»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Why Are The Boomers
| The Alley |
|
Why Are The Boomers |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. not the greatest generation? http://www.amazon.com/Greatest-Generation-Tom-Brokaw/dp/140 0063140/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213054677&sr=1-1 . |
||
| © Copyright 2008 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Because we're not so competitive, man. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Well. There's always the possibility that Tom Brokaw is wrong. It's not like we're done.  And nods to Bobk--not so competitive? Or not as "ambitious"? Maybe we're not as hungry, or not as focused on common goals because we have so many options now. Maybe the technological revolution has slowed us down to a more contemplative place, even as it rushes communication it also enhances singular creativity with more opportunity for self-promotion. Hmm. I dunno even know why I'm answering this. What's a "boomer?" Am I one? I'll be 47 soon--do I qualify? Karen's confused. Again. |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
quote:Source: Wikipedia. Karen? You are one! |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
We are the greatest based on our humility  ...plus the fact that we introduced Leave It to Beaver, Ozzie and Harriett, Dobie Gillis, television, Elvis, the Beatles and the hula hoop. |
||
Larry C
since 2001-09-10
Posts 10286United States |
Are we supposed to care what other people think? Because if there is one thing I can't tolerate, it's intolerance.  |
||
|
graeshine2006 Member
since 2008-06-03
Posts 368The Prairie Lands, USA |
So what are you if you were born in the late 60's and what is Generation X? And why aren't they great???? Just wondered! |
||
|
Susan Caldwell Member Rara Avis
since 2002-12-27
Posts 8348Florida |
"early 60's" What is the cut off? "too bad ignorance isn't painful" |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
The cutoff is actually 1946. The "boom" was supposed to have occurred when hundreds of thousands of soldiers returned home at the end of the war to satisfy the intimate demands of their long-awaiting significant others. That was in 1945. Nine more months or so takes you into 1946. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Balladeer: "The cutoff is actually 1946. The "boom" was supposed to have occurred when hundreds of thousands of soldiers returned home at the end of the war to satisfy the intimate demands of their long-awaiting significant others. That was in 1945. Nine more months or so takes you into 1946." Not even technically true, since soldiers did not return from overseas until 1946, and not all went the rabbit route immediately. and:..."plus the fact that we introduced Leave It to Beaver, Ozzie and Harriett, Dobie Gillis, television, Elvis, the Beatles and the hula hoop." Again, off the mark. Start with Elvis: He was born in 1935, and first recorded in 1953. By your definitions, boomers would have been six years old at the time. Ozzie and Harriet first aired in 1952, Beaver in 1957, etc. These funny, family oriented shows were are WRITTEN, which gets forgotten, by people born in the 20's and '30's. They were fantasies which fed into the fantasies of the Parent's of the boomers. They didn't shape the boomer ethos as much as give maturing boomer's something to rebel against. Rebels without a Cause, so to speak, which was actually written in 1955 when boomers per above would have been 9, and directed by a guy, Nicholas Ray, whose sensibilities were pure 1940's. The principles and operating examples of "television" were parented by Zworkin in 1928. CBS had a patent for and broadcast in early color in 1950. No boomers involved. Alas, John Lennon and Ringo Starr were born in 1940, McCartney in 1942, George Harrison in 1943,thus beating the boom. Sunshine: re the wiki-quote pushing baby boomers into being born in the 60's, it just a reflection of the silliness occasionally found in the wiki. My gosh, I could go on about these misconceptions, and offer something half way analytical, but I just noticed I'm typing in the box and stand to lose this note altogether. Boom! Jimbeaux[This message has been edited by oceanvu2 (06-23-2008 04:39 PM).] |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
But just for the heck of it, I'll posit that it was boomers who changed the nature, the whole paradigm, not just the mechanics, of communication. That was pretty nifty. As nifty as the generation which produced Tesla, Einstein, Edison, Ford, ad-not-quite-infinitum, I don't know. Best, Jimbeaux |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
Hey hey hey, Jimbeaux... sources "not wiki..." quote:http://www.aginghipsters.com/blog/archives/000062.php quote:http://www.mindbranch.com/Baby-Boomers-R567-526/ I still contend...I'm a Boomer!! |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, Jimbeaux, I had no idea anyone would try to be so specific about my light-hearted comments so let me say what I was relating. The boomers were in high school when the Beatles, Stones and the rest of the British invasion wandered to our shores. Also at that time, Elvis had been going strong with his hits and movie career. It was the boomers who bought their records and danced to their music in their senior proms. At home, we watched Ozzie and Harriett, Dobie Gillis, Leave It to Beaver and Father Knows Best. I was referring to things that happened during our formative years, the teen years. Why you would want to debate or discredit it is beyond me but, whatever turns you on...... |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-walt-babyboomers-blurb,0,1036393.blurb |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi Balladeer: I don't want to discredit at all, and understand your's was a lighthearted remark. The only reason why I'd "debate" boomerism is that facts have a nasty way of interrupting friendly generalities. I think we tend to lose track of precedents when discussing Boomers. I think part of what happened was that the "60's" for most folk, took place in the "70'" and were shaped by attitudes dated the 40's. 50's, and well before. There was both acceptance and rebellion against these attitudes, as would be common to any generation. There seems to be a flow to generational responses, not a "break" with the past, but a reassement and sometimes a moving on, as with the boomers. But there is no way that history and occasional accuracy gets out of it. I think this is of import beyond boomerism per say. If we don't know where we came from, how can we assess where we are, or in the case of us duffs, perhaps "were." The topic is only important in the abstract, but the abstract has to come from a historical concreteness, or attempt at accuracy. This stuff interests me because, like you and me and many others were "there." If we look into the question of what formed the "boomer" mentality, we have to look at what preceded it. I think. What social ethos actually formed "boomerism?" I guess I was Alleying against unfounded generalizations in general, and using your examples as examples of how this really doesn't work. Lord knows, I make spectacular generalizations myself, using terms like "we" and "us" when there is no "we-ness" or "us-ness" to it. Just a kind of whacky "me-ness" reflecting individual sensibilities. Was there something "special" about our generation? Probably. Was it more "special" than other generations? I'm not sure yet. But "boomers" didn't come from nowhere, without historical precedent or shaping forces. It was almost all of a piece. Here's an exception, perhaps: what other generation practiced school drills of diving under desks in the event of an atom bomb? That was sort of new... And your second post was very funny. Best, Jimbeaux |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi Sunshine! Extracted verbatim from your post: "Others have attempted to define the generation along experiential lines, breaking the years into broad common ground. For instance, those born in 1964 probably share very little experience with those born in 1946." I'd certainly buy that, and thanks for posting a variety of views! Boom away! Jimbeaux |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
