For those of you who don't know, I wear corrective lenses because I am near-sighted. During the last decade or so, I have been blessed to have very little change in my eyes, so I have been able to forego the expense of new glasses every year or two. The second last pair I purchased were progressives meant to help me cut fabric at the brick and mortar store, which meant I wanted the close up portion at the top of the lens instead of at the bottom where most people want it (for reading). They didn't work. I still had to remove my glasses to follow the line on the Aida cloth.
Then, two years ago, I got new lenses that were normal progressives because I did start to need them for reading (like a normal person). They worked but for some reason, the right lens soon fell victim to scratches on the inside of the lens. Since I clean both lenses with the same cloth and I don't have stainless steel lashes on my right eye, there is no discernable reason for the scratches. Even if they fell on a rough surface, the outside would be scratched, not the inside. So, off I go to get new glasses.
The optometrist that checked my eyes told me there was negligible change in my eyes so I would be getting the same prescription. Did I just want new lenses or was I getting new frames too? Since my current glasses also had transition lenses (darkening in the sunlight), I opted for new frames so I could have an indoor pair and an outdoor pair. The optometrist started her checklist for the prescription: no transitions required, check. I nodded. Progressives, check. I said no. She insisted that I would be unhappy without progressives and would be back within a couple weeks to change them. In other words, she twisted my arm.
Fast forward two weeks after receiving my new glasses. With progressives, I was unable to read the music clearly when playing the piano or organ for church and my eyes tired very quickly trying to decipher what was on the computer screen. Back to the eye care centre I went - with both pairs of glasses in hand. Well, okay. One pair was on my face because I needed to drive safely. I explained the problem and was firm this time that I did not want progressives. My new frames needed lenses for distance and my old frames were going to get reading lenses - but not ordinary reading lenses because they focus approximately one foot from one's face. I needed to focus almost exactly two feet from my face because that is where my music sits when I play either keyboard and I can easily put my computer screen at that distance, if needed. So intermediate lenses were recommended and ordered.
Fast forward another week. My readers come back, my distance lenses are ordered and my new frames go off to be refitted. I took Mom with me this time just in case I wasn't safe to drive with my readers. (As it turns out, it was no different from driving with tired eyes.) Working on the computer was definitely easier without progressives and everything was clear enough, even driving, so I could function normally. The true test of the new readers came Sunday morning (yesterday) when I had to play for two services. You guessed it. They didn't pass muster.
I got my measuring tape out of my purse. (Cos everyone carries one in their purse right? No? Just me?) I measured the distance from my eyes to the music when I sat where I needed to in order to play. 24" Then I measured from where I had to sit in order to read the notes clearly. 30" Those 6" are the difference between touching the keyboard and pedals and not touching them at all. Thankfully, I was picking up my driving glasses after church. I explained my dilemma to the eye care specialist and she agreed that I couldn't let improper lenses keep me from playing at church so, after some careful calculations, the readers went off to get refitted again and I left with my driving lenses.
So what does this long-winded story have to do with the title of this blog? Well, remember when I said I'm near-sighted? Most people my age - especially those who started wearing glasses later in life - are far-sighted. The running joke amongst people in that age group is that their arms aren't long enough. While playing during the church service and at the meeting that was held after service (where papers were handed out for people to read) my arms weren't long enough. They were, in fact, 6" too short and I spent my entire Sunday morning learning what it was like to be far-sighted. I will continue to laugh at people complaining about their short arms because I am comfortable with them laughing at me when I take my glasses off and hold paper to nose to read something. What I won't do is take for granted the fact that I will always be able to see clearly, even though that distance is gradually getting closer to my face.
written by Lori, grateful TCL owner, who - even though she is writing this blog hunched over the computer screen sans glasses, is happy to have experienced life through a different set of lenses this past week. It has given me a new perspective. I'll stop now.
