, and I think that's too much adjustment for the brain. But I do have one very determined, pretty short-sighted friend who, when she reached the age of needing to wear reading glasses, had laser treatment on one eye, threw away her contact lenses and trained herself to adjust to different sight in each eye.

I am developing slight astigmatism with age, so in the long run I will probably need reading glasses for that. But I'm still all right so far.

mago said...

LAser treatment makes me shudder. It may be good to repair when some tissue "got off", but only the idea that with such a skalpell - and it is nothing else! - parts of my eyes become vaporized makes me want to hide. Never I will allow such an operation!