Late last year, I wrote a post on my delight in being part of generation no-name, in that I am too young to be a B-Boomer, and too old to be an X-er. Someone wrote a comment in response, telling me that I was wrong wrong wrong ... because my generation does indeed have a label, and it seems that I am part of a cultural steamroller coming soon to a media outlet near you.
Apparently I, along with millions of other early 1960s babies, am part of Generation Jones.

Then there's the piece yesterday's Sunday Age, which boldly claims that we are the 'lost generation that's found its voice'. Makes me wonder about all of those pre-Baby Boomer generations, going back centuries. What snappy label did the generation of people born between 1765 and 1790 go by?

When I read The Age article yesterday, I did find its focus on a raucous 40-something wedding a bit odd. But then I remembered (through a rather fuzzy head) that I'd been at a very raucous event myself the previous night - our primary school Trivia Night Fundraiser. It was full of Gen-Jones types dressed up in their going-out clothes, drinking buckets of red wine, shouting, playing games, dancing to My Sharona, and squealing in delight as we managed to name four characters from F-Troop correctly.
Yep, partying like it was 1989!
1 comment:
Have you noticed too, that some of Amanda Keller's sidekicks aren't even babyboomers - they're WAR babies (like Harold from Neighbours and Benita from PlaySchool).
And hey, even the Gen X contestants are those born from 1970 onwards - none of 'em seem to be from the sixties..,. (Huffs indignantly) - I guess it's 'cos we'd be too old for telly but not old enough for Amanda....
How's this for a word verification - agmoss! I'm trying to be all aggro but am really just a pile of wet... moss.
Post a Comment