Generation

Generation in social sciences is usually regarded as equivalent to birth cohort or age cohort, a group of individuals born in the same time period. A concept of generation is thus contextualized both within the historical time and within the company of coevals. It is nowadays widely accepted that a birth cohort comes to have social significance as a generation by creating a distinctive cultural or political identity. Therefore, a common way of explaining age differences in social and cultural contexts is to define age-related distinctive features as generational characteristics. For consumer cultures, generation is an important concept, because generational identities typically manifest themselves in attitudes and practices related to consumption. Particularly when comparing the attitudes and practices of young and elderly people, one usually refers to generational differences. However, there are some empirical problems in these interpretations.

Maybe the most well-known theorist interested in social generations was Karl Mannheim. In his essay “The Problem of Generations,” Mannheim emphasized the social and political role of generations in historical change. According to Mannheim, each generation experiences certain social and cultural events from a distinct viewpoint. Generations are held together by their joint experiences of (traumatic) historical events, and collective identities of generations are formed by these experiences. Mannheim stressed the importance of the events that occurred in youth. The more dramatic and traumatic the events in the youth period were, the stronger and more persistent was the generational identity shaped by the events. Mannheim also argued that generations radicalize by traumatic experiences and thus get the strength to change society with new political and cultural visions.

Following the ideas of Mannheim, warfare such as world wars, revolutions, dictatorships, and massacres should be especially important for the formation of generational consciousness. Also, nationalist movements are thought to have connections to social and political generations. Since historical periods and events vary significantly, all generations are not equally active and do not necessarily act strategically to bring about change. June Edmunds and Bryan S. Turner see a certain pattern of activity among successive generations. An active generation (generation for itself) is likely to be followed by a passive one (generation in itself) that inherits changes produced by the predecessor. In Western societies, this succession is said to be particularly obvious for the postwar “baby-boomer generation,” which is regarded as a “strategic” generation in many ways, and the succeeding “Generation X,” which is said to be less fortunate and more passive (Edmunds and Turner 2005, 562).

Ronald Inglehart distinguishes successive generations according to their material values: materialistic and postmaterialistic. The degree of materialism depends on whether the generation has grown up fighting for scarce material resources or not. Inglehart, too, emphasizes the baby boomer generation in particular. The values of baby boomers are nonmaterialistic, whereas the parents of the baby boomers who experienced the war had more materialistic values. Pierre Bourdieu saw the contradictions between generations also important in cultural transformations. According to Bourdieu, intergenerational competition over social, economic, and cultural resources produces significant social change. Thus, according to many theorists, there is necessarily a “generation gap,” or at least there are very different values between the generations.

...