So Far, Articles Attacking Our Generation Are Classist and Misinformed

Whoever smelt it, dealt it.

The New York Times spends so much time depicting my generation as status-obsessed, self-esteem-seeking rubes one get’s the impression there’s the slightest case of psychological projection at play. Continuing the tradition of “What Is It About 20-Somethings?" and plagiarism generation,  comes this editorialized reportage.

The Times tries to play it straight, telling its readers a recent study suggests young people prefer a boost to their ego, in the form of a compliment or a high grade, than enjoying standard pleasure makers like food and sex. But the findings aren’t an insight into the machinations of young adults—they deal squarely with college students.

That doesn’t stop the article from ascribing the preferences of a select few college students to the attitudes of the entire young adult population. Which shouldn’t be all too surprising—trashing the young is a meme that isn’t likely to slow down. Less than 40 percent of young adults aged 18-24 were enrolled in some form of higher learning in 2009; unless we’re talking about Pakistan’s parliament, a minority should not represent the majority.

Campus Progress staffers have their theories on why this phenomenon of pigeonholing the young won’t let up. When queried, Micah Uetricht poses his answer in the form of two questions: “Are young people addicted to feeling good about themselves? Are middle-aged researchers and journalists addicted to writing half-cooked academic papers, articles, and books trashing Milennials to further their careers?"

Nicolas Mendoza quips, “clearly the solution is Chinese mothers for everyone.”

To the various pieces that suggest “the irresponsible, hedonistic egocentricity of "millenials," Ryan Brown says, “enough already.”

Dissecting the young is nothing new. 1904’s Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education,written by psychologist G. Stanley Hall, described the teen as essentially fractured, full of "storm and stress" and burdened by conflicting impulses. His analysis was the first serious scientific foray into youth’s struggle of transitioning into adulthood. Hall likened it to a "Rousseauian struggle between natural youth striving to retain primitive instincts and a civilized adult world excessively reticent in its passions and creativity.” Critics in the 1920s lamented many adults past their 25^th year still behaved like adolescents. Apparently, America embodied this petulance as a whole; John Lennon said in a 1966 interview: “America used to be the big youth place in everybody’s imagination. America had teenagers and everywhere else just had people.”

In general though, the studies and pieces that try to pinpoint the absurdity of the young are not only misguided, they’re classist. But I’m also afraid the writers publishing them got their inspiration from the sort of liberal arts education many of us in the business underwent. Is bashing the young while only taking a gander at its elite a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Lessons from the 20^th century seem to answer in the affirmative. The spokespersons for the young we studied tend to occupy the upper rungs. Gertrude Stein, wealthy, called the emerging writers of the 20s the “Lost Generation,”—that collection of artists I’m sure many young scribes sought to emulate in their first year in college. They were wealthy, too. Under siege by the existential weight of post-war America sounds unpleasant, but that doesn’t really chafe at working class people who have more material concerns, like, will there be money for dinner? If you were like 30 percent of the population and a farmer in the 20s, you’d ask, “why are my crops selling at such a low price, I can’t pay my mortgage?” There wasn’t too much roaring for nearly half of America back then.

The distance between rich and poor, the concentration of wealth, are back to 20s levels. And like today, those cultural critics were of the rich, commenting on the denigration of the young, who were also rich.

Though, those generational encounters offer good laughs. After a very drunk F. Scott Fitzgerald tried to embarrass Edith Wharton at one of her famous tea parties by telling a story of a lost couple finding shelter in a bordello, she states at the end, "you haven't told us what they did in the bordello.” She described the encounter in her diary as “awful.”

Here’s the rub—with fewer job openings today, we do have to tread adulthood differently. It’s a brave new world, and maybe what researchers point to as self-absorption is really the anxiety of realizing there are suddenly far fewer light posts along the way. Brother can you spare a job? Brother can you spare a livable wage? Can college not cost so much?

Memo to researchers and cultural critics going forward: stop viewing the behavior of the young as something peculiar, and please oh please take it for what it is—a coping mechanism. We’re happy to hear advice on how to deal. Until then, don’t knock the hustle.

Mikhail Zinshteyn is a staff writer for Campus Progress. You can e-mail him at mzinshteyn@googlemail.com.

Related Stories

• REPORTS: How A Stafford Increase Would Impact Your State
• VIDEO: Obama, Students Tell Congress: #DontDoubleMyRate
• Obama Targets For-Profit College’s Predatory Recruiting of Service Members, Veterans
• GOP Proposes Cuts In Prevention To Keep Student Loan Interest Rates From Doubling
• During President Obama’s Visit, UNC Students Discuss #DontDoubleMyRate