This week's rant: glasses

[nineveh_uk]

Possibly in an act of sub-conscious sabotage, my need for new glasses, which was hitherto merely a matter of aesthetic preference and minor toddler damage, combined with thinking that it would be a good idea to have a spare care in the car when I went on holiday/to an airport in it* has become more urgent thanks to a scratch across the lens. A scratch that is not visible when distance-viewing, so the car spare stands, but is prone to be suddenly distracting when watching TV, which is the thing other than driving that I mostly use my glasses for.

So I have justified spending needs! The only issue is finding the new glasses. At the moment, the front-runner is a pair in Boots housed in the men's section, on account of how all the women's rimless ones defy the point of rimlessness, which is not to be very visible on the face, and are both sparkly and massively broader than my head, whereas this pair are discreet and for narrow heads. It is Boots because, much as I should like to give my custom to an independent optician, I feel that £200 - £300 for frames, and then £100 - £200 for lenses on top of that is taking the piss. I do not need lenses that could be used in outer space or to film wildlife documentaries or whatever the ridiculous justification is. I have a boring prescription for which boring lenses will do just fine. So while Boots will still charge a ridiculous mark-up, and I can't just buy the same thing online because I need the frame fitting, they are nonetheless better than that otherwise lovely pair in Kidlington, because they do not cost £400.

Not ranting: I like the new computer. It does not randomly freeze in the middle of things.

*Hmm. Taken together those are really quite decent reasons.

Comments

[tree_and_leaf]

Have you thought of trying Specsavers? I seem to remember they had some decent women's rimless frames earlier in the year.

[nineveh_uk]

I have, and they have some very nice ones, but they were really too wide for my face. It's a pity because Specsavers actually do a petite range*, and my current glasses are from there, but there was nothing really that worked.

*I am not petite, but the measurement across that bit of my face is.

[tree_and_leaf]

Ah, that's a shame!

[nineveh_uk]

I am blaming fashion. A lot of women's metal-framed glasses are quite blingy at the moment. Whereas the otherwise-good men's pair have rather brutal square-cut lenses. On a cursory investigation, it looks like a hard life for men who don't suit rectangular frames.

[mrs-redboots.livejournal.com]

I don't know where you live, but if you're anywhere remotely near Clapham (London), Brompton's Opticians are absolutely brilliant, don't take the piss too badly, and always go the second mile. And no, they haven't paid me to say that - but I would not take my custom anywhere else.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

Alas, I am not (well, not close enough for glasses). But I may have to eat my words anyway - have just tried on a pair that totally take the piss, except that they are also amazing.

[mrs-redboots.livejournal.com]

That's good. Amazing glasses FTW!

[elmey.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking about new glasses too. I haven't seem any new styles that knock me out though. So it may take a while...

[sonetka.livejournal.com]

Are wide lenses coming back? The last time I got new glasses was about eighteen months ago and I had the opposite problem -- all the lenses seemed so teeny-tiny that I felt like I'd spend all my time squinting. Possibly different trends on different sides of the Atlantic.

As for super-expensive cool glasses -- I remember being extremely jealous of one of my cousins when he got incredibly expensive glasses with titanium frames -- mostly justified in his case because he played a lot of sports and was always getting them knocked off and the frames would have snapped within the first week if they'd been ordinary. I didn't want them enough to actually take up sports, though.