[pen] Dunno about Darren, but I would feel exactly that (and frequently do). We've too few trees as it is, without wasting them on pointless letters, cards etc.
(Projoy) You really can't be allowed to get away with that. The proportion of paper in actual letters compared with the total amount of paper (newspapers, junk mail etc) that comes through my letterbox is very small. In any case, we're not short of trees; there are many more than there were 40-50 years ago, everywhere. To be honest, I'm not that keen on trees, they spoil the view and at one time threatened to undermine my house. Rather overrated, I feel.
[Rosie] Who says my annoyance is confined to only legitimate letters? As to "more trees", I don't know if that's true, although I guess you're more likely to know than I am, But don't we need even more trees at the moment to do Carbon Dioxide conversion? This is the general impression I have gained.
I suspect Rosie is right that there are more trees now than in the 50's. I'm pretty sure, however, that there were many more in the 30's and more still before WW1. Also, the tree-planting boom of the 50's 60's & 70's was mostly conifer plantations. Planting more trees as mixed woodland must be a good thing both aesthetically and as carbon sinks.
IIRC, commercial forestry supplies most of the pulp for paper - and that's a planting-and-harvesting operation of fast-growing monoculture conifers; it doesn't use wood from mixed and deciduous woodland.
(Projoy) It's true that trees fix carbon rather than letting it float free as CO2 but the number needed to make any difference is impractically large particularly considering the rate the Amazon jungle and other areas are being chopped down. Trees are nice but have become sacred, which is just silly. They undermine buildings, obscure the sky and the view, drop leaves on the railway line and are even allowed to obscure signals. The biodiversity of tree-free railway cuttings was incredible. Down with trees! BTW I don't quite understand your aversion to printed paper. I get cards all the time from my nieces in addition to all the emails, which is nice, and far better than when they were young teenagers and sent me electronic Christmas cards. Sod that.
[Rosie] Well, I suppose it's a personal preference, but I just find dealing with paper irritating these days. It becomes clutter very quickly. You can't miniaturise it and file it conveniently in a sensible folder system on a HDD. Cards and the like seldom express sentiments profound enough to be worth keeping, and for the most part are ritualistic and purposeless. Almost anything that could be said in a conventional letter could be said in an email, which is far more keepable these days.
[PJ, Rosie] Being a keen calligrapher - I mostly design and write greetings cards to close friends and family. They seem to appreciate the personal, snail-mail touch because it's evidence that one has made the effort. Far more 'keepable' I'd say.
I loathe "greetings cards", and I've just deleted my justification of that statement because I don't want to feel yet again that I'm the only one singing in tune :-)
[Phil] I'm only mentioning how much I despise commercial greetings cards so you know you're not alone. Under normal circumstances I wouldn't even have botherd to mention it. Profit margins of 60%+?? The sleazy slimeballs.
I love cards. I love writing letters. I love recieving post of any form. I send lots of postcards when I go on holiday. I particuarly like hand made cards. I do get a bit pissed off when I get a Christmas card from someone I rarely keep in touch with just signed with their name, as I'd like a little newsbite. I try to lead by example and put a little line or two in each card, something personal to who its addressed to. I also mostly try to make my own Christmas cards, although I was defeated on that one last year (I sent over 85, and recieved a similar number). So, why do I like them. I accept that I do mostly just throw them away (or try to recycle) and it is a fair economic cost, but I like to keep in touch with as many people as I can and I think its a good way to show that you're thinking of someone. Hurrah for cards. That's what I say!
[Lib] If I want to know what someone whom I am otherwise too feckless to stay properly in contact with is up to, I'll usually google them or take a look at their blog or something. If I instead sent a card for the sheer sake of "staying in touch" what pleasure would it afford them to know that I thought of them... but didn't think enough of them to do more than send a card? You might argue that I miss the point, and I suppose I probably do. Obviously, not attacking anyone else's way of staying in touch, but that's how it's always seemed to me.
[PJ] You didn't seem any more crabby that I am (revising never brings the nice side of me out)... I like to know that someone out there is thinking of me. That's probably something to do with the kind of high-maintainence-centre-of-attention person I am. Getting a card is something concrete that I can see that they've thought of me. Looking at my blog doesn't mean anything as I don't track all the hits. But, each to his own, hey? And I'll remember not to send you any cards a ProjoyTowers.
[Phil/PJ] Hmm - surely you have aunts, uncles, grandparents [even parents] that may not be quite as netsavvy as you? [or even own a PC]. How do you all stay in touch or send birthday/christmas-type greetings to them? Telephone?
[Chalky] Why stay in touch? Why send greetings? Unless you want to know them as friends, doing either of those two things seems completely pointless - maybe even slightly hypocritical - to me.
[Chalky] I didn't say that I prefer to use the net. I just don't really "stay in touch". I have one uncle, one aunt, one cousin, no grandparents. I do speak to my brothers and parents fairly frequently on the phone. I do send birthday and christmas cards to all family members (including in-laws and 2 nieces) - I also loathe buses, but use them when necessary. On the other hand, we all use email too for quick messages, e.g. my sister-in-law invited us to her 50th birdthay party by email, and I was able to decline within 30 minutes - job done, no waiting; no having to find a "sorry we can't come" card, write it, find her address, buy a stamp, post it (all of which would take me a day or two).
[Projoy, Phil] Blimey, I'm now wary of having either of you two as friends... if I left it too long, the friendship lapses and you'd discontinue membership! I've got friends all over the place that I don't see for a couple of years at a time, but I'm extremely pleased that I *can* count them as friends, and still send xmas cards. I really can't see it the way you do.
[Phil] I see. You seem to use different methods for different folks. Me too. I just prefer to make a greetings card than to buy one [for the reasons already stated by PJ and SM.
[PJ] Why stay in touch? The ones I stay in touch with are the ones I LIKE and respect.
Well, I know it means more to me when I send a card or letter than an email (partly because of the extra effort). So it means more to me to receive one as well. Also probably more than half the people I communicate with regularly are not regular e-mail users, even if they have an address. I just think it's for different purposes. Quick notes, information-based, SMS or email; communication - letters or cards.
[Proj] You don't think staying in touch with your aged relatives who are not on the Internets is worthwile in itself? Me, I like sending post cards, but not too many or too often. I defaulted out of Postcrossing recently. In other news, I suck at lecturing. Really and truly.
[Néa] *thinks for a moment*. Mm. Not really - for them or me. [pen] I have friends whom I sometimes don't see for a couple of years, or more. It sounds like in your case it's necessary to send a card or something in order to maintain the friendship subscription (whether used or not). In my case I'm very happy for someone I like to show up again after a couple of years of not calling or writing. I don't require them to ping me in the interval, because it would be a waste of both of our time (at least until they or I are ready to re-engage - and also a waste if one of us is no longer really interested).