Comments on: I read the book and wondered where I was—Review: Generation X by Douglas Coupland

By: Dave Sohigian

Dave Sohigian — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:02:46 +0000

+1 for Dr. Slammy.

By: Dr. Slammy

Dr. Slammy — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:00:21 +0000

FeelsRight: Thanks. As I read the list of people you regard as “credible” I laughed so hard my liver shot out my nose.

By: FeelsRight

FeelsRight — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:32:00 +0000

If Pontell’s theory is so “ridiculous”, why do so many credible and influential people strongly believe in and support it? David Brooks (New York Times), Karen Tumulty (Time Magazine), Clarence Page (Chicago Tribune), Jonathan Alter (Newsweek), Roland Martin (CNN), Michael Steele (Chairman, RNC), Chris Van Hollen (Chairman, DCCC), Stuart Rothenberg (Roll Call), Juan Williams (Fox News Channel), Howard Wolfson (Political Advisor), Mel Martinez (U.S. Senator [R-Florida]), Carl Leubsdorf (Dallas Morning News), and Peter Fenn (MSNBC) are among many who have publicly expressed their belief in the GenJones construct. Should we believe them, or someone with an unknown blog with a tiny readership who bases her arguments on obviously unresearched emotional feelings rather than an informed take on the actual facts?

By: CLG

CLG — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:44:34 +0000

Generation Jones is a convenient opt-out for those who believe Generation X is an epithet. I railed against Pontell’s ridiculous theory in my blog here: http://creativedestruct.blogspot.com/2009/03/gen-xers-are-real-tweeners.html

By: eric

eric — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:12:42 +0000

i read the book in ’91 — when i was 21. i’ll agree it was very quotable, but it defined my and what i perceived as my generation about as much as taco bell defines “destination restaurant.”

to be honest, i cannot recall the story of the book, only my recollected perception of it. i identified with none of the characters. i was not in the “jet set” and cared little about money. i’m sure i’ve got my copy sitting in a box somewhere, probably riddled with mold and filth after carrying it around for nearly two decades because of it’s supposed “worth.”

it spoke neither to me nor about me.

of course, in retrospect, it probably said more about my generation than i believed it did at the time.

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 14:57:33 +0000

Sure, if you were trying to artificially create a faux generation around a phenomenom like Obama, you could put him in the middle of the generation to make it resonate. In this situation, however, that point is completely irrelvant, since the GenJones birth years of 1954-1965 were determined several years before Obama became known nationally.

Read Strauss and Howe for the “definitive treatment”? Are you joking? While S&H’s work becomes increasingly discredited and irrelevant, GenJones becomes increasingly popular and established.

“Let go of this GenJones thing”? In your GenX-obsessed dreams. What you underestimate is how determined many of us who support the GenJones construct are. There is an inevitability to the GenJones movement; whether you like it or not, Boomer/Joneser/Xer is here to stay.

By: Lex

Lex — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:00:32 +0000

Indeed, Sam. On the other hand, a person born in 1961 will have had a significantly different experience than one born in, say, 1973. Eg. the difference between really experiencing Reagan and mostly just remembering him. Perhaps the problem is (and i doubt that this exists in the serious literature, only the popular application of it) expecting a generation to be near monolithic in behavior, attitude, etc..

I also think that Russ makes a very important point that goes with that…that is, the gap between perception and reality.

By: CWMackowski

CWMackowski — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:15:07 +0000

Howe and Strauss is good stuff. I’ve heard of the Gen Jones stuff, but I can’t say as I know where the name came from.

By: Dave Sohigian

Dave Sohigian — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 02:45:31 +0000

@Dr. Slammy – Amen to that!

By: Dr. Slammy

Dr. Slammy — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:55:44 +0000

Please, for the love of all things sacred, let go of this Gen Jones thing. It was, and remains, a marketing hook.

I’m sure a lot of people born in 1961 – as is the case with ANY cusp group (and I was born in 1961, as well) – feel some ambivalence about their place. When you artificially cobbled a faux gen together that puts them squarely in the middle, yeah, it’s going to resonate. But you can do the same thing with ANY birth year.

Gen X began in 1961. You want the definitive treatment, go read Howe and Strauss’ 13th Gen.

By: no noob

no noob — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:27:00 +0000

As a Joneser myself, I found Reagan delightfully refreshing. Thatcher too.

By: Dave Sohigian

Dave Sohigian — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:46:19 +0000

Okay, you have now motivated me to read the book. I have been writing a ton about Generations on my blog, and have heard Coupland's name again and again, but now I know I have to read it.

By: Franklin

Franklin — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:32:17 +0000

It is relevant to note that Coupland has since described the three protagonsists of his novel as part of the fringe of Generation Jones, whose mindset later became the mainstrem of the next generation…GenX.

Coupland, Obama, and others born in 1961 are right in the middle of Generation Jones (born 1954-1965). A national poll looked at this exact issue a few months ago, and found that those born in 1961 overwhelmingly felt they were part of GenJones, not Boomers nor GenXers

By: Dilly

Dilly — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:47:39 +0000

I agree that the designation of Gen X is too broad. Copeland was born in 1961. I was born in 63 and feel that the bleak attitude was shaped by our early exposure to the Vietnam war, Nixon and then experiencing Regan’s cold war in our teens.It was the mindset that birthed punk rock.

By: Russ Wellen

Russ Wellen — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:51:50 +0000

. . . unfulfilled, uninspired twenty-somethings who float through life, tell stories to each other, and experience a nagging sense of being adrift in their own lives despite their best efforts to ground themselves.

The only difference between them and Baby Boomers at that age, such as myself, is that the BBs got credited with a degree of political consciousness or rebellion that, in truth, most of them completely lacked. It was just sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll. As with the Gen Xers.