The return of the K
I'm not really sure what happened.
It was a bad, very bad K weekend. The details aren't important. Just know that it was more of the same: disappointment, dashed hopes, poor communication. I complained to A that it was a Sisyphean breakup, but we agreed in the end it was more Promethean, except with the heart rather than the liver eternally regrowing and getting redevoured by carrion. (And yeah, I have considered making a pass at A based solely on his ability to contribute to conversations in this manner, but, trust me: bad idea.)
In response, I finally did what the ancient Greeks surely would have done, and posted my profile at match.com. The particular guy whose intense, intelligent eyes and crackling prose inspired me to actually buy a membership vanished, his profile apparently expired, the second my card was processed (talk about tragedy!), but my foray still received a gratifying amount of attention. Mostly from semi-illiterates heavily into Nascar and looking for "a sweet Girl who just like Fun," but, still, attention's attention, yes?
I began to realize the problem once I'd whittled them down to four reasonable choices (let's just call them the manic neuroscientist, the cute editor, the strutting foreign policy louche, and the smoldering astrophysicist). All verrrrrry eligible suitors! And in this corner, we have K, unemployed for five years, who forgets birthdays, smokes, and claims to "have issues" with romance.
There really ought to be no problem. And yet, I realized as I scrutinized suitor emails and read between lines and found myself making excuses to postpone having coffee, that it was only in part because I need a little more time to solve the weird beige hair problem. I was, at some level, ruling each one out because he wasn't K. My brain has utterly reconciled itself to the need to move on. My heart, vulture-torn though it is, stubbornly continues to accept him as a fact.
"Ah," you say with relief. "So the title of this post is just metaphorical, then?"
Um. Yeah. About that.
See, I went into work this morning, even though I really shouldn't have, and in my pain- and painkiller-addled state was somewhat even more sensitive than usual to the hideous social and intellectual environment that is my present employment, and I ended up leaving by noon and coming home very upset. K's always good to work-vent to, because he knows the entire catechism, chapter and verse, so that's what I did. And we somehow got into talking about the relationship, and into a huge argument, and teetered on the edge of further (?) breaking up ("times infinity!"), and then the next thing I knew, we were agreeing that he'd come back Thursday -- yes, this Thursday -- for about ten days, and we'd just see how it goes.
As I said, it all happened sort of fast.
It was a bad, very bad K weekend. The details aren't important. Just know that it was more of the same: disappointment, dashed hopes, poor communication. I complained to A that it was a Sisyphean breakup, but we agreed in the end it was more Promethean, except with the heart rather than the liver eternally regrowing and getting redevoured by carrion. (And yeah, I have considered making a pass at A based solely on his ability to contribute to conversations in this manner, but, trust me: bad idea.)
In response, I finally did what the ancient Greeks surely would have done, and posted my profile at match.com. The particular guy whose intense, intelligent eyes and crackling prose inspired me to actually buy a membership vanished, his profile apparently expired, the second my card was processed (talk about tragedy!), but my foray still received a gratifying amount of attention. Mostly from semi-illiterates heavily into Nascar and looking for "a sweet Girl who just like Fun," but, still, attention's attention, yes?
I began to realize the problem once I'd whittled them down to four reasonable choices (let's just call them the manic neuroscientist, the cute editor, the strutting foreign policy louche, and the smoldering astrophysicist). All verrrrrry eligible suitors! And in this corner, we have K, unemployed for five years, who forgets birthdays, smokes, and claims to "have issues" with romance.
There really ought to be no problem. And yet, I realized as I scrutinized suitor emails and read between lines and found myself making excuses to postpone having coffee, that it was only in part because I need a little more time to solve the weird beige hair problem. I was, at some level, ruling each one out because he wasn't K. My brain has utterly reconciled itself to the need to move on. My heart, vulture-torn though it is, stubbornly continues to accept him as a fact.
"Ah," you say with relief. "So the title of this post is just metaphorical, then?"
Um. Yeah. About that.
See, I went into work this morning, even though I really shouldn't have, and in my pain- and painkiller-addled state was somewhat even more sensitive than usual to the hideous social and intellectual environment that is my present employment, and I ended up leaving by noon and coming home very upset. K's always good to work-vent to, because he knows the entire catechism, chapter and verse, so that's what I did. And we somehow got into talking about the relationship, and into a huge argument, and teetered on the edge of further (?) breaking up ("times infinity!"), and then the next thing I knew, we were agreeing that he'd come back Thursday -- yes, this Thursday -- for about ten days, and we'd just see how it goes.
As I said, it all happened sort of fast.
11 Comments:
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 2:34 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 10:03 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 3:09 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 10:26 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 9:18 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 10:01 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 5:57 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 7:23 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 1:44 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 8:52 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
- 5:24 PM
Post a CommentSo does the prescription for the painkillers extend beyond the 10-day, free-trial period?
Just curious!
"Sisyphean... Promethean..."
My vote is for "Augean" as in "Why put up with this horse-s#!%?"
You should really read your own posts and never make decisions while addled.
Oh, hey...hey, now. What's all this, then? Snark from R (yes, I know you still read); that I expect. But these others?
Yes, it's true that K did indeed do all those not terribly nice things I blogged about, and we spent a lot of time angry or upset with each other, but there was a lot of other stuff, too, which tends not to figure so prominently in the blog (really; what would be the point of *that*?).
And it's also possible to read the entries from the last four months and see that I haven't exactly been a happy Esquiver... unproductive... malnourished... not writing... not getting out much...
And while it's flattering to have people assume that I could or should just go out and meet someone "better," there's at least two things in play, here. First, it's extremely difficult to find someone who shares my highly idiosyncratic values. K isn't perfect on this score, but the overlap is pretty damn good. Second, it really can't be overstated how tricky I can be to live with. (My many lurking exes: feel free to chime in here.) That suggests the appropriate standard for relationship comparison may not be how far it deviates from some imagined (and unattainable) perfection, but, y'know. More along the lines of what Samuel Johnson had to say about women preaching.
Of course I still read. And I was well aware you knew that. If for no other reason -- though there are many other reasons -- I read because you're a fantastic writer, and the blog posts could easily be turned into something more rewarding if you didn't self-sabotage your writing career. (The only weakness in your writing is the occasional need to show off, and consequently a sentence or two is what I would describe as over-written, but this would be a trait you'd share with early Michael Chabon.)
Anyway, I would not snark anonymously, especially not about K. (I did consider snarking about your Hillary Clinton posts, or at least linking to writers like Katha Pollitt for a more balanced analysis of the role of gender in the presidential campaign.) You and K. have so many unique personality traits that align rather nicely that I don't know that you could find someone more suitable. Yes, I wish he would try harder, and it's his loss on so many levels for not doing so. (I've discovered as I've gotten older that I really like making an effort at being a good boyfriend/fiancee and it's satisfying in and of itself.)
My only significant worry regarding K. is the indication that he exploits you financially. But I'd be very, very happy to be wrong, and if not, well, it's certainly something that you have decided to tolerate and therefore something I try to avoid thinking about.
Of course, you could take a six month break from men and write a novel. Your loyal readers could easily help out with plotting.
It's not just that I think you could write a great book. I genuinely, passionately believe that the world will always be a lesser place without the book you're capable of writing.
R.
R: I'm torn between wanting to (1) ask you to marry me, and (2) point out that you probably meant "fiance," not "fiancee."
Aaah. As you know, pedantry turns me on. Or maybe what turns me on is that fact that you get so much pleasure out of it.
(Readers might read irony or sarcasm into the above, but I'm quite sincere.)
Either way, it's a big disincentive to proper spelling/grammar.
R.
Hey hey hey! I mean hey now......
I have been (kind of) holding my tounge here about some things, but I feel the need to interject a quick story about an old episode of the sitcom 'Taxi.' In this episode, Danny DeVito had broken up with his sometime girlfriend (Rhea Perlman--who'd a guessed?), and she was off the show for awhile. Then, Rhea comes back and wants to have dinner with Danny. Danny is convinced that Rhea misses him, and has come crawling back. No such luck: Rhea is going to get married to another guy, and wants to tell Danny in person.
When she tells Danny, he flips out (shocking, I know), and tells Rhea that she should at least have the decency to sleep with Danny one last time before getting married.
I mention this story, appropos of nothing.......
I remain:
In complete denial of even joking offers of holy matrimony with R.--or pretty much anyone else, not that it matters.
Bill Abendroth
I don't think it's at all incontrovertible that my comment about the painkillers must be construed as a dig at K. As I've said before, I like the guy, and -- believe me -- I sympathize with the bit about sticking with guys who understand one's quirks.
I was simply responding to your own admission (whether or not written in jest) that your judgment might have been impaired by your painkillers. You are, after all, going to have some more judgments to make over the course of the trial (re-?)reconciliation.
it really can't be overstated how tricky I can be to live with.
Well, certainly, if one takes that as a given, it becomes important to set one's sights lower.
Or, one can take the advice from the old Henny Youngman doctor joke: "Doc, it hurts every time I do this!" "Stop doing that."
Some mild self-improvement on my part dramatically changed my romantic life for the better compared to what I settled for in my first marriage.
-- Ted, who was also fortunate L.G. didn't settle for him
Italo,
No, no: I know you know K as someone who'd give a person the shirt off his back. ;-) And I was amused by your painkiller question. I was reacting more to the comments after yours.
Ted,
I'm glad you feel you've successfully implemented some changes, but I'd wager you're probably still rather difficult to live with. Instead, what you've done is to find someone who somehow doesn't mind, and that's brilliant, and you should do what you can to hang on to that. I'm just saying I'm in a similar position with K. It isn't an issue of settling -- serious questions have sometimes arisen as to compatibility, but never really with regard to settling. I'm aware that I see qualities in K that some (but by no means all) others sometimes miss, but I genuinely consider that to be their loss.
<< Home