Not with a Boom, With a Whimper

A couple of good reads apropos the comment-fests on the Boomers. First, one from the Times (via Rachel):

It was a time of collective self-importance, which masked — not very effectively — a striking indifference to the way the world actually did and might work. I hardly met a single person in the “underground” context who didn’t, no matter how sexually available or amusing, turn out in the end to be ignorant and rather a bore.

The depths of tedium that can be plumbed by sitting around half stoned, listening to people chatter moonily about reuniting humankind and erasing its aggressive instincts through Love and Dope, are scarcely imaginable to those who have not suffered them.

And the other one, from the incomparable Lileks:

Before the 50s, when there were actual problems like an interminable Depression and Nazis, adolescents were mostly unseen in the culture. You had kids, and you had grown-ups. Adolescents were young grownups, expected to adhere to the same general rules of behavior. It was an adult culture, and adolescents were the interns. The culture would tolerate some things like Bobby Soxers, but with wry eye-rolling amusement. After the war, though, the adolescent was not only the focus of the culture’s attention, he was taken seriously. He was an inarticulate oracle, a mumbling sage, a jeering jester with a switchblade. One of the dumbest lines in cinema is one of the most famous: asked what he’s rebelling against, Marlin Brando’s character in the “The Wild Ones” says “Whaddya got?”

Oh, I don’t know. The Pure Food Act, antibiotics, an industrial infrastructure that makes it possible for you to ride your bikes around, paved roads, a foreseeable successful conclusion to rural electrification, sewers, the ability to walk into any small café and order a Coke and know you won’t be squitting your guts out 12 hours later into a hole in the ground alive with squishy invertebrates. Little things.

Someone please tell me why Lileks is not writing for the NYT.

Finding Your Target

Well that last post generated a lot of heat, both pro and con. I think that the point I was leading towards got a little lost in the shuffle, but it sure was interesting to see the split within the Boomers reflected in the contents, which gets at the way I look at the generational divide.

One of the issues that I think Ginny was hinting around (I don’t want to put words in her mouth, but I think she’ll correct me if I’m wrong) is that the Boomers are not homogenous in any way shape or form. No generation is. A lot of the vitriol directed at the Boomers (including my own) is really not deserved by an awful large percentage of that group. As I said, the Boomer scientists (and some of the middle managers) I work with are not in the way – they are some of the best of what that generation has to offer. What no one asked about the “goals” survey was – what were the demographics? Were the respondents upper-middle and upper class kids in the 1960s, the very same ones who threatened to change the world? Or were the respondents mostly working class kids who went to, or were at risk to going to, SEA? The inward looking goals, the desire to travel after a lifetime of manual labor, might not sound so bad to Gen X ears coming out of the latter.

Read more

Ka-Boom

Ginny’s post got me to thinking about what exactly is a Baby Boomer. As she pointed out, a lot of people’s visceral reaction to those Boomer late-life goals are due to the very inward looking nature, given that generation’s hubris and threats to change the world (for the worse, in hindsight). Us Gen Xers take great delight in pointing out the hypocrisy there, but really, how much of that generation fits our stereotypical Boomer image? There is a very large core group that does, but there are significantly large minorities in that generation who do not fit the stereotype of the narcissistic leftist. None of the Boomers I work with fit in that mold, but then they are all scientists. When we talk about generational characteristics and how they impact society, we have to put our prejudices aside and look at what is true, rather than what we’d like to be true.

Read more

True, False, or Bloody Stupid*?

Ginny dredged up a lot of bad memories here from when I descended into the valley of the shadow of idiocy in grad school. At one point I wanted to go for a dual Ph.D. in Slavic Linguistics / Literature (I hadn�t decided which) and Physical Chemistry, the idea being to get a job teaching both subjects at a small school. Don�t laugh. I got better (in the mental health sense). I dropped the humanities classes and got an MBA instead.

Read more