Retrospective Aging

Carl Sagan, with his youthful appearance, prompted an intriguing reflection on the deceptive nature of age, as evidenced by old high school yearbooks showcasing seemingly mature teenagers. The question arose: did people genuinely appear older in the past, or was it an illusion fueled by selective examples, fostering a nostalgic view of a tougher era? This phenomenon was dubbed "retrospective aging," a perception that people appeared more grown-up at a younger age than they do now.

To explore this notion, Brandon McCarthy's inquiry on Twitter triggered a flood of responses, with individuals sharing photos of their parents in their early twenties, highlighting the contrast between generations. The discourse expanded to encompass footballers from bygone eras, with ages like 24, 31, 33, 29, and 27, suggesting a prevailing belief in the idea of retrospective aging. While acknowledging the counter-argument that kids nowadays grow up too fast, the discussion delved into the question's validity and whether it stems from a genuine shift or a romanticized view of the past.

Scientifically, research from Yale and USC shed light on the matter. Comparing measures of various bodily functions across different eras, they found that lifestyle changes, improved nutrition, altered smoking habits, advancements in healthcare, early-life conditions, and enhanced skincare, particularly the use of sunscreen, collectively contributed to humans aging more slowly today. The study suggested that, indeed, 60 could be the new 50, 40 the new 37.5, and 20 the new 19.

The exploration expanded beyond the physical realm to include the impact of dentistry and orthodontics on facial aesthetics over the last century. Contrary to the belief that people looked older in the past, facial features in magazines showed minimal changes, except for an increase in the portrayal of larger lips across all ethnicities. Retroactive aging was also discussed on a personal level, with anecdotes about perceived age differences in high school seniors and the realization that perspectives played a significant role.

Transitioning to the influence of styles and mannerisms, the narrative emphasized the evolving nature of self-expression, affected by clothing, hairstyles, accessories, makeup, language, and body language. While certain modes may resurface, they are never exact replicas, adding to the complexity of retrospective aging. The text posited that what seems old today might be an anachronism, with individuals unintentionally adopting styles reminiscent of the future.

An amusing detour touched upon a purported time traveler from 1941, identified in a photo taken at the reopening of the South Fork bridge in Canada. This mystery highlighted the potential for individuals today unknowingly resembling future fashion, opening the door to whimsically dressing for the possibility of being hailed as a time traveler in the future.

The narrative seamlessly incorporated a sponsorship message before transitioning to the fascinating concept of the face-name matching effect. Research from Millsaps College and Miami University delved into the idea that people associate certain face shapes with specific names. The exploration navigated through prototypical faces for names like Mark, Josh, Bill, Justin, Dan, Brian, Tom, and Andy, demonstrating the intriguing connections between names and facial features.

Drawing parallels to Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray," the discussion introduced the notion of a reverse Dorian Gray effect, proposing that names could influence a person's actual physical appearance. The face-name matching effect was explored further, showcasing studies on occluded faces and heat maps revealing which facial features were most associated with different names.

The narrative gracefully transitioned to the perception of old age, delving into the average age people consider someone as old and the desired age individuals wish to be. It incorporated humor by highlighting that only 21-year-olds are content with their current age. An amusing tangent explored the belief among older individuals that they dream in black and white, potentially influenced by the prevalence of black and white TV in their formative years.

The discussion concluded by contemplating the enigmatic nature of dreams, drawing parallels between dreams and motion pictures. It questioned whether our perception of dreams had been shaped by the evolution of visual media and pondered the elusive essence of dreams – whether they are in color, black and white, or something more abstract.

In a reflective sign-off, the text left the audience with the lingering question: Do you get the picture, or does the picture get you?