Is the State responsible for entertaining the elderly?
Professor of Philosophy Lars Svendsen, author of the bestseller Kjedsomhetens filosofi [Philosophy of Boredom] (1999), said that boredom, in its simplest sense, was the "privilege of modern man"; this "modern man" being the representation of the upper-class European who had enough wealth to be exempted from the obligations of manual labour and who had a lot of free time. It was not until the middle of the last century that this experience was democratised as a result of the gain in leisure time resulting from the empowerment of the proletariat and the consummation of the welfare state in Europe. Since then, boredom is no longer considered the privilege of a few, but a plague or an epidemic affecting many, as thinkers such as Hans Blumenberg or Walter Benjamin warned from the Germanic country, and others such as Henri Lefebvre from neighbouring France.
The spread of boredom in developed countries is accompanied by a series of risks which researchers have been trying to make visible for decades and which I have outlined in my book The Disease of Boredom, which is soon to be published. Boredom is associated with
a) mood disorders such as anger or rage, disaffection, apathy, depression, anxiety, stress or alexithymia;
(b) behavioural disorders such as suicide, crime and delinquency, rebelliousness and provocation, bestiality, impulsivity, reckless driving or addictions to drugs, sex, gambling, the Internet, mobile devices, eating disorders or problems in the work and school environment;
(c) personality disorders such as hysteria, narcissism or pathological states of self-awareness, identity and introspection;
d) mental illnesses such as psychosis, schizophrenia, paranoia, Alzheimer's disease, Asperger's syndrome or bipolar disorder, among many others.
In view of the potential global health problem that can be caused by suffering from a chronic state of boredom at a generalised level, an infinite number of corrective measures have been created as part of the machinery that offers constant and often mediated entertainment from childhood to maturity. But there is a sector of the population, the one that curiously is most affected by boredom and its associated problems, for which the entertainment monster has hardly thought of anything: the elderly.
The elderly are the most common victims of boredom, in their case also related to agitation and nervousness, sleep disorders, decreased functional skills, loneliness and disinterest in the outside world, as I explained in a previous post. However, in them the factory of dreams and aspirations that keeps us entertained all the time has hardly stopped. This can be clearly seen when we pay attention to how the leisure market addresses the elderly and what marketing strategies are used to attract this age group which is wrongly considered to be residual, with little purchasing power or interest in entertainment consumption.
The private business world has not yet been able to fully understand the advantages for all stakeholders of making the demand for leisure by the elderly profitable, as it has for children, young people and adults. It has not fully realised that boredom today is the privilege of many pensioners. And it is entirely within its rights to ignore the issue that there is a large target waiting to be conquered. However, if the shortage of entertainment offers, translated into an increase in the experience of boredom, can bring about such health problems, should not the State take more of a stand and take more responsibility when it comes to entertaining the elderly in order to prevent boredom from jeopardising the well-being of the elderly?
This question came to my mind during one of my interviews with retirees for this blog. Talking to Patricia, a former high school teacher who is now 69 years old, I confirmed again my suspicion that public institutions still need to improve a lot in the area of personalised attention to the particular situation of many elderly people. This British woman, who has been living in our country for years, explained to me in detail what to expect from the elderly in terms of leisure activities offered and managed by the public and private sectors. Since she retired, she has dedicated herself to the community, holding a political position that allows her to be very aware of the issue and she is very convinced that the State already does everything in its power to alleviate boredom in old age. Let's see if this is really the case.
In our conversation, Patricia told me that the Regional Ministry of Culture receives many offers of entertainment both from the public sector (IMSERSO, social services, employment and training service, etc.) and the private sector, and that it channels them to the elderly through the Municipal Boards. With regard to the latter, the list includes activities mainly related to the arts (music, choir, theatre, restoration, painting, sculpture, crafts, macramé) and sport (gentle hiking, excursions). As far as the public is concerned, she herself acknowledges from the outset that things are more limited and that many of the activities on offer correspond to the typical cliché or stereotype of what older people like. We are talking about training courses, board games, folk dances, book clubs, trips for retired people... So far we are where we always are. Whether or not this offer is sufficient can of course be discussed, and to determine this there would be no choice but to ask the consumers themselves, which is not done.
How does the administration make these offers available to the elderly? This is another question that I have been addressing in my interviews. As Patricia tells me, the main channel is the web; even the registrations for these activities are usually done through the internet. Here we already have the first handicap, which the social and political agents try to solve through the traditional method of advertising that is the posters placed in areas frequented by the elderly: the health centre, the cultural centre, the library, the auditorium, the supply premises, the pharmacy, the senior citizens' club... Again, is this enough? The interviewee herself suggests that it is not. What happens to elderly people with reduced mobility who hardly ever leave their homes?
In these cases, older people who are interested in receiving more personalised offers that are tailored to their needs and limitations can ask for guidance from the responsible institutions. Well, that's great, of course. But Patricia unwittingly admits that there are many factors that stand in the way of taking such a step. One of them is gender. Women, she says, "are much more driven forward" than men, who are often afraid of what is new or wrong and embarrassed to embark on collective activities. The demand for information and participation in leisure activities is usually marked by women, who sometimes "drag" their husbands along with them.
Another is education or cultural level. Patricia thinks that the most vulnerable in this respect are usually "less worried about embarking on activities, but they are also less bored because they are used to being inactive and content with watching television for long hours". This is a myth that I have previously debunked: the absence of cultural curiosity does not mean that you are free from boredom - quite the contrary! It is precisely these people, who do not feel the natural call to participate in many activities because they are unaware of the potential pleasures of culture, who demand the most personalised attention from us.
What happens to the profiles that are most reluctant to embrace the path of meaningful entertainment? How can we help them to manage boredom from the institutions? For Patricia, at this point the social and political agents are no longer willing. There is no way to make personalised proposals available to older people who are not interested in them, even if the supposed lack of interest is linked to fear, shame, a personality that is said to be not very curious, or if leaving these people to their own devices with their boredom has harmful effects on their health. "The state has to offer and the individual has to accept and seek. If the individual does not seek the state, he or she cannot do more," says the interviewee. Is there really no way to address this problem more directly if it is not the eldest who takes the initiative to seek help? When it comes to physical or mental health problems related to dependency, and even other scourges such as loneliness or hopelessness, we take it very seriously and make everything we can available to the elderly. But this is not the case with boredom, despite being aware of the risks involved in their experience. Are we?
In the times to which Svendsen refers, something like an old age forgotten by the leisure sector and susceptible to illness or worsening of physical and mental health conditions due to the absence of significant entertainment did not exist. Now we live with this reality and we cannot look the other way. In a health care system like ours, which boasts of being among the best in Europe and the world thanks to public funding, my answer to the question that opens this post is a resounding yes. If boredom is a public health issue, especially for the elderly, our state is responsible for ensuring that entertainment options reach everyone; even those who are most invisible.
