When I put up that one, lonesome tree -- a six-foot Wesley pine purchased for $20 at Walmart in 2009 during our most recent Oakwood stay -- it looked really, really sad. Kevin pointed out that the little labels showing where to insert which branches were visible, and I briefly considered saying the heck with it and buying a bigger, prelighted, 220-volt Christmas tree.
So I did what any self-respecting woman with 72 million boxes of Christmas decorations would do: I poured (almost) everything we have into that one, lonesome little tree.
Hundreds of decorations and 6.5 strands of lights later, we have this:
How does one use 6.5 strands of lights, you might ask. Well, there are seven strands on there because that's all we have. But half of one of those strands won't light, and it's not like I could give up the half that will, so the dead half is wrapped around the bottom of the trunk. I like to think that half would make all the difference in those almost-dark lower branches, but the reality is that I might have gotten just a little carried away with the lights on the top. But just a little.
I actually like it better without the lights on. That way I can tell whether there are any branches yet to be smothered in decorations ...
4 comments:
Are you sure there's actually a tree under there? ;-)
I have the opposite problem. Our tree, which is now 7 years old, was looking pretty pathetic so the kids and I had to make a paper chain to fill in the gaps. It kind of goes with all the school-made ornaments already decorating the tree, at least that's what I'm telling myself.
Absolutely love the tree. Overdecorated or not, it's perfect!
That is a fantastically Christmas-y Christmas tree. I love it!
Zoe, I think it's fantastic. After 14 years of marriage we still have barely enough ornaments to decorate our tree rather pitifully. We do have plenty of lights, though. There's no such thing as too many lights on our tree.
Post a Comment