HEALTH PLUS:You cannot be old; it is adjectivally disallowed. But at least you can be older, writes MARIE MURRAY
IT IS permissible to say “older”, to speak of “older people” as long as you don’t say “old”.
Such is societal determination not to use the term “old” that doing so elicits shocked responses, clear social signals that one has made a faux pas, one has said the “o” word without its qualifier “er”.
The term “young” can be used for those who are young. It is not always diluted into describing them as younger people, or at least it is not an offence to do so.
But old is an inadmissible adjective. You cannot be old; it is adjectivally disallowed. You must be “older”. It is even acceptable to be the oldest (as in the oldest man or woman in Ireland).
Odd that you can be the superlative but not the preceding stages; that you can be older and oldest, but not old. In fact, you can be what you want as long as it is not old.
There are a number of philosophical and practical questions raised by this.
For example, if you are older, then what age are you? Older than what? Older than Methuselah?
To reach his age, once meant that one had achieved a remarkable age. But if memory serves he was only three score and 10 and these days 70 is practically infancy.
Older is definitely younger than it used to be. Older is definitely older than young. What it is not, however, is old.
There is an unhealthy tendency to bring this fear of using the word “old” into more domains that those of age.
To cite a somewhat trivial example, but an example nonetheless of the fear of using the word “old”, the labels on skin products are never described as being for old skin.
Ask anyone from the world of cosmetology in any of our premier stores for a product for old skin and they will provide you with cream for “mature” skin. What is mature skin? At what age does skin become mature? Is it immature before that?
Then why are there are no potions for immature skin? If mature is the new descriptor for “old”, is one immature before achieving maturity? It is all most confusing.
And if it’s good to be older, why are there so many procedures, surgeries and cosmetic camouflages to conceal the ageing process?
We tell children to act their age and then we refuse to do so. We will not be old (er).
One would not wish to labour the point, as one could grow older doing so. One could ignore the entire terminology of old age as yet another paradoxical postmodern perspectival vagarie (if the singular of vagaries is allowed?) on the basis that Bernard Baruch has already established that old age is always 15 years older than you are.
Now that is a fine example of postmodern relativity because it demonstrates that you are what you think you are in the postmodern world and nobody can contradict you because reality is invented and socially contrived, fiction is fact, life is as it is narrated and truth depends on the interpreter.
So if you wish to interpret the term “old”, as 15 years older than you are, and continue to do so as the decades go by, that is fine, but is there any age at which you will achieve the distinction of being old?
In the journey of life will you ever have the satisfaction of saying “I am old” and know that it is an honour to be old, that it is revered and celebrated, admired and recognised for the achievement that it is, not couched in patronising euphemisms, not circumvented with semantic obfuscations that do no service to the age, the stage or the people who occupy it.
That is why I like Alan Jay Lerner’s lyrics from I’m Glad I’m Not Young Any More, which go as follows: “The fountain of youth is dull as paint, Methuselah is my favourite saint, I’ve never been so comfortable before, Oh I’m so glad I’m not young any more.”
He sees the benefits of old age.
So do I. Being old is a distinction I would like to achieve – in about 15 years’ time, when I am old!
mmurray@irishtimes.com
Clinical psychologist and author Marie Murray is director of the UCD Student Counselling Services