BRINGING HOME BABY

If you're a dog lover, or as in my case a dog nut, you have probably experienced the grief that comes with a dog's death. Even when you know a dog's suffering has come to an end, it's not easy to be rational or common-sensical about it. You loved her or him, and that loved one is no more.

Some react by quickly filling the void with a new dog. The best way to fight loss is to head right now for the shelter or breeder, goes the argument. Others (that would be people like me) can't do such a thing. However much sense it makes, the idea of filling our need can't be so conveniently and quickly accomplished. It would be wrong, a utilitarian response to a deeply subjective state of mind and emotion. Grieving is for real, and quickly bringing home a new dog won't do. It would be like losing one's spouse to terminal-something, returning from the service, and sitting down at the computer to check out some online dating site.

That's why it took me three years to finally accept that the empty space in our lives shouldn't go on longer. Truth to tell, this acceptance came to me, not to my wife Barbara. She was so attached to Chelsea that she kept saying "No more dogs." When I started dragging her off to see rescues in people's foster-care homes, she said without ambiguity, "If you do this, she's your dog, not our dog. I get too attached, it's too painful."

I nodded solemnly, accepting my future fate as the sole "staff member" in our household, should I bring another dog into our empty nest. But confession is good for the soul: I knew this idea--YOUR

dog, not OUR dog--was just an idea, a principle with just about as much chance of being stuck to as our winning the Powerball lottery.

I'll have more to say about all this down the road. But today, long after she joined us (not just me), here is the latest Knister to take up her duties as time-clock manager, SKYLAR. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE SPARTAN AND THE PRESIDENT: SECOND THOUGHTS

Image
--Sweetheart, you’re talking to yourself again. --I was dressing myself down. I was taking myself out to the woodshed. --Please don’t tell me you forgot to turn off the coffee maker again. We don’t need any more caffeinated tar. --Nope, on top of the coffee maker. --But you needed dressing down. Discipline. --That’s it, I lack discipline. Toughness and grit. Those are the qualities in short supply with me. But not with General Stanley McChrystal. I just read his discipline level allows him only one meal a day. --Well, he’ll have lots more time for the gym now. Maybe he can add a snack. --He will, that’s true. Although they run a pretty tight ship at these cable networks. I imagine he’ll be spending lots of time there soon. --You see him doing color commentary on the war in Afghanistan? --Almost certainly. After all, TV has welcomed back Elliot Spitzer. Notice how they’ve been rehabilitating him lately? He has his own show now. I see the same thing figuring for McChrystal. --Ah well. Li...
Read more

MERCANTILE AMERICA: COSTCO

Readers of DBD know that I am often irritable (and no doubt irritating), whereas Barbara is almost never guilty in this regard. With me, the quality is probably just one more effect of growing old, the grumpy-old-man syndrome. Perhaps that’s why I am put off by certain behaviors of others in my age “group.” A better person would be more generous and less tetchy, less inclined to project personal frustrations over aging in the form of criticism. That said, I would be very interested to learn your impressions of older people. Many blogs and websites trumpet our spunk and creativity, or express sympathy when scammers take us to the cleaners. What are your views and stories? --Was it crowded? --Very. After shopping I got in line for gas. I almost gave up. I ended up in a line with two SUVs ahead of me. Both the size of Nimitz-class carriers. It took a good ten minutes for them to fill up. --Did you snack? --You always ask that. You always interrogate me about snacking. I do not...
Read more

HEROES IN WORD AND DEED

The Masters is over, but the most recent controversy surrounding Tiger Woods is not. This one has to do with a stark black-and-white Nike ad, in which the voice of Woods’ deceased father Earl demands to know of his son whether he’s learned anything lately. The commercial ends with Woods, somber-faced and saying nothing, still squarely centered on the viewer’s TV screen. Although the ad’s been called weird and creepy, it’s also been described as one more from Nike that does what good ads should, gain attention and create a buzz. Either way, it provokes questions. The first has to do with exploiting a dead father’s voice to help shore up a son’s shaken reputation and lucrative contract with Nike. Is this OK? On one hand, nobody made a fuss when Natalie Cole sang duets with her long-gone father. That, too, had to do with a child’s career being enhanced or promoted by using a dead parent’s voice. On the other hand something tells us a mute Tiger being admonished by his recently dec...
Read more