"The 'O'-Word' In Action"

I hear the signals, loud(ly) and clear(ly) at a recent dinner with a friend.

“Baseball today is just ‘homers and strikeouts.’”

“Football’s a brain injury waiting for a gurney.”

“There are no movies to see anymore.”

“I am totally off potatoes.”

At that moment, I stop, taking stock of my blizzard of negative pronouncements.  I then proceed to offer a summarizing reaction to those grumbling assertions, which is the following:

“This is what ‘old’ sounds like.”

You may rest assured, 

I was not delighted with that sound.

It’s been happening a lot lately.  Last week, in a single conversation, I heard myself utter four insistent, personal “Do not’s”

“I do not order clothing online.”

“I do not use meal-delivery services.”

“I do not download books onto my cellphone.”

“I do not ‘scan’ signatures on my computer.”

Four adamant “Do not’s”, in, maybe, ten minutes, all of them collectively confirming, 

“I’m old.”

I know I am getting “up there.”

But is it necessary to reiterate that with every action I take?  Or, more specifically, every action I don’t take?

Apparently, it is.

It is very rare that I scrupulously examine an “adjective.”  It’s like studying some particular behavior under a microscope, and going,

“Come here, Watson!  (RE:  THE SLIDE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE)  Do you see that?  I have successfully isolated ‘Old’!”

Consider the magnified “Blow-Up” of a recent personal occurrence:

Owing to Dr. M’s scattershot work schedule, Tuesdays are the only available weeknight we can go out. Tuesday afternoon, I am about to depart for my bi-weekly pedicure appointment (resulting from two troublesome toenails that began suddenly misbehaving after I turned 70.  I just thought you’d like to know about that.)  After deciding to take in a movie that night, I suggest we discuss which film she has found worthy of our attendance after I get back.

I return around four. Rejecting films that are too violent, too depressing, too stupid and too “therapy-oriented” (because “That is not how it works.”), it comes down to a choice between two movies – the Melissa McCarthy movie about a celebrity letter forger – or is it letter forgerer? – and A Star Is Born.

The Melissa McCarthy film, which we are actually interested in, does not work for us “schedule-wise.”  Leaving us A Star Is Born, which is fully acceptable on the standard of “We’ve got to get out of the house”, though scoring less favorably on the grid of “Are we really excited to see it?”

Our facial reactions reveal it all:

“We should probably go out. But A Star Is Born?  Again?”

Shamelessly “punting”, we agree to defer our decision, adopting what turns into a “Three-Step Determining Process.”

Step One:  We agree to put off our decision until after we’ve had dinner.

Step Two: After finishing dinner, we agree to “make the call” after a post-prandial rest.

Step Three:  We confer again after our post-prandial rest…

and we decide not to go.

Surprising neither of us, but disappointing us both.

We got close.  What it ultimately came down to was that A Star Is Born was good enough to see but not good enough to go to.

Perhaps if they made better movies, this wouldn’t have even come up.  But – See:  “Complaint Number 3” – they don’t.

(Rebutting Disclaimer:  The Oxford Experience.  Proving, “If you really, passionately want to do something…”) (But how many of those are there?  {Placed in non-contaminating separateparentheses.}) 

I cannot truthfully blame the movies.  It seem like there is some kind of deliberative “Balancing Act” going on.  You take the amount of physical energy needed to fuel your trip to A Star Is Born for which there is tepid enthusiasm, the “Moment of Truth” arrives, you weigh your level of energy against your honest enthusiasm… 

and you end up watching The Great English Baking Show on your iPad (Dr. M) or reliable Law & Order reruns on TV.  (That would be me.)

I am not fooling myself. I have mirrors and numerous doctors appointments.

I understand where I’m headed.

But do I have to go there so predictably?