Commentary by T.W. Bill Neville
As Jackie Gleason used to say, "What a revolting development this is." That was my first reaction as I received the first e mail response to my article on the "Blessed Dream."
I had to set it aside for a while, before I reread it,and then understood what the point of dissension was. It was my use of a "dream" as "factual" to my ability to accept the "dream" as a salubrious adaptation of "dreams" without my wife.
What I'm learning is that the absence of my wife is conceptual in just about every facet of my continuing existence. For instance, I remember when our grand kids were trying to convince "Ga", that's what they all called her, to learn how to "text."
She was not interested under any circumstances. Just like the Internet. "NO WAY" She wanted to hear voices. So they asked me if I could please try and get her to text. I accepted and chose to try and convince her by relating a story about an aging couple with mobile phones learning how to text.
The wife was a "romantic" and he was more of a no-nonsense guy who traveled on business One afternoon she decided to send him a romantic text message. "If you are sleeping, send me your dreams. If you are laughing send me your smile. If you are eating, save me a bite. If you are drinking, send me a sip. If you are crying, save me your tears. I love you."
He texted her back. "I'm in a truck stop, on the toilet. Please advise" My wife, only paused for a split second and said, "What's that got to do with texting?", and I never brought the subject up again.
So, I responded to the critical "DREAM" e mail by saying, as diplomatically as possible, that, like the "texting" episode, I wasn't about to NOT accept "DREAMS" involving my WIFE, and "risking" another, "What's that got to do with "DREAMS" response!