Month: October 2023

October 2023

By Richard Fleming

Photo courtesy of Amilrali Mirhashemian

(Baby Boomers are far from homogeneous. We face differing financial, health, social, and family situations. My ideas in this post will not apply to every Boomer, but I think they may apply to many.)

In the early 1980s a novel term for Baby Boomers began to garner attention. We became known as the “Sandwich Generation.” This concept achieved wide currency, even though it emerged before social media claimed its role as the sole arbiter of what ideas should be popular. The moniker was based on the fact Boomers carried significant responsibility for the welfare of both the generation above us (our aging parents) and the generation below (our children). We found ourselves in the middle of a proverbial sandwich.

This idea was accepted by many Boomers. Being called the Sandwich Generation was not a pejorative, but an honorable acknowledgment of our role in society. We were the key ingredient binding together the three generations. I cannot speak to how the top and bottom layers of the sandwich viewed this metaphor, but at the time I don’t recall much grumbling from either our parents or our kids.

My wife and I indeed spent much time and energy making sure our parents lived safely and securely through the ends of their lives. And we did our best to make sure our children were well-positioned to be independent, responsible, ethical young people. We served these roles reasonably well, though in retrospect we certainly could have done some things differently. But we provided the best support we could.

*    *    *

Today, Boomers can no longer be called the Sandwich Generation. For most of us, our parents have passed on, so we are no longer responsible for their well-being. And our children are mostly – with a few significant caveats – off on their own. At least they don’t require, and certainly do not want, parental guidance or advice.

So have we bequeathed the Sandwich Generation role to Gen X and Millennials? Not exactly. Today’s reality is more complex. To begin with, many Boomers are still reasonably self-sufficient. Yes, we have accumulating health problems and other challenges, but most of us can still manage our lives without supervision or support from our children. Most of us have not yet assumed our role as the top slice of bread.

Another way the sandwich concept falters is that many of the children of the Boomer generation still need help from their parents. This is not a critique of younger folks. It is rather a reflection of the difficulties our society and economy have created for younger generations. These problems often require us to support our children in a number of ways.

High-quality childcare is hard to find and tends to be expensive, so many of us spend significant time babysitting grandchildren. Some evidence suggests that Boomers spend more time babysitting grandchildren than did previous generations. This is partly because, compared to our parents’ generation, we tend to live longer and are in generally better health. Simply put, we have more time and energy available for babysitting than our forebears. We take on this responsibility willingly and are rewarded with love beyond measure.

Boomers often continue to provide their children financial support. Again, this is not a criticism. Today’s economic reality tends to make it harder for young people to generate enough income to pay for food, housing, and all the other expenses of daily living. Real incomes have dropped for many jobs compared to the mid-20^th Century. And costs of living are higher. It is true that many Boomers also live with financial insecurity. But many others are in a position to help their children financially.

Nowadays, Boomers also open our homes to our kids more often than was the case in the past. For a variety of reasons, our children often find themselves in the position of needing to move back home for periods of time.

All these situations represent a major change from when we were in the workforce. When we Boomers were in our prime working years, we tended to be financially better off than our parents had been when they were working. And we also tended to be better off in that stage of life than our kids are today in their prime working years.

*    *    *

Where does this leave things with the Sandwich Generation concept? My proposal is to start identifying Boomers as the Open-Faced Sandwich Generation. We no longer have responsibility for the top slices of bread. But we still have a fair amount of responsibility for the lower slices. I feel this open-faced sandwich metaphor accurately describes many, though not all, Boomers.

But it is a transitory image. We Boomers are growing older each year. I have little doubt we will all soon become top slices of bread. My personal challenge, when that time comes, will be deciding whether to see myself as pumpernickel or sourdough.

*    *    *

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to be notified of future posts. Subscriptions are free.

October 2023

By Richard Fleming

Photo courtesy of Jaredd Craig

According to some experts, as we age we tend to read less fiction than when we were younger. Apparently it becomes harder for aging brains to digest novels so we increasingly turn to non-fiction when we read. (I am not addressing the situation of people with dementia or pre-dementia in this post. My focus is on old people with our usual, run-of-the-mill aging brains.)

This phenomenon is not tied to old folks reading less. Actually, older people tend to read for pleasure more than younger folks. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 38% of people over age 65 read for pleasure on any given day, more than any other age group. And we spend more time reading than younger folks, an average of one hour and 47 minutes on the days we do read. In every age group, women read more than men, which I do not find surprising.

But why are old folks reading less fiction than we used to? It seems to stem from our memory losing efficiency. As our brains age, we tend to have increasing trouble with short-term memory and working memory. Short-term memory is how we remember recently acquired information. Working memory is what enables us to understand and process interactions among people or things.

Reading fiction requires keeping track of a variety of characters engaged in various activities over several hundred pages. Finding enjoyment in this activity clearly relies on the efficient functioning of both short-term and working memory. We need to remember the personality, background, and motivations of the character we met on page 17 to understand why he fell in love with a character from page 112, then betrayed her on page 248, and finally received his comeuppance on page 280. When our short-term and working memory functions are getting rusty, novels can generate more confusion than pleasure.

Non-fiction appears to be more digestible for oldsters. It is often grounded in people and events we are already familiar with and have known about for years. So it is easier for us to stay oriented in time and space when reading about history, politics, culture, or social issues.

What are the implications of our changing reading habits? On the one hand, I think it is great that older readers are interested in learning more about the world we live in, leading us to consume more non-fiction. But I’m also concerned that reading fewer novels may not only be a symptom of our faltering memories but may also contribute to a withering of the elderly imagination. Reading fiction is such a powerful stimulus to creative thinking. The last thing we old folks need is for our brains to ossify even more rapidly.

I’m trying my best to keep novelists employed by buying interesting fiction on a regular basis. But there is one problem with this economic stimulus package. The stack of books next to my bed continues growing higher since my consumption of novels is not keeping pace with my acquisition of them.

I’m finding reading novels does seem more time-consuming these days. Ten years ago I zipped through Cormac McCarthy’s The Road in five days. The themes of this novel occasionally percolate in my mind, confirming the power of great fiction to stimulate thinking. When McCarthy died this past June, it made me want to read another of his works. I headed to Bookshop Benicia and bought a copy of All The Pretty Horses. I finally started it a couple of weeks ago, and I have to say it is a rough slog for me. It is difficult to keep up with the characters and the story, and I’m only a hundred pages in. I’m trying to decide whether my turtle’s pace through this book is because I’m ten years older than the last time I read McCarthy. Or is the book itself denser and more obscure? I am enjoying the read, sort of, and intend to finish the book before Halloween. Hopefully.

Interestingly, I can still briskly zip through books on politics, the environment, health care, and economics. I don’t seem to struggle with remembering who Reagan or Carter were. The decades-long accumulation of scientific research on global warming is not a big reach to retain in memory. So maybe my experience confirms the theory that seniors have more trouble reading fiction.

While we’re on the subject of old people reading, a corollary question is whether more reading helps preserve or even enhance our cognitive abilities as we age. The evidence is mixed. One study showed that elderly people who read regularly for eight weeks performed better on memory tests than a similar group who worked on puzzles. Another study showed no difference.

But it seems useful for us seniors to read books of any sort, including novels. There has never been a scientific study demonstrating this activity to be harmful. And who knows, if we seniors read more fiction, perhaps we can find more creative ways to make the world a better place.

*    *    *

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to be notified of future posts. Subscriptions are free.