Because I am too
old to be young and too young to be old, I usually think of myself as middle
aged. It has a respectable ring to it, an aura of dignity, seriousness and
maturity. I think of middle age as that time in life when a person still has
the ability to raise hell and sow wild oats; and the wisdom not to. With its
melding of youthful strength and exuberance with prudence and judgment, middle
age seemed to be a great age.
Then Anthony Trollope came along. The other
morning I was being my self-satisfied, middle-aged self, sipping coffee and
reading Trollope’s He Knew He was Right. The title appealed to me. I too know
that I am right. But somewhere in the second chapter, I lost all interest in
Louis Trevelyn, the protagonist, and whether or not he was right. It wasn’t Mr.
Trevelyn’s fault; the problem was his father-in-law, whom Trollope describes
thusly: “[Lord Marmaduke] had become at fifty what many people call quite a
middle aged man. That is to say, he was one from whom the effervescence and
elasticity and salt of youth had altogether passed away. He was fat and slow,
thinking much of his wife and eight daughters, thinking much also of his
dinner.”
Well, that’s a heck of a note. Here I am
thinking that middle age is what I want to be, and Trollope tells me it’s just
euphemism for fat and slow. I’m not as elastic as I used to be, but I am still
as effervescent as Coca Cola. Shake a can of Coke, open it and it gushes all
over the place. Shake me enough and I’ll gush too, and I’ll make a bigger mess.
The salt of youth? I can be darn salty when the need arises. And the things I
said about Mr. Trollope at that moment were salty enough to make a sailor
blush.
After a few minutes, I was calmed by the
thought that life expectancy in 19th Century England was considerably shorter
than it is for the adequately insured in 21st Century America. Trollope was
obviously vain about his age, and he expanded the bounds of what was then
considered middle age in order to make himself feel less old. Fifty in Great
Britain at the time was probably the equivalent to 117 today. No wonder Lord Marmaduke was short on
elasticity, effervescence and salt; he wasn’t middle age, he was ancient.
Saturday morning, however, as I scanned the
Earthweek feature in the Plain Dealer, I let loose a triumphant shout of, “I
knew I was right.” The item that caught my eye was headlined, “Middle-aged
humans are nature’s most evolved.” That
message is delivered by Cambridge professor David Bainbridge, in his book
Middle Age: A Natural History. A sentence in the second paragraph of the
article read, “This means older men and women have become perfectly adapted to
help their families and society without the burden of raising children.”
The second paragraph of a newspaper piece is usually a very good place to stop. By then you know the gist of the story, and
all the details and qualifiers that complicate things are yet to come. But I
soldiered on to the third paragraph, which read in part, “ important attributes
such as brainpower are at least as keen in a person’s 40s and 50s as they were
decades earlier.” Conspicuous by its absence is any mention of people no longer
in their forties and fifties. Does that mean middle age ends as sixty? And
where was Mr. Bainbridge a few years ago? It would have been nice if he had
mentioned this when I was standing atop the evolutionary mountain. Now he comes
along to what? To tell me I’m over the hill? To tell me I’m no longer elastic,
effervescent or youthfully salty?
According to Wikipedia, however, Mr.
Bainbridge will be forty-four in October. How convenient. He’s declared himself
to be one of nature’s most perfect creations and that he will be one for the
next sixteen years. Maybe not in those words exactly, but it’s there between
the lines. I hope he comes across Trollope’s book; that will bring him down a
peg or two.
I know I’m right about that.
No comments:
Post a Comment