The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

Columnist says no reason to buy a dozen roses

I suppose everyone knows by now about the Valentine’s Day rose sale. Sponsored by the Towers Hall Council, the people behind it will even deliver the roses for you. All you have to do is pick pink, red or yellow, and whether you want to send one for $2, or 12 for $21. Now, let me explain why the second option is the most ridiculous thing since Sweatin’ to the Oldies on ice.

You see, there are lots of reasons why getting 12 roses should impress a girl more than one. For instance, she should be impressed if her admirer had to climb Mount Sinai to get them, provided they only grew there three at a time. Or if to get the other 11, her would-be Romeo had to swing across a flaming chasm with a rope fashioned from used tissue paper and water molecules.

However, nowhere outside of a horrifying alternate universe with backwards logic will you find the reason, “Because he shelled out $19 more.”

A bouquet of diamond bracelets would be better than just one because, Jesus, dear God, how much did you pay for that?

Story continues below advertisement

But, here we’re talking a difference of $19.

Are we actually supposed to think, “I might not be able to buy that sweet mama’s affection with $2 worth of roses, but she’ll be all over me if I spring those extra 19 smackers!”

Of course not.

I don’t want to dash anyone’s hopes, but if one rose isn’t gonna bring them over, they ain’t gonna swoon over a $21 bouquet. The reason there is a 12-rose option is this: to create a situation where the recipient might possibly be put-off because she thinks her admirer felt she was worth only two bucks. In other words, the option is there to intimidate us into buying 11 worthless roses.

The thing is that a single rose is just flat out — everyone knows this — more romantic than a bouquet. A single rose can be left delicately placed where she can’t miss it — on her pillow or vanity perhaps, with a cutesy note underneath.

Now a bouquet, you put that on a pillow the only way it looks natural, and it looks like Poison Ivy and Carrot Top are doing the “four-legged frolic” under the covers (only, you know, it’s just their heads. And they’re not moving). Put it anywhere else and it looks like a cotton candy cone with 11 more roses sprouting out the top than you should’ve bought in the first place. And also, no cotton candy.

I will admit that a whole bunch of bouquets might sway a stubborn sweetie who wouldn’t necessarily be moved by a single flower.

But say some brave soul is feeling extravagant and has a heck of a better summer job than I do — why should he have to go through the anxiety of deciding how many armfuls of bouquets he should get? Take that weight off his shoulders!

Make the options to pick from a single rose or a truck full. And if you don’t think anyone would buy a truckload of roses just to catch some chick’s eye, you obviously don’t know all of the sexually-frustrated super-rich freshmen I do.

The great thing about the single vs. truck-full-of-roses option is it would make everyone happy. Extravagant rich guys could just pick the bigger one and park it outside their stubborn sweetie’s window, who now wouldn’t have to wait in her doorway for 15 minutes while the rich guy carried armfuls of flowers up.

Even more importantly, every other guy wouldn’t be scared to buy less than the maximum number of flowers, and the greatly admired girl won’t be irrationally disappointed when someone sends her a single rose.

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

The Spectator intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. The Spectator does not allow anonymous comments and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.
All The Spectator Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Activate Search
Columnist says no reason to buy a dozen roses