I was born in 1984, and therefore just (although still saw) missed a lot of what would be described as 'Gen X'. From my basic, and brief understanding, this was a period where a great malaise swept the nation and humanity, as it seemed to exist, descended into nonchalance.
That being said, it's very understandable, as the first generation where it felt like the world's issues were out of their hands - that they could not engage societally or make a functional change in policies that felt beyond their remit. Therefore, when faced with this, and, despite the Clinton-era promises of change, there was 'more of the same'. How better to revolt, than to disengage. From this era were a number of my favourite pieces of creativity, several noted below.
In these texts, as well as others, the sense of ennui permeates the title, as if the trudgeries of modern-day living have proved too much. It's easy to find numerous other texts from the early 90s that demonstrate this same, now somewhat strange, sense that nothing matters. In the era where social media has linked every human being together at all times, it must be an increasingly difficult concept to consider the sense of self, and of self-isolation. In Gen X - TV from The Brady Bunch to Melrose Place, Rob Owen posits that 'even Gen Xers who proudly boast 'Kill Your Television' stickers on their cars, grew up watching the box, and whether they like it or not, it has influenced their lives'.
So what happened in the 20 years from non-commital nodding to ensuring that ones' voice was heard, at all times, as loudly as possible, and to all corners of the world?
In E Life After The Dot Com Bust, Peter W.G Keen mentions that following headline from the 1930s won the most boring, but read headline - 'Small Earthquake In Chile - Not Many Hurt'. But that entire concept, the idea that humanity must read into every faucet of existence, is what drives the internet as it currently stands. In the 90s, in the time where even Rodney King, impeachment, and OJ Simpson were met with a shrug of the shoulders, it would seem impossible to see such a story gain traction. However, in our constantly connected society, it's easy to see Facebook users tagging themselves as 'safe' given such a calamity.
So why do we care?
Because we are made to.
It is reckoned that the average US adult now spends 12 hours a day engaged with media content, most of it through screen time on a phone. And one of the problems with that comes the constant communication. Picture this - a friend you get on really well with, one who lives half a world away, sees you every two years. Those two years are an occasion. They're celebrated.
The same friend who now accesses you on social media, sees you 2 times a day. And they see everything you post, directly or indirectly. The sense of ennui is gone - everything needs a reaction, lest the discourse fail these days. In Blending Spaces, Julia Schwartz argues that we do not have the same 'time/space' paths as we would in a 'normal' society - that is to say, we do not get the personal space we need from each other.
Our relationships therefore become extreme, focused, and entirely reactionary, where, in a 1990s environment, they would have time to breathe.
This is not in any sense, a desire to return to that sort of environment - the early 1990s were popularised by desperation, a lack of control over societal issues, and other factors. But with all that in mind, there is something more simplistic in letting the ennui hit, and accepting responses 'as they are' without staring into the page.
