The news is abuzz today about Sir Paul McCartney tying a knot for the third time. Good for him! Number two, Heather Mills, obviously didn’t work out too well. His latest, Nancy Shevell, has been a longtime friend of the family. She is independently almost as wealthy as Sir Paul, so no goldiggin’ going on here, folks.
She’s also a young 51. Paul is 69. 18 years difference. At first thought it seems like such an age gap, but then again no. Which is the point of this blog post: the relativity of age.
Thinking about the bride’s age makes me think of my own age, 53. That means that Paul is only 16 years older than me. I find that shocking. Only 16 years. When I was a wee young lad and first discovered the Beatles, they seemed so much older. And at that age, a 15-18 year gap (spanning all the Beatles’ ages) is a huge difference. And so I have always thought the gap as tremendous until today.
But in middle age, 16 years just doesn’t seem like a big difference. Perhaps this is also because my brother-in-law, Dave, just turned 71 (making him the same age as Ringo Starr or John Lennon). I hope to be in as good a shape as Dave is when I get to his age, which I expect will be in better health than I was a year ago. In some ways this makes me feel old, but in others it makes me feel young. It is all relative, isn’t it?
This makes me wonder who the famous people are that are 16 years younger than me. Sure enough there is a web site that lists celebrities by birth year. So here are a few: Christian Bale, Penelope Cruz, Jewel, Alanis Morissette, Hilary Swank, Leo DiCaprio, and Ryan Seacrest.
I share 1958 with the likes of Michael Jackson, Prince, Madonna, Sharon Stone, Kevin Bacon, Alec Baldwin, and Jamie Lee Curtis. Just in case you were curious.
It occurs to me that this blog post was both boring and self-indulgent. But that’s what is so fun about blogging, don’t ya think? :-)