The current generational model that many pop-sociologists, newspaper columnists and marketers cling to may be a convenient framework, but it is one that is not fit for purpose in an ever shrinking and ever fracturing and more complex world. The most robust academic work in the field, the grandly titled Strauss-Howe generational model is, even to its champions, an Anglo-American-centric tool for historical framing and to its critics, a vast generalization with little empirical evidence to support its core thesis. As appetizing as an academic deep-dive on this may be, I shall limit this to thinking about recent generations and their utility (or otherwise) as a tool for understanding people, cultures from a brand perspective
The idea of these 20-year monocultural blocks in human time was born out of the post war baby-boom, particularly in the united states and were the beneficiaries of the post-war American high, rapid growth of mass culture and mass consumerism as well as a marked increase in living standards and leisure time. They were also the first group to be dissected from the outside by marketers, and in many respects it the reinforcing messages made the idea of a ‘generation’ and its particular spirit and outlook a self-fulfilling prophecy.
That the ‘boomers’ and then after, the Gen-Xer, in the US were the two most convincingly coherent cohorts and that may be no coincidence, not just because they were researched, written about and sold to in a way that molded them into a coherent whole, but also, economically speaking, in the west, they were more ‘whole’. On the ‘soft side’ you have a golden age of mass broadcast media and on the hard side you have, what is in the long history of pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial capitalism an anomaly – a decrease in inequality. Now, not to get all Piketty about it, but with good working class wages and earnings doing better than assets, there was a chance for people of the same age across a broadly similar cultural backdrop to have similar experiences, and similar possibilities open to them, socially, professionally, educationally. Historically, this is a aberration, as the young country squire and the young peasant would have never felt part of a similar generational identity, but with decreasingly inequality, relative prosperity, mass media and a world that still felt big and un-PC enough to forget about those defined as the ‘other’ – non-capitalist, non-white, non-EU/US, we could lull ourselves into thinking that this was a world where neat 20-year blocks of people could be in it together.
Of course if we had of take a global view in the 70s when the idea of the ‘boomer’ the first marketable generation was being popularized we may have seen the fallacy of that, but we didn’t, it stuck and now in an ever shrinking world we can somehow post-rationalize the theory because we all have smartphones. Of course, we cant, and in fact, everyone doesn’t have a smartphone at all. The world is smaller for those who can afford to shrink it, which is a self-selecting and self-confirming sample. The reality is, birth year is a very poor proxy. A 24 year old urban Jakartan vs. a 24 year old in an agricultural area of Sumatra will be very different. The Jakartan may have a lot in common with a 24 year old in downtown Sao Paulo, but likewise he may have with a digitally saavy 53 year old in Berlin. Likewise the our son or daughter of the soil in Sumatra might have more in common with a middle aged Bavarian farmer.
An age based- monocultural theory works in a monoculture, as the post-war US was to a large extent ( god forbid anyone do anything as pluralistic as declare themselves a socialist, or be black and ask for rights, for that matter) but so the what was age acting as a proxy for in that self-selecting blinkered process. What are some of the key axes, the indicators that can allow us to start forming some useful cohorts, that we can map against populations?
Urban vs Rural
A key indicator, which has a huge bearing on your views, outlook and interaction with the world – shapes the kind of influences that you are expose to, the amount of risk and reward available to you and the kind of stimulus you have to shape your view. A rapidly urbanizing world offers us a dangerous confirmation bias to the idea of homogenous aged-based international cohorts…
Which itself acts as a proxy for many things, including affluence and even more strongly, political inclination – the higher your educational attainment, generally the more liberal you lean, at least within the normative framework for your cultures political spectrum
Key Life stage Markers
Another where Age was a useful proxy, but longer, less linear lives and changes in aspiration (when it comes to kids and settling down) and hard headed reality, especially when it comes to urban housing mean that it is not an accurate or useful global proxy any more)
Marriage, parenthood and Home/property ownership are all massive deciding factors shaping someone outlook and view. Where many of the western-centric generalizations about Millennials fall down in Asia is that it fails to remember how much younger people still have children and that, particularly in less equal, more patriarchal skewed set-ups, as 24 year old without a child is more different to a 24 year old with than she is to a 40 year old without
One that,, if Google and many over tech utopians have their way, will eventually disappear as a discerning factor, but the reality is that globally we are not yet at a stage when this can be disregarded. Access is uneven, can be patchy and often for many as a proportion of income (another key factor) too expensive to be ‘always on’
Optimistics vs. pessimistic
How do you see our future? How do you see the world? Naturally this will be influenced by any number of things, but it is important to take into account. There are many with huge advantages in developed nations who are negative in their worldview, and the converse is true in many more difficult to live in cultures and situations. The importance of outlook should not be overlooked
Of course, taking a mapping based on these, you would expect to see age, driving certain clusters in certain countries, but interesting to see is how that matched up against other groups else way. A Vietnamese urban 20-something might really tally with an affluent, upbeat suburban boomer on America’s east coast…!
Of course the danger here is veering in the opposite direction, but the point is we must realize that time and age are a poor proxy and no guarantee of some kind of universal human generational experience
This is long overdue. Apologies for lack of updates. Note to self- blog little and often…!
This summer as festival season has descended upon us once more, these events continue to become more and more mainstream. Something dropped into place for me though this year, indicating how I believe this works as part of a wider and stranger phenomenon. Every year, for the past half decade at least, summer festivals have become a mainstay of the Sunday supplements. Columnist well north of 30 obsess over line-ups, this years ‘hot’ festival fashions, camping essentials (not necessarily in that order) and every weekend paper feels obliged, come late May, to publish a festival pull-out. The cost of these events continues to rise, pricing out much of the youth that these events were intended for. Unless you go with your parents…
Christa d’Souza declares herself earlier this year in the Guardian as ‘ageorexic’, Madonna parties with her daughter Lourdes, and I once gatecrashed a party in Paris in 2006 where both Jade and Mick were cutting a rug until the small hours, but this is an occurrence not confined to celebrity. I have thrice this summer seen ‘tweenage’ sons skateboarding or BMXing with 30-something fathers, both dressed in baggy cargo pants or shorts, wearing short-sleeved over long-sleeved t-shirts. The celebration of the cult of youth that we have seen increase ever since the ‘creation’ of the teenager with the extension of secondary education after the second world war, as well as, in the US where it was born, a huge rise in the affluence of families and the available of consumer goods. Youth culture brought the wider world rock and roll, or punk, or goth, or any number of youth sub-cultures which the adult world has at once celebrated and reviled. But now we are faced with a situation where the mainstream is not repelled, only enthralled. New parents in their late 30s wait until their toddlers go to bed on a Friday night to get some friends round, crack out the MDMA and get mashed. They listen to the same music as 15 year-olds and can afford to go to more gigs, buy more MP3s and attend more festivals.
If youth subculture has become popular culture, what is left to the youth as their own. This youth culture that has just become culture is not the whole picture. Previously, any trend that was counter-cultural had to find outlets on the ragged edge of mainstream culture, because recording a single was expensive, running a radio station needed some serious hardware, and, technically, a license. The barrier to entry is so much less, that artists and trends need only become popular in one small group, often a highly localise geo-cultural nexus. The Hackney grime scene, at least as it was nearly a decade ago, is one such example, but again this got mainstreamed. Electro? The mash-up phenomenon? All these got mainlined into the multi-channel television, national radio, Sunday supplements. So what are the current youth trends, the genuine sub-cultures that aren’t being listened to by these kids’ parents? ( And ‘these kids’ are only the most determined, who haven’t given up in the face of the financial clout, and determination to stay young being led by their GenXer parents) I don’t know, but I give it a few weeks before I will on the front few pages of the Guardian guide…