Poll regarding Christmas letters
I was reading something today about conserving resources, and it suggested sending Christmas letters electronically instead of using paper products to mail them. I am torn on this (pun not intended). On one hand, it saves a lot of time and paper to send them electronically, especially considering most will be thrown away. On the other hand, it's exciting to receive them in the mail and watch them stack up throughout the month of December. In the electronic age, the personal touch is particularly appreciated.
I have historically mailed a Christmas letter to friends and family who live far away, particularly those who only hear from me once a year. It has always seemed a little silly to me to send cards to people I see regularly. To those, I usually email the letter I have mailed to the others. I mean, I send 20 or 30 cards a year anyway - I can't imagine how expensive and time-consuming that would get if I sent them to everyone I know. And YET, I enjoy receiving these letters from certain friends I see regularly.
Of course, that's another thing... cards versus letters. Cards are pretty, but they don't communicate a lot to me. The thrill of getting Christmas letters is in reading about my friends' lives and putting myself back into their lives for that moment, remembering times we've had together and appreciating the ways God has blessed them. I'm afraid I don't really understand the tradition of sending cards that are simply signed with no personal touch other than the signature itself. What is the point?
So, anyhow, I am especially interested in hearing your perspective on this. Please share!
I have historically mailed a Christmas letter to friends and family who live far away, particularly those who only hear from me once a year. It has always seemed a little silly to me to send cards to people I see regularly. To those, I usually email the letter I have mailed to the others. I mean, I send 20 or 30 cards a year anyway - I can't imagine how expensive and time-consuming that would get if I sent them to everyone I know. And YET, I enjoy receiving these letters from certain friends I see regularly.
Of course, that's another thing... cards versus letters. Cards are pretty, but they don't communicate a lot to me. The thrill of getting Christmas letters is in reading about my friends' lives and putting myself back into their lives for that moment, remembering times we've had together and appreciating the ways God has blessed them. I'm afraid I don't really understand the tradition of sending cards that are simply signed with no personal touch other than the signature itself. What is the point?
So, anyhow, I am especially interested in hearing your perspective on this. Please share!
Labels: philosophy
posted by DenverSop @ 10:57 PM
5 Comments:
At 12/20/2007 11:11 PM,
blocko said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 12/21/2007 9:02 AM,
Anonymous said…
There is something about getting a letter in the mail. Knowing that someone went through all that effort to get something to you that you can hold in your hand. As much as I love EMail, I prefer letters. I don't get the card thing, either but that is me.
I think your method makes sense.
~BPP
At 12/21/2007 11:57 AM,
Anonymous said…
I suppose sending just a signed card says one of three things:
1) I'm still alive out here, and I think just often enough of you to let you know that fact.
2) I'm too busy to send you a letter, but here's a signature anyway as I feel a sense of obligation to send these cards.
3) You already know the pertinent things to know in my/our life, but here's an extra bit of Christmas cheer. (This one would be the least common, I'm sure, and even though you'd fall into that category, you get a letter from us anyway.)
Letters are the way to go. As for the print versus email situation, print is most definitely the way to go. A cyber card is special, but then it's put in the trash bin and is gone forever. A hard copy of the same card at least ends up on a dresser, table, or other display point for a few days before meeting the same practical fate, it causes additional thought of the sender. I think that fact right there makes the traditional version the way to go whenever possible.
At 12/23/2007 11:11 AM,
Mellifluous said…
I think that your philosophy is the one Rog and I have held for a long time. We do include family members in the snail mail list especially if there is a picture. Of course, we do ours for Valentine's day...another day people like to get mail. It helps us keep this season from getting overwhelmed and also catches us up with folks.
At 12/27/2007 6:17 PM,
GeekTeach said…
I do like jpl's 3rd option - you are so much a part of our life that a letter would just be a summary to you anyway - but somehow we still send these people a letter. I would be very accepting of a simple card from this type of person.
I'm trying to convince "someone" that now that I have this font that is my actual handwriting, we could fake people out and make them think that we actually hand wrote each letter - but she isn't falling for it. Of course now that I included that in my comment, none of you will fall for it either.
One thing that I thought was fun back when I was still living at home: I convinced my parents to use some mail merge features to allow them to add the little handwritten blurb that is added at the end of the letter - that little personal touch down by the signature - into the actual text of the document. (Yes, this confirms that I've always been a geek.) I remember one of my mom's sisters calling to ask in a bit of a panic if we actually included that story in everybody's Christmas note. Good times...
As for your actual question: I say kill a tree and save a friendship - it's a sacrifice worth making.
Post a Comment
<< Home