Here we go again. The Bookwitch Christmas tree is up, but not dressed. Has probably not even had breakfast yet. We’ll throw some lights on it, maybe tomorrow, and then goodness knows when there will be time to add baubles and stuff. 2012 is a blue year. That means we leave the red baubles in the box and put the blue ones on the tree. One year I found we had too many decorations, so split them up according to colour.
Less is more.
I have blogged about similar topics on here before. But I must state that I do not have a religious tree. It has the word Christmas in it because that’s what this time of December is called. ‘Back home’ I would have a julgran, and according to Wikipedia Yule tree is half acceptable here. Many languages have secular words for their trees. Tannenbaum only means tree with needles, I think. The Danes and the Norwegians have their version of Yule and so do the Finns. Not sure who Noel is, but the Spanish speak of birth. Esperanto seems to have a Christ related tree-word, however.
But that’s beside the point. I feel anyone can have a tree if they want to, no matter what their religion, or lack of. And Christians don’t have to have one. It’s a seasonal decoration. (Mine consists of 56 branches and one top, all attached to a ‘trunk’ which divides in two. I know, because I was sad enough to count this time.)
Anyway, what got me started was this piece by Neil Gaiman from a few years ago. It was the first time I’d considered that non-Christians might have to go without trees. That they might even choose to. And that children will nearly always want what their friends have. Neil’s parents sound all right.
Mother-of-witch was a busy woman. She must have decided early on what she could cope with to make life Christmassy (juligt), and what we might as well be without. She chose tree and ginger biscuits.
That’s why I can do without most things, but not the tree and not the biscuits. And contrary to my gluttonous remark yesterday, if one thing has to go, it would be the biscuits.