An unspoken boycott on gift giving

Having interviewed a style editor about gift giving, I got to thinking about my own holiday wish list. What do I really want?  God, just thinking about it reminds me of post-college conversations with my parents, lame sessions with guidance counselors and the upraised eyebrows of assorted therapists I have seen in my lifetime.

This year, my husband and I have eschewed a present swap without really discussing it much at all. We're getting our place professionally painted next week, and so our walls are getting wrapped -- in a way. Plus, we buy each other little gifts -- like an old Cat Stevens album from Amoeba or a pulp fiction detective novel -- all the time. I know that he bought me a book at Taschen the other day because he hip-checked me out of the shop in Beverly Hills.

I, on the other hand, eyed some monogrammed cuff links for him, but didn't follow through. I also contemplated a vintage camera, a membership to a comic book of the month club (I don't even know if one exists, but it should) and a cookbook for him. He recently made baked chicken with great success and I need to act on the Iron Chef-high before he reverts back to saying, "What's wrong with hot tuna and noodles?"

Not exchanging gifts is actually a great present in itself. In my past, a gift from a man I was dating -- or engaged to -- carried too much gravitas. If a man gave me slippers, I found them to be utterly unromantic and therefore, deemed our relationship "lustless." If a man bought me jewelry, it just didn't sparkle enough (or, I sheepishly admit, cost enough). Unwrapping a present, for me, was like reaching inside his chest to weigh his heart. Invariably, it was always a few ounces short.

This year, my husband and I will probably take a walk at some point on Christmas and cook dinner early and then drink some  great wine and play Guitar Hero in our underwear. The tree -- already drying up and jettisoning needles everywhere -- will stand without a bounty of wrapped loot beneath it. My husband's heart will remain unscathed.

Having said that, I do have a wish list. It's fun to think about what you want in the abstract, without the pressure of expectation. For years, I have coveted the work of local artist Kim McCarty, and her watercolor series of boys and girls has always awed me.  In their faces, seemingly both reticent and eager to please, I see myself wanting and not wanting to be bothered. I think I apply that same dichotomy of desire to gifts. Not this year, though.

Credit: Kim McCarty paintings, kimmccarty.net

Comments

[Mike Barker]

Monica...
Maybe a gift for yourself could be an art appreciation class at the local junior college. Kim McCarty's stuff appears to me to be just about as meaningful and "artistic" as Keene's.

[Kat]

I had the same reaction to the artistic illustrations. They also seem more than a little kiddie pornish. Not that I'm one of those fanatics but I've just never been a fan of pictures of naked children although some people find such subject material etheral, innocent, pure and other such crap. Guess I'm not evolved enough.

[gmulleer]

wow. when such beautiful paintings inspire responses like "kiddie pornish" and "crap" you know you're dealing with some pretty disturbed souls. well, it's not worth arguing taste... monica, wonderful post, and to mike and kat, at least you'll always have thomas kinkade mall galleries.

[Mike Barker]

gmuller....
I guess I did not make myself clear enough. I feel the Kim McCarty art belongs with the Thomas Kinkade stuff. There are dozens of very fine young California artists, artists who have something meaningful to say and express. If you or Monica would care to look, visit some of the websites of our local colleges of art such as UCLA, CalArts, USC, or especially, Laguna College of Art. I guess I am prejudiced in favor of Laguna as I know a professor there and have visited the student gallery there. If you think McCarty is interesting, wait until you see what these young men and women are creating.
I was not so much trying to be harsh in my criticism of McCarty as I was expressing my feelings when I compared her work to others I have seen.
At least this is getting someone thinking about art and not money for once.

[gmulleer]

yes, it's nice to be thinking about art. i just checked mccarty's website. seems she is a graduate of UCLA and the Art Center College of Design in pasadena. she also writes a little about her art. to her (and now me), i'd say she does have something meaningful to say and express. but really, i just found her work - as i said above - beautiful. that's pretty much it. thanks for directing me towards other local talents. always curious what's out there. p.s. kinkade blows.

[Kat]

Isn't art in the eye of the beholder? I just said the peices weren't my style or my taste but that obviously other people are into it. And if you don't think those images resemble naked children then you are blind. Either that or your'e so pretentious you can't think for yourself.

If you dig on paintings of naked, waifish, child like figures then more power to you. Buy one and hang it in your house. I won't. I also won't criticize your right to enjoy any image you find to be artistic. And if I want to buy a velvet painting of Elvis and hang it in my house it's none of your business.

I don't think Monica puts out images, or ideas or blogs because she expects everyone to agree with her on everything. If she didn't welcome other opinions I doubt she'd have a forum for them.

[gmulleer]

nope, i never said they weren't images of naked children and i'm not sure how you made that leap. i might be quite pretentious but i'm not blind. i only questioned your description of them as kiddie porn... if that's all it takes, then the feds should come raid my family's photo albums. since kiddie porn is actually illegal, careful - it's a little bit much to throw that term around. but - yes - to each his or her own. point made.