Today I stumbled across a mini-war sparked by a writer from Elite Daily, a blog that purports to be "The Voice of Generation Y." I won't get into whether I think Elite Daily is a fair or accurate representation of my generation, but I certainly find some of the articles entertaining. Anyway, the article, by Lauren Martin, is called "Could It Be? Millennials Are The New Generation Of Hippies, But With Better Weed." She basically argues that millennials have ushered in a new modern-day "hippie" era reminiscent of the 60s. She draws parallels between Woodstock and Bonnaroo, between Vietnam War protests and the Occupy Wall Street movement, and between marching for segregation and marching for gay rights. She points out our general culture that mixes drugs and rebellion with movements for change, acceptance and freedom (the legalization of marijuana was pretty central to her argument).
Two days later, Bryce Rudow of The Daily Banter fired shots back, claiming that no, millennials are not hippes, even if they wish they were. He argues that the music festival culture popularized by Bonnaroo and Coachella is linked to giant corporate entities that true hippies lived to hate. He picks apart her argument in a lot of ways, but what I found most interesting (and what actually relates to technology and the media!) is how he tied the internet to his argument. Martin didn't directly address the internet in her piece, but I imagine she'd say that it acts as a platform for free expression and creativity. After all, the internet has propelled political movements and proliferated the work of small artists.
But Rudow argues that the internet has actually rendered us one of the least "free" generations in history. Rudow says hippies of the 60s tried to be what they saw as authentic, forging their own aberrant paths against the hands of corporate and governmental dominance. But millennials, he argues, are trapped in a "prison of awareness" formed by the internet. Everyone is aware of what we do, and we're aware of what everyone else does around us. We exhibit so many facets of our lives through social media because we need validation. And within this sphere of constant judgment and observation, we're actually conforming to norms, not rebelling against them.
I've thought a lot about this myself, even before reading these two articles. The rise of Urban Outfitters and the resurgence of record players and flowery headbands in our generation no doubt resemble the hippie era. But this is where I agree with Rudow's retort: Many times, these idealized and glamorized depictions of "hippie culture" are found on Pinterest boards and Instagram feeds. Pinterest is overflowing with models who rock the middle hair part, high-waisted denim and tie-dyed crop tops. We seem more concerned with projecting these images and values into cyberspace than living them out in our daily lives. And more importantly, by participating in Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, we're actually selling ourselves to the corporate domination that hippies defied. We're willingly handing over our data to massive servers to do with it what they please.
Am I suggesting we should all cut out social media cold turkey? Of course not. I use it daily and I like it that way. But I do think the parallels between millenials and the hippies of the 60s are far fewer than they might appear on the surface. The challenge for our generation will be to find our own meaning of authenticity in an era when our lives are constantly on display.
No comments:
Post a Comment