20 October - dear john
I once was having a gay old time in LA visiting a friend. I was out of work and with a decent redundancy cheque so technically receptive to her luring suggestions ‘Why don’t you stay here longer? you could do this, that, drive to Acapulco etc’ And I’d replied ‘No, no, what about W?’ The boyfriend at that time who was sending sweet emails containing various versions of ‘Miss you’.
So I landed back and as I was about to launch into an afternoon of let’s get reacquainted with each other type action, but instead I got the speech. Which left me speechless for a few seconds – I had definitely not seen it coming, though strangely had not purchased any over the top presents for him but just some standard ‘have been away’ item – only to blurt out ‘Why didn’t you tell me on the phone, I could have stayed in Santa Monica FOREVER!!!’ and I could tell he was about to reply ‘But that’s not how it’s done, you can’t do it by text or email, it’s cruel, everybody says so’. Which it is, usually. Very bad form indeed, but right then, staring ahead at no job/no man, frankly, a few more weeks of deli/latte/veggie/spiritual eating would have been much better. It was also the beginning of Autumn which in California would have just been SUMMER! The beaches were teaming with surfers. Naturally I can say it was the shock that made me be so superficial, I did get upset afterwards. Then got angry and got all the way through that annoyingly reasonable 'sarah' circle. (er sadness, anger, rage, accpetnance, hope - think, could be wrong, could be sod off, arsehole, rent a cottage, abseil, heal? So yes, I should not worry about how one will receive a Dear John letter. For all I know he may carry a Dear Jane in his pocket as we speak. We could play double bluffing agents of love perhaps?
1 Comments:
At 12:53 PM, Anonymous said…
A typed dear John seems a little impersonal. Still, better than a fax.
Post a Comment
<< Home