Saw this in today’s NY Times and it got me thinking – what is a ‘generation x’ anyway?
First, there are a lot of big words in the first few sentences and beyond. Far be it from me to castigate anyone about using an overabundance of enormous, hyperpretentious and likely overreaching words when a simple piece of profanity will otherwise do – there are still many I don’t understand in here.
It reminds me of an otherwise horrible book about Smashing Pumpkins (the band I like, Billy Corgan, a.k.a. Bat Boy, I can do without) that had so many big words rammed into the first 5 pages I couldn’t even finish the foreword without retching – back to the library (and for once, on time!) it went.
but back to the article. I will have to look at the underlying book they are indirectly reviewing here – ‘The Ask‘ – never heard of it or the author. But then they mention the much-despised (by me) Douglas Coupland who coined ‘generation x’ in the first place. Thanks, El Doo-shay – we’ll never live that one down. I had a roommate in college who was obsessed with that book, which naturally I read at one point and have loathed ever since.
What’s very spot-on in this article is the repeated slams on our aging 40-something sense of cool (“fake-vintage rock ’n’ roll T-shirt and thick-framed glasses”), the constant need for pop-culture-quip-meets-relevance in our daily conversations, and calling out John Cusack and Ben Stiller as movie archetypes of our generation. There are others, but these will serve quite well (and Lloyd Dobler loved Fishbone, so there!). I haven’t seen Greenberg yet, but will definitely have to now.
Also – the article implies/hints at the marked difference between compatriots of mine who have had children (and thus, being responsible adults, had their priorities completely adjusted for them by reality) rather than the self-indulgent ‘high drama’ I seem to have mastered of late. Or maybe not of late – maybe for way too long? Dunno.
this quote is telling:
“But what if you never gave up adolescence in the first place? What if you donned the binding garment of maturity only tentatively, and accessorized it with mockery, as if it were a hand-me-down from Grandpa or an ugly shirt plucked from a used-clothing rack? And what if, from the start, your youthful rebelliousness had been a secondhand entitlement, without a clear adversary?”
As someone who still revels in ‘sticking it to the Man’ (regardless of what form, major or minor, that takes, even if only a delusional metaphor many days) this sticks pretty well. If you are middle class, grew up in a suburban-style town, went to public school, went to college, etc. and now have a job that pays the bills – barring chronic illness or some sort of major tragedy – what do you have to bitch about? So where’s my ‘adversary?’ I’m not going to answer that, if you’ve been around me more than 10 min. you already know at least one 
– but one thing is certain – even in going to graduate school, i’ve never connected with ‘suit society’ – and it’s only due to luck (being in the tech industry with its -shall we say ‘loose’ – theories of proper dress and hygiene) that i’ve largely avoided it as an adult. Being on the West Coast doesn’t hurt either. So maybe I never did grow up? Again, dunno.
Is this rambling getting anywhere? Back to the article – in talking more about the main character of The Ask – this quote sums it all up, doesn’t it?
……“If I were the protagonist of a book or a movie,” Milo says to his onetime boss, “it would be hard to like me, to identify with me, to like me, right?” The response is devastating: “I would never read a book like that, Milo, and I can’t think of anyone who would. There’s no reason for it.”
Wow. the above reminds me of Woody Allen’s classic Annie Hall quote about his relationships “I would never want to belong to any club that would have someone like me for a member.” Boom!!!! or the more modern version, from the (other) spokesman for our generation, Homer Simpson – and his attempts when a kid to join the ‘No Homers Club’ – Sad, but effective use of plurals, that.
What was the original point again? That someone wrote a book summing up ‘modern 40-something’ – yet most of us it describes don’t want to read it? Or that we are simply beginning to reach the midlife angst felt by others before (and will be felt by ‘millenials’ someday – ha – suck it!) and we 40.x still can’t deal with it.
Who knows? Interesting to ponder, though. And for those in the same age group who parade around like they’ve got it figured out – ha! I fart in your general direction! Your mother is a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries! The point is, they’re kidding themselves too – which based on the Bill Watterson book I literally just finished reading – gives me that evil, evil Calvin grin…muhhahaha!
So in summary, if you can find real meaning in the above, I have some beach property in Tibet that I’ll sell you for a song…
candybowl
