@$:[AT]bodyindent:Is it really the worst way to look?Almost nobody seems to think we made a big mistake by investing humongous amounts of time, money, energy and genius in medical research that lets us stay alive for longer than ever before. Think of all the things we might've achieved instead if we didn't mind dying young: Instead of penicillin, we could have placebos that come with childproof caps that adults could open easily. Instead of angioplasty, we could have computers that don't crash. Instead of chemo, we could have cars that run on something cheaper and more abundant than oil ¿junk mail, say?But no. We were dead-set on staying alive, and now most of us can. Nobody dies of TB at 30 anymore, the way some of our great-great-grandparents did. For the first time in history, most of us have a decent shot at living long enough to experience old age ¿ which we used to aspire to. But now, perversely, instead of flaunting our success, instead of glorying in our long-hoped-for survival into old age, instead of celebrating its barely explored possibilities, we routinely ¿ half the time without even noticing ¿ stigmatise it. Old age is the new leprosy. We fear it. We ridicule it. We don't want to touch it or know about it or have anything to do with it. OK, ageing undeniably has its disadvantages ¿ there's nothing wonderful about wrinkles, arthritis, etc. But, as they say, consider the alternative. And bear in mind that, at least as I remember it, being 20 was also no picnic either ¿ no money, no idea what to do next, no sense of how the world worked. The only reason we aren't terrified of youth is that we aren't getting younger. Naturally, given our visual culture, much of the fear of ageing turns out to be the fear of looking old. Marketing, naturally, does its best to amplify that fear, and channel it into shopping. The number of products that purport to "defy ageing" ¿ as if anything could ¿ is truly amazing. Case in point: "How Not to Look Old," veteran beauty and fashion editor Charla Krupp's new book, is almost certain to be a best seller. (The subtitle is "Fast and Effortless Ways to Look 10 Years Younger, 10 Pounds Lighter, 10 Times Better," but think about it: If it were truly fast and effortless, would it take a whole book to explain??)Much of Krupp's fashion and beauty advice is plausible enough ¿ skip the Joan Crawford-dark lipstick, never buy unflattering clothes, find jeans that fit, etc. But most of it is directed at keeping you from looking clueless, stuffy, fat, boring, out of date, inappropriate, underdressed, overdressed, badly dressed, generally unattractive, etc. ¿ none of which is quite the same as looking old. She promises that readers over 40 who follow her advice will look ten years younger. That's debatable ¿ but it's marketing genius. Last time I checked on Amazon, the book had only been out for a week and was already ranked ninth in sales. Apparently most women are more frightened of looking old than they are of looking badly dressed ¿ or we'd never leave the house in leggings and baggy T-shirts. Conflating looking old with looking bad may sell books, but it's a lie. As you know if you happened to see Julie Christie in "Away From Her". Christie looks old in the movie; she has plenty of wrinkles, and her sturdy, freckled arms reminded me of my grandmother's. She's also radiantly beautiful. She didn't look better in the '60s, only younger. Old isn't necessarily ugly ¿ and being young, in case you haven't noticed, is no guarantee of being beautiful.To assume, even before we get there, that old age is ugly is foolish and damaging. Let's stipulate up front that a lot of getting dressed is and always has been about disguise and pretense. We typically do ourselves up to look ¿ insofar as we can ¿ thinner, richer, cooler, smarter, better connected, etc. than we are, and we don't worry that much about any potential corrosive effects of the transaction. But when you pretend to be something you aren't, you implicitly admit that there's something inadequate, something shameful, about what you are. It can't be healthy to believe that public acceptance ¿ by neighbours, colleagues, boss, grocer, discount drugstore checkout person ¿ depends on your ability to pass for younger than your actual age. You can't believe that without also believing there's something intrinsically wrong/inferior/undesirable/unworthy about being whatever age you are. Imagine if somebody published a style manual for persons of color called "How to Pass for White". It's unthinkable for a couple of reasons. For one, it'd be a public relations disaster on the Imus scale, because it's insulting to imply there's something intrinsically wrong/undesirable/inferior/shameful about not being and looking white. And, anyway, the book wouldn't sell. As Sen. Obama's recent success in Iowa illustrates, Americans don't stigmatise race the way we used to. How many persons of colour would be willing to deny a significant aspect of their identity ¿ and then go to a terrific amount of trouble: new wardrobe, new makeup, demanding maintenance routine, uncomfortable underwear, etc.¿- just to look white? Big whoop. So why is it plausible to assume that getting old ¿ something every single one of us is doing at every single moment of our lives ¿ is so appallingly shameful that every woman over 40 should be willing to jump through hoops to pass for ten years younger than however old she is? Next week: The specifics: How to look your age without looking clueless, stuffy, fat, boring, out of date, inappropriate, underdressed, overdressed, badly dressed, and/or generally unattractive.