'New York' magazine explains case of the missing grown-ups
—Posted by Catharine P. Taylor |
|
March 29, 2006 | Permalink |
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
So they're adultolescents with money and a hipster sensibility? (Newsweek, 2002)
Posted by: rosehips | Mar 29, 2006 5:27:44 PM
If that article hasn't already, they should add PT cruisers to the list of items an adult buys to try to stay hip. Being a 21 year-old designer, I think those cars look hideous (somewhat like a mini-mini van) but those automobiles are the cars I see the most with custom paint jobs and personalized license plates in the area I live in.
Posted by: dano | Mar 29, 2006 6:14:31 PM
The worst offense committed by today's grups is not their clothes or taste in music. it's their insistence on erasing the social lines between the adult and child worlds, and the adult and adolescent worlds. when i was a child in the 1960-70s, and my parents went out to the movies, or dinner with other couples or to parties, they got a babysitter for my siblings and me. These days, parents schlep their kids everywhere--to R-rated movies, high-end restaurants, and get-togethers with friends, which in my parents' day, were "grups"-only parties. My own friends are among the worst offenders in this respect, but what can you say? and don't get me started on happy hours for moms with toddlers in tow. there are few more irresponsible activities than that one. worse, it's the poor kids and teens who also suffer. They should be allowed to have their own, youthful social sphere and culture without having it intruded and tread upon by over-involved parents.
Posted by: hail the generation gap | Mar 29, 2006 7:02:47 PM
Man, you have been drinking the Kool-Aid big time. Or I missed the sarcasm. That article was shoddy journalism. Or do you not remember hippie parents? 30 and 40something parents on the dance floor at Studio 54?
Every generation has a group that refuses to grow up. The people profiled in the article are just a small subgroup of people in their 30s and 40s. We see it more in advertising because of the Logan's Run nature of agency life- no one wants to be perceived as "old school." But out in the real world, there are precious few rock star parents or dads who compare what rock bands their 2 year olds are into. And where they exist, they're usually met with lots of eye-rolling. Not approval or envy.
You need a reality check, Catherine.
Posted by: Reality Check | Mar 29, 2006 9:55:00 PM
It was a dead-on article. All the writer did was open his eyes and type what he saw. We've all thought it, but he wrote it. But I agree, he mostly wrote about the older 'creative class' mostly found in metro areas, especially in NY. It's not new at all though, only a little more prevalent in some areas. And I still prefer the term 'Yipster.'
Posted by: Lenato | Mar 30, 2006 1:24:37 AM
Am I just not getting it or is 'Grups' the complete *opposite* of what these hipster mommys/daddies are trying to be? If I remember my Star Trek correctly, Michael J. Pollard and the rest of the kids saw the grups (like Capt. Kirk) as mean old fuddy-duddies who wouldn't let them stay kids. Grups are like your parents who are just interested in going to Sears to buy a new fridge and mowing their lawn...not having a hipster t-shirt or snowboarding, etc...
Posted by: Foulard | Mar 30, 2006 5:56:45 PM
And don't forget white. This is a white phenomenom.
Posted by: New York Anthony | Mar 30, 2006 6:04:47 PM
I am just so bummed that this breed is associated with Death Cab for Cutie...I've been listening for years to them...please tell me I am not a GRUP
Posted by: Mary | Mar 30, 2006 6:17:03 PM
Hail, Amy Sohn wants to talk to you ASAP. [cf. gawker today.]
This post has to be sarcastic, right? Right??
Posted by: greg from daddytypes | Mar 30, 2006 6:28:44 PM
I love you catharine taylor. you're the only thing about adweek I like. (i know we've met and that maybe sways my opinion, but still.)
Posted by: copyranter | Mar 30, 2006 6:34:24 PM
"Bobos" sounds so silly, anywayz.
Posted by: Eric | Mar 30, 2006 7:32:04 PM
This is not a question of still being childish in my opinion...if someone has a job and can afford 200 jeans or whatever, go for it....but what i think is lack of adulthood is the total lack of taking reponsiblity, of maintaining friendships and relationships - judging whether you would want to date someone because he's got clever entries on myspace....everything seems to have a cash and carry tag on it these days, even people. and if someone doesn't wear the right shoes, or hang with the right crowd just return 'em. You can be hip AND a decent adult...unfortuantely i don't see that enough.
Posted by: cp | Mar 31, 2006 3:54:29 AM
Isn’t this mostly a New York peculiarity? I’m sure it exists in lesser metropolises (Chicago or Boston or San Francisco) but is likely much less common and likely dismissed as pathetic. Most of my 30-ish friends in other cities are embracing the traditional rituals of adulthood. I think there is something about the culture of New York that enables Grups.
Posted by: martin | Mar 31, 2006 8:54:05 AM
i was just blogging about this on my MySpace page the other day. Signed, a 34 year old copywriter who's so adolescent she has a roommate and is still hooking up with emotionally unavailable rock stars.
Posted by: rogain | Mar 31, 2006 10:17:24 AM
the above is totally true.
Posted by: rogain | Mar 31, 2006 10:18:06 AM
the above is also sad.
Posted by: jerk | Mar 31, 2006 2:43:53 PM
what's wrong with being a cool parent?
Posted by: | Mar 31, 2006 8:15:11 PM
what's a "grown up" someone who's out of touch with cool things because they had a kid? pleaseeeeeeeee. obsess over something that matters.
Posted by: | Mar 31, 2006 10:21:08 PM
I like the term 'kidults' better…
Posted by: lou | Apr 1, 2006 8:33:31 PM
Death before dockers.
Posted by: Dario | Apr 1, 2006 8:56:50 PM
" Most of my 30-ish friends in other cities are embracing the traditional rituals of adulthood."
Like what? Living in a boring suburb and spending their weekends mowing the lawn? Driving to a stale office park every morning in their mini-van? Having sex twice-a-month, missionary only? Having their monthly big night out at the best restaurant in their lame town, Olive Garden?
Posted by: ShootMeFirst | Apr 1, 2006 10:19:32 PM
Christopher Noxon wrote this article in the New York Times years ago. He called these people rejuveniles, which is so much better than grups.
Posted by: Jones | Apr 2, 2006 8:52:51 AM
I believe what they're referring to as "grown up" is finally understanding that there is more to life than being "cool".
In other words, transcending the mentality of an 18-year-old.
Posted by: DanO | Apr 5, 2006 11:59:23 AM
I agree with 'Shootmefirst'. I have put way too much time, energy, "blood, sweat, and tears" into raising my own children and hell, raisng myself (in terms of education, career skills, staying healthy and fit, etc) to now, in mid forties, fall into all the glory of the 'traditional adult lifestyle" depicted above. The only thing that was left out was a heart attack for the man of the house and perhaps, breast cancer for the woman somewhere in the late fiftyish-early sixtyish range. I listen to whatever I feel like listening to (and it varies with the day); I wear whatever feels comfortable and appeals to me; and I enjoy the eye opening conversation and sparkling company of a variety of friends ranging in age from late-teens to mid-seventies....including my own late teen-early twentyish children, for whom I am currently assisting with college educations. I, in no way, feel that I am attempting to relive my own twenties. Why should I? I've been there and done that...have no desire to redo it. However, I also do not wish to sit still, curl up, collect dust, and await death. I would like to savor and make the most of what remains of my own life. I AM a responsible adult. For goodness sakes, what qualifications does anyone have to ascertain what is appropriate for me now, any more than whenever I was a teen (should I have been chastised for listening to Chopin when my friends preferred Led Zeppelin then?) in terms of personal taste in music, clothing, or really, anything else? I can't imagine where so many people with so many problems of their own have time to delve into this kind of crap.
Posted by: pgfrederick | Apr 30, 2006 12:21:14 PM
