In Praise Of Grumpiness

According to the American Psychological Association, the image of "grumpy old men and women" is really a myth. A recent University of California at Irvine study is only the latest to indicate that older people forget unpleasant images more quickly than pleasant ones, while people under thirty remember more negative ones. I was surprised by these results, because I have many negative images in my memory, and I'm definitely over thirty. Maybe I'm just young at heart.

Psychologists have concluded that older people are so aware of the fragility and shortness of life that they don't waste their time concentrating on negative things. They suggest that as we get older, we do what the old song says, and "accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative."

If this is true, why are people still not talking to that relative who slighted them years ago? Why are they complaining about that rude waitress they had that one summer? Why are they describing their labor pains that were worse than anything women experience today?

It seems to me that there are positive and negative people of all ages. Those of us over thirty should be insulted by the conclusions of the study. Don't ever sell us short. We are just as capable of being negative as young people.

In the study, psychologists showed subjects three categories of photographs — positive, negative, and neutral. A "positive" image showed a man and a young boy at the beach, watching seagulls overhead. A "negative" image showed a couple in a cemetery looking at a tombstone. And a "neutral" image showed scuba divers checking their gear by the side of a dock.

Maybe the researchers were all young people, because I don't evaluate these images the same way. If I saw a picture of a man and a boy at the beach watching seagulls overhead, I'd say that was negative. I'd assume that, any minute, they will be doused by those pesky seagulls. And why is an image of two people in a cemetery necessarily negative? It could be a very loving, moving experience. And I wouldn't consider scuba divers checking their gear before they go in the water as "neutral." We don't know how recently those divers ate lunch.

The psychologists seem to assume that being negative is bad or, well, negative. Not necessarily. Just think of the columns I'd have to write if I were completely positive:

"Hillary Clinton Has No Agenda" — It is completely logical and not hypocritical at all for Senator Clinton to simultaneously put out her autobiography while telling the world she's a "very private person."

"George W. Bush Really Needed To Fly In That Jet" — Obviously, there was no thought whatsoever to publicity when the President landed dramatically on that aircraft carrier.

"Most Things On TV Are Great" — "Reality" romance shows about superficial men and women deceiving each other are not only entertaining, but enlightening.

And who is in a better position to be constructively negative — a young person or somebody with experience being negative? I don't have a Ph.D. in psychology, but the fact that I'm being so negative about the study casts doubt on the study's conclusions. They are saying that older people are more likely to see the glass as half full, rather than half empty. I'm saying that everybody is different, and when I see the glass, I don't see it as half full or half empty. I see it as something that I'm probably going to spill all over myself.

By Lloyd Garver