Problems of those who grow old

Press, 8 October 1977, Page 17

Problems of those who grow old

Growing Old In America. By David Hackett Fischer. Oxford University Press. 232 pp. $15.95. (Reviewed by Ralf Unger) America’s early years up to 1780 were an era of growing gerontophilia with a veneration of old age accompanied, however, at times, by hate and fear. Between 1780 and 1820 when the French and American Revolutions were in process, attitudes to old age suddenly began to change, and an era of growing gerontophobia began, and increasingly Americans glorified youth. As a result, the elderly often became victims of prevailing negative attitudes and social arrangements. In the first two-thirds of the present century there was a marked change. Old age began to be perceived as a social problem, and an elabroate system of social welfare was created to deal with it. The author of this compact survey shows that the study of old age lies at the intersection of many major questions such as demography, the family, the life cycle, stratification, and welfare. We all grow older faster than we think, he points out, and yet at the same time the experiencing of ageing has changed faster than our understanding of it. In the America of the seventeenth century only a small minority lived long enough to reach old age. Scarcely anyone “retired” in the full modern sense of the word; they worked until they wore out. Today most men stop working before they are 65, and women commonly see their last child leave home before they are 45, and their maternal tasks continue to the end of life. The life cycle has been radically transformed over the last 200 years, and in that period the people of early America exalted old age while their descendants have made a cult of youth. The attitude expected from the young before their elders in early

America was that of “veneration,” which had nothing to do with love. Age was required to respond with “condescension” to youth. The American Puritans said that old men looked like God, and the basis for the power of the old was the possession and control of their lands nearly to the end of their lives while children tended to remain economically dependant long after physical maturity. Youth was then the hostage of age, but the theatre of America simultaneously took as its common satirical target crabbed old age with its vices attacked as the vices of power. Old men appeared as lecherous, obscene creatures who tormented their beautiful and innocent young wives. Just as the colonies found themselves increasingly in opposition to Britain trouble developed between the generations in American families. In both cases the problems were political, problems of liberty and power. After the American and French Revolutions a world was created without veneration or condecension. At the same time costumes changed, and male fashions flattered age. Young men were made to look older than they were with natural hair hidden beneath a wig. Then between 1790 and 1850 clothing changed to flatter youth. Wigs were replaced by toupees, and white powder yielded to hair dyes. Group portraits of American families also were transformed. Those of the middle 1700 s showed the father towering over his family. After 1780 all members of the family were placed upon the same horizontal plane, and in this century the children were placed above their parents. Changes in modern America were full of trial and trouble, particularly for the aged. With the growth of the cult of youth the moral authority of old age was seriously eroded. Retirement improverished large numbers of elderly Americans, and at

the same time changes in family structure and residence patterns caused the generations to live apart more and more. However, as elders lost their authority within society, they gained ties of affection, and their ties of obligation weakened. Rules and authority were less talked of, and confidence and tenderness increased. Now the social security paradox is beginning to take effect in America. Inevitably everyone is getting back less than they give in their lifetime for social security in old age, and fewer people are contributing to the support of an increasing number of the aged. The author suggests that it would be cheaper and less disagreeable in many ways to give each American a capital grant at the beginning of life instead of supporting the aged by income at the end of their useful life. This capital would be invested as a sort of “national inheritance," and earn compound interest until the infant, who received it originally reached the age of 65. A sum of $l4OO is suggested as the gift from the state. It would grow to $225,000 by the time the recipient reached 65. This would provide a pension of $15,000 for each American, far more than social security provides today. When the pensioner dies the money would return to the Treasury. This is a fascinating suggestion because of its simplicity!. But the author’s proposition seems certain to be shot full of holes by an economist who considers the sweep of monetary reform over the last few centuries. Although it is confined to the United States over the last 300 years, Fischer’s thoughtful extended essay should be required reading for all those concerned with the problems of the aged in our society. Others will gain some understanding of the sweep of social philosophy from its treatment of one aspect of the changing family.