Wednesday, August 31, 2005 at 9:08 PM
Generations
So in the spirit of consciously expanding my horizons, I picked up Ian McEwan's Amsterdam, winner of the illustrious Booker Prize in 1998. I guess he is a good writer. The situation he creates is believable. The way the characters react is credible. The characters remain consistent throughout the whole story, they never do anything that conflicts what you expect them to. All the threads come together, there is no situation or dialog that is extraneous. The pacing is good, it pulls you along enough so that you want to finish the book. Not every novel does this; I have read some otherwise good novels that have shortcomings in one or more of these areas. Another positive aspect of the book is that it is rather diminuitive in size, and less than 200 pages long. At least in my world, this is a compelling reason for it be read cover to cover because it is so short and doesn't take up much time to accomplish.
But in the end, my advice is to save your time for the thousands of other good books that are out there. I will be open about my particular bias -- when I read a book, I want to walk away with something I did not have prior to reading. In a work of "literary" fiction, I am looking for some insight into human nature or some angle of looking at the world I had not previously considered that is at least remotely appealing. And this is what Amsterdam utterly fails to do.
The main problem with Amsterdam is its characters. Each and every one of them is despicable. There is Molly, who has had tons of boyfriends and lovers, regardless of whether either party is married or not. Clive is a composer who witnessed a rape and did nothing to stop it. Vernon is a mediocre newspaper editor who turns into Kenneth Star. And then there is George, Molly's husband, who is generally unliked, overbearing, and manipulative. The supporting characters are about as savory as this crew. Apparently, the only character who possessed any charm was Molly, and she starts out dead. The only redeeming aspect of the story is that most of them get what they deserve in the end.
Why on earth would anybody give a damn about these characters? Why, indeed. I found myself wondering why the hell am I spending precious time reading a book about a bunch of self-absorbed, hypocritical, ambitious baby boomers fueled by delusions of pompous granduer? Personally, I have had enough of this particular generation. I will be so happy about 20 years from now when they have ceded control of the media to the next generation and have started to die off so we will no longer be plagued by the continual spotlight they seem to feel they deserve.
Of course, there are a number of historical reasons which would explain why and how they have managed to co-opt the media. Their mere birth hailed the formation of a term and definition of a whole demographic: Baby Boomers. Growing up on TV, by the time they were young adults in the 1960's, they had learned well how to manipulate the media. Of course, hippies come immediately to mind. In the late 60's, you couldn't open a newspaper or magazine without seeing some sort of article on the Generation Gap, the drug culture, or the Counter Coulture. Even the academics were taking them seriously. The manufacturers had a field day offering the public all the accouterments of beads, headbands, and flowery prints to transform the 9 to 5 grunt into a "weekend hippie." Despite all the publicity they got, (which presumably applied to all youth) the truth is that not everybody in that age bracket was a hippie or even close. Not a even a simple majority, probably 15% or less. And yet, everybody in America knew exactly who the following people were: Timothy Leary (not offically a boomer, but definitely regarded as a spokesperson), Abbie Hoffman, Bob Dylan, Arlo Guthrie, Ken Kesey, not to mention the Beatles and the Stones. Bob Dylan had his film, Don't Look Back, and the Beatles had Hard Day's Night. The whole point of these films was to follow them around being marvelous. Arlo Guthrie had his own movie, wherein he played none other than, Arlo Guthrie. Abbie Hoffman was a genius at getting media attention. From supporting Pigasus the Pig for president in 1968 to levitating the Pentagon, the man made headlines. Everybody could connect Leary with "Turn on, tune in, drop out." Monterey Pop, Woodstock, and even Altamont were made into full length movies. No wonder Baby Boomers got the idea they were fascinating as all get out. And to be completely truthful, I think they actually were for a brief time.
Unfortunately, they didnt' all die at 30. They grew up and became part of the Establishment. Not that there's anything wrong with being 30, or that there's anything wrong with growing up. It happens to the best of us. The problem I have with it all is their insistence that their experience is singular and completely different from everybody else's. Lots of people have lost, and are still losing brothers and boyfriends in shitty, pointless wars. Millions of women have had to raise children on thier own, for one reason or another and had to work, to boot. So the boomers work 80 hours a week for a SUV and to send their kids to 80 million camps, soccer fields, and lessons, using equipment made by mothers in Asia working 80 hours a week to keep their kids fed. Somehow, I don't think it's all that unique or fascinating. It fucking bloody sucks. From one generation to another, right back at 'cha. That's right, I'm talkin' bout my generation.
By adriennelibrarian at 9:08 PM
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
Don't you think the next generation won't think the same thing about US?
Our generation is gone gone gone gone, lady. Gone before it even started.
We're doing all of the same things THE PREVIOUS ONES did, from the beginning to end.
We all thought we were hot shit, gonna change everything and reinvent everything from the wheel to whipped cream.
That grunge and punk you thought was revolution was nothing but gristle from corporations.
And now, we're no better than they were or are.
We're just a bunch of hypocrits, falling into the same puddles and patterns they did.
-AgingAgentIzzipedsome
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
Oh yea, someone who used to go to *that school*(tm), and actually is now going back there to finish their plan, told me today that, while our group of folks would think about the wild past of the college, the current crop of folks actually believes that WE were the wild bunch, and they spin tails about us continously.
Yea, this person also believes Howland is an evil place. So, maybe my memory really is for shit, or someone needs to bonk my aging head with a brick of oatmeal.
Here I am, supposedly with the worst memory, and I was straight-edge 50% of the $!@# time I was there...
~
adriennelibrarian said...
Shaw, every single twenty-something that has walked the face of the planet has thought they were hot shit and knew exactly where everybody else went wrong. That's the way it is, I accept it, I'm not going to hold it against anybody. Everybody pretty much does and believes the same thing somewhere along the line. What annoys me to no end is the media image of this group (from which there is no escape) that they are somehow different, their youth was more glorious, that they deserve to prosper more than anybody else, that they should never grow old. And no, I do not think we suffer from those particular delusions.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
Are you saying that aging hippies in general have a self-centered attitude amongst themselves?
That's actually opposite of what hippiedom was supposed to be about - it was supposed to be about sharing and generosity.
If our generation is supposed to not suffer from the "never grow old" syndrome, then why does the media say that 30 is the new 20?
And that whole dellusions of granduer/immortality thing - that's just part of being young.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
oops - oh yea, while some hippies may have/had that whole "parakeet in a mirror" syndrome, I have met some generous hippies before. Though I do think beatniks were even more generous (although that's my bias - my father was THE beatnik. Any guy who stole bunches of Ginsberg and Keruoac books from the Enoch Pratt free library...yep, he was beat...)
~
adriennelibrarian said...
Yeah, but the delusions of granduer/immortality at 60? Gimme a break.
I'm not talking about those who remained forever hippie. I'm talking about the Jerry Rubins out there. They ain't using their hummers to give homeless folks a lift, now are they?
And, pray tell, who controls the media? It ain't us. Making 30 younger than it is helps make 60 look not that bad, now doesn't it?
~
adriennelibrarian said...
And for another thing, I know you are baiting me, you are delibrately baiting me. I will not be subject. (I'll give you a quarter if you can tell me where that's from.)
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
You think Hunter S. Thompson had delusions of granduer and immortality?
What about the Wavy Gravy's out there? The ones that are still there donating their time to good causes? He runs a camp for disadvantaged kids! http://www.campwinnarainbow.org/
And yea, you have members of the Grateful Dead who donate a helluva lot of time to good causes. Garcia started a charity or two, if I remember right.
And there's more hippies doing a lot out there....
And no, I can't remember the "baiting" quote, mostly 'cuz my fragile mind is aging too quickly. - nor can I google it. Thus, I'm stuck w/no quarter. Damn...im poor. No bran buds for me.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
wait - I remember - it's The Graduate.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
nonono - Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
~
adriennelibrarian said...
Hello. Do you read? I clearly excused those who remained hippie. I also stated it was the image presented that is irritating. And why on earth bring up Thompson? The man was in a class all by himself at almost every level.
P.S. The quote is from a much more benign source.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!
Yes ma'mm, I did read...a few times.
To me, there's always gonna be a disparity between image and reality when it comes to what generations are really about. Like it or not. Sometimes, through the years, the image gets more and more magnified than what things really were about.
Part of the problem with the hippie generation is that folks have to eat...thus, they grew up. Why on earth do you think they really had a second (and ick, a third) Woodstock? It wasn't for sharing, it was to stuff people's wallets.
Our generation wasn't supposed to know what they wanted. Well, a good portion of us did, and some of them got what we wanted. Even if we didn't know what we wanted, we all got it up da butt anyway it seems...
And yes, the man was in a class all by himself - but, he was still a major part of the hippie generation. That's like saying Ginsberg wasn't part of the beats because he was in a class by himself - but he was.
But no, I don't remember what the quote was from. I've been trying to figure it out for two days now...but no, I'm not baiting you. I have no bait to put on my hook that's attractive enough to get fish or foul.
~
adriennelibrarian said...
The quote from The Point, narrated by Ringo himself.
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
one of the many things that I've always wanted to see.
Guess I can go to First Run Video down here and rent it.
Alas, I lost a quarter...
~
Shaw Israel Izikson said...
But if you really truly believe this about hippies, Mother Magarita, then pick up that new Barry Miles Hippie book, which will either reinforce your opinions or totally change your mind.
Honestly, I don't think Hippies even believed in Hippiedom...it was just an image to sell Pilot Pens.All of the true hippies left the planet years ago, anyway.
~
