not what I called them
When I was a child, I called them "teens". As a teen, I called them "yuppies". As an adult, I refer to them as "Disco kids" or more properly, "the disco kid generation". This is the set of people who came of age in the days of disco, from the mid-seventies (by the time it was properly the seventies and not left overs from the 60s) to the early eighties. They sometimes call themselves babyboomers, and if they were raised in some rurality, odds are they are more properly babyboomerific. But on the whole, there was always something about them which was not quite babyboomer and not quite the same as my generation.
Truly - and I say this after years of experience with this age group and recognizing there are people of that age group who do NOT fit that type - I don't like many of the characteristic traits of this age group. Listing them would be exhausting so I'll try for a summary statement. They are ungodly self-centered. At least the babyboomers had something to be self-centered about. They did try. They made changes. They raised consciousness. Sure, they sometimes can get gloaty or possibly worse, maudlin and bitter, but they came of age at a time when even just acting contrary was having a point. The disco kids? Nah. They tried some of the same shit, the "look at me! I'm different! I'm wearing a denim vest!" approach, the tendency to confuse being contrary with being intellectual for example, but it is stale. Not that this is odd in its proper context. It's a typical adolescent thing to be fascinated with yourself to the point where you believe deeply and unselfconsciously (about the only thing an adolescent is not self-conscious about) that you and your uniqueness are the center of so very many things. What makes the disco kids special, what marks them as a generation for me, is that they never fucking grew out of that.
Needless to say, I don't like them. Working with them is always a chore, and working under them is irritating to the point of a near physical aversion.
Tonight I looked them up. Turns out the fuckers have their own name. Generation Jones. Go figure.
4 comments:
greetings earthling.
i'm sitting here waiting till my hubby goes to sleep before i go to bed. i'm sitting here riddled with guilt about the last comments that i made to him about not respecting his mother's selfish/harmful stance as a member of a family.
i sat outside and felt the guilt for dissin his mummy.
then i read your post.
funnily she is not of my mother's babyboomerific charmlessness. yes, you guessed it: she is of the disco kid generation.
at least the babyboomers can put up
a reasonable (but mindless)argument for their fucked position (concrete-like). the disco dudes just carry on, trudge past and say very little making them seem even more arrogant that the gen that preceded them.
so thanks.
i feel no guilt any longer since reading your definition.
i'm with ya.
Hey D!
It's bad enough having one for a boss, I think one in my family would give me an ulcer.
Interesting... never heard of "generation Jones." My oldest brother was born in '64, so we always called him a boomer, but he obviously doesn't share the traits, challenges, and cultural history of those born in the 50s. Your description isn't too far from what I've observed about him. I think there's something dangerous about coming of age during a time when decadence and self-indulgence are Job 1. He's gay too, so he has this notion that has persisted into his middle 40s that everywhere he goes should be like Studio 54. He lives in a perpetual childhood and relies on others to pay his bills. He's intensely hedonistic and has nursed an addiction to alcohol and cocaine for 20 years. Hey toyed with anorexia because he wanted to be thin for vanity. I love him, but his intense self-centeredness has harmed our relationship. Last year, when I took my 1.5-year-old to visit my family for the first time, he bailed at the last minute and didn't show up, claiming to my parents that he was sleeping and never heard their four phone calls. The truth went unspoken: he was either still high or hungover, and didn't want to make an appearance. I'd hesitate to generalize to an entire demi-generation of people, especially because many of my colleagues were born in the very early 60s and are responsible, giving adults, but the Gen Jones description certainly seems to apply to my brother.
WW, I know it's a big generalization. I was just talking to a friend of mine this weekend who is quite firmly in this age group and who said "So what is it do you think made it so I didn't turn out that way?" because she really quite obviously didn't. Every set has its more and less canonical members. Not all members of a set share all properties of the set as a whole. There's a term for that...decompositionality? I suppose if that is the right word, this would actually be "non"decompositionality.
Many of your colleagues are responsible, giving adults? So tell me, do the responsible, giving faculty members ride unicorns to work? (I kid! I kid! Seriously, good for you for sticking it out or having the luck to find these rare beings)
Post a Comment