[HN Gopher] The Sixties Come Back to Life in "Everything Is Now"
___________________________________________________________________
The Sixties Come Back to Life in "Everything Is Now"
Author : tintinnabula
Score : 25 points
Date : 2025-06-08 22:15 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.newyorker.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.newyorker.com)
| Telemakhos wrote:
| The sixties ended before I was born. Why do they have to keep
| coming back to life? I just keep getting older, but the boomers
| have an eternal youth of reviving their favorite decade.
| thecolorblue wrote:
| We will be doing the same thing for the 90s soon.
| krapp wrote:
| Nostalgia tends to follow a 20 year cycle, so we'e already
| done that. People are doing it for the 2000s now.
| jhbadger wrote:
| And for over half of a decade already! The award-winning
| 2017 movie "Ladybird" was a nostalgic look at that distant
| year of 2002!
| unstablediffusi wrote:
| bro I missed 2019 for almost six years now
| whilenot-dev wrote:
| I wonder when we'll ever become nostalgic for anything
| after 2007...
| Aardwolf wrote:
| Nostalgia for those good old times of quarantining in
| 2020
| lazide wrote:
| The traffic was _amazing_.
| brookst wrote:
| I miss being nostalgic for the 80's
| Maken wrote:
| Disney is already remaking movies from the early 2000s. But
| maybe it's just because they ran out of material.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Don't underestimate a few incompetent leaders.
|
| There's NOTHING that can't ruin.
| FrustratedMonky wrote:
| Yes.
|
| Something not 'polite' to talk about.
|
| But when Russia invaded Ukraine, there was a surge in
| Nostalgia for 80's/90's Cold War era, Russia is the enemy
| culture.
|
| Like 'Red Dawn', etc...
| larrled wrote:
| Not nostalgia. Putin is what he is. Movies about hitler
| aren't nostalgic. Germany under Hitler was an "enemy
| culture" no? We must never minimize the global disdain for
| Russia under Putin. How many have died? Nostalgia just
| isn't the right word, or it shouldn't be.
| FrustratedMonky wrote:
| Maybe shouldn't be, but that doesn't mean it isn't.
|
| Nostalgia for a time in the past, but bad things can
| trigger feelings from the past.
|
| So not Nostalgia for "we really miss when Russia was
| great".
|
| More like Nostalgia for 99 Luft Balloons, the song, that
| also came out at same time. And was part of Cold War
| Culture.
| CalRobert wrote:
| The nineties were the last time I remember a real sense of
| optimism in the future
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| It was the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the
| Internet Age
| CalRobert wrote:
| Climate change was still a distant worry too
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| "American Graffiti"; when I was growing up they were going back
| before I was born too. I don't mind though because, for
| example, that film is excellent (and is that filmmakers best
| film ;-)).
|
| Seriously though I have been musing as to how the children of a
| generation get to define their parent's generation, more or
| less wrest if from them, in film, etc. Sometimes (often) they
| take a fairly dim view of the world they grew up in, a dim view
| of their parents. (And maybe now I am channelling a film like
| "The Graduate", for example.)
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| American Graffiti didn't depict boomers, they were kids who
| had graduated high school in 1962, that was Silent
| Generation.
|
| It's referred to as a nostalgia movie, which on one hand
| seems fitting if you've watched it, but on the other hand, it
| was written in 1972 about a period in time ten years older.
| Would a movie screenplay written today by a 28 year old
| depicting being an 18 year old in 2015 be seen as nostalgic
| in the same way?
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I realize that. It depicted 1962 -- I was born a few years
| later. I meant to use it as an example that it has always
| been generations holding on to their formative years, not
| just boomers (there are just a lot more of them).
| subdane wrote:
| The mainstream audience was young and open to new ideas. Folks
| could create new things that impacted the culture at large and
| in that way punch above their weight class. In NYC, people
| could create art movements that would live for the next 50
| years. Sort of like the way kids could create new technology in
| a garage in Silicon Valley in the 70s, or a dorm room in the
| 00s. It was a time in culture where the doors were open and you
| could have profound impact. The doors closed again, so people
| look back and have an appreciation for what was possible and
| what became and perhaps long for it again.
| sevensor wrote:
| We've been reviving the 80s nonstop since _The Wedding Singer_
| was in theaters. I was alive for that decade the first time
| around, and I'm ready for it to be over now. 1990s was really
| only about a seven year hiatus.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| > Hoberman makes clear one crucial factor in the city's creative
| energy: "cheap rents."
|
| I keep seeing this in various places. The rise of the "College
| Music" scene in Athens, Georgia during the 80's has also been in
| part attributed to the cheap rent in the student ghettos (typical
| of many college towns).
|
| Growing up in Kansas City, the neighborhoods around the Kansas
| City Art Institute were also low-rent. Child (impressionable) me
| remembers walking through the neighborhood at night, let by my
| mom, for the free Friday night film ("Journey to the Far Side of
| the Sun", "Fantastic Planet" to name a few I recall). There was a
| large chicken leg sculpture, perhaps 8' tall in one yard that
| always spooked me to walk past. Some kind of sculpture of broken
| bits of mirror and glass made another small lot look like an
| alien set from "Star Trek"....
| SecretDreams wrote:
| It turns out that when it's more affordable to live, more
| people will have things to live for and focus on beyond just
| grinding to pay rent and scrounging dollars to buy food.
|
| We've collectively destroyed this concept for the next
| generation of young people and we need to desperately course
| correct.
| coldpie wrote:
| > We've collectively destroyed this concept for the next
| generation of young people and we need to desperately course
| correct.
|
| Sorry, turns out it's economically way more important for the
| richest two dozen people in the world to turn all of our
| collective resources into computer programs that will tell
| them how special and cool and inventive and totally not "the
| man" they are. Anything that gets in the way of that must be
| destroyed.
| dnissley wrote:
| It was actually just everyday people who chose to destroy
| the concept of cheap housing, not "the richest two dozen
| people in the world". By limiting supply in the name of
| neighborhood character, boomer environmentalism, and
| property values.
| kurthr wrote:
| No, it was the banks that held the mortgages, and the
| builders and real estate agents who make the most on
| rising prices. You can't buy a house without selling the
| one you live in... without leverage!
| xmprt wrote:
| I don't know what kind of backwards logic that is. Banks
| help first time homebuyers purchase their house. Builders
| build houses and add supply that helps meet demand
| (everyone needs a place to live). Real estate agents help
| navigate the process for people who are unfamiliar with
| all the different steps.
|
| There are bad actors in all of these (banks caused the
| financial crisis and agents are probably paid more than
| they're worth for $1M+ houses in CA), but the biggest
| root cause that's missing from your comment is NIMBYs
| blocking new development almost everywhere.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Not seeing "NIMBYism" in Nebraska.
|
| Instead I am seeing developers who would rather build an
| upper-middle class neighborhood, not a starter home one,
| because they can get a much larger profit for only a
| little more effort/material-cost.
|
| I suppose when they are finally unable to sell them
| they'll start addressing starter homes. I have no idea
| who could still be buying all of these though. (Perhaps
| people leaving CA like I did after retiring -- they're
| not going to like the property tax rate though.)
| dnissley wrote:
| NE seems relatively affordable?
|
| Expecting starter homes to be a category of real estate
| that is newly built seems naive. Starter homes are some
| combination of older, smaller, bad location which makes
| them more affordable. Why wouldn't real estate developers
| satisfy the demand at the high end before moving down
| market? Seems like the easiest way to turn a profit to
| me. Rational actors etc
| coldpie wrote:
| Nope. Unlike the wealthy, the people who need the cheaper
| housing do not have the time or money to spend lobbying
| for their own interests. The wealthy are taking all of
| our resources[1] and spending them[2] to turn our water &
| energy into computer programs that will steal and extract
| even more wealth from the people who actually create
| things.
|
| [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/social-
| trends/2020/01/09/trends-...
|
| [2] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/private-
| investment-in-art...
| dnissley wrote:
| Who shows up to the public comment meetings to register
| their complaints about new housing being built? Who
| empowered those meetings to exist in the first place? Who
| created the laws about needing an environmental review
| for a building being built in the middle of an existing
| city?
|
| It was everyday people. Not the 1%.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| There are lots and lots of nice cheap housing in small
| towns. Example, when all my coworkers were fighting over
| insanely overpriced condos and apartments in San Fran, I
| bought a 1300 sq ft house outside of Tracy for less than
| $200k (1/3 of rent in the city)
|
| Get out of the cities...
| justinrubek wrote:
| Great, now most people can spend their lives driving. I
| see so many people on their phones on the road, and I'm
| sure that part of it is that they don't want to be
| commuting as much as they have to.
|
| Not to mention, it's more inefficient to sprawl.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| 1/3 of the staff where I work are remote and it's a super
| conservative run factory. Most live within 20 minutes of
| the site.
|
| Customer support, sales, accounting, HR, IT, etc., all
| don't need to go into the office most of the time. Why
| force them? It also opens up the job market to a larger
| pool, cuts health care and child care cost, insurance,
| etc.
| xmprt wrote:
| > Get out of the cities...
|
| This is a terrible public policy if it's the plan. And
| while I think selfishly it might be better for
| individuals if they did, I don't think it's actually
| helping anyone. Cities used to be a place where you made
| a life for yourself and could earn more and innovate more
| than you could in rural/suburban areas. Now it's a luxury
| to live in one and that doesn't bode well for the future
| of the country.
| v5v3 wrote:
| But that was before tech became so common.
|
| You don't need to live in the city to earn more and
| innovate.
|
| Warren Buffet didn't move to Wall Street and he did ok...
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Your argument seems to be, "That might be better, but it
| would mean change, and that's bad!"
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| Cities have always been the most expensive option... they
| are meat grinders for careers. There's plenty of jobs but
| it is very diffcult to get ahead. Always has been that
| way.
|
| I'd rather be a big fish in a small pond.
| SecretDreams wrote:
| I promise you this is only a short term solution that
| will eventually ruin the small towns and their youth as
| well.
|
| Canada is seeing that right now where so many people from
| big cities flooded small towns. All that has happened is
| something to the tune of 200% appreciation in small
| housing prices over the last decade with almost no
| appreciation in wages. It's crushed housing for the
| smaller towns and the individuals that lived there. It's
| truly just a kick the can down the road approach.
| dnissley wrote:
| This discussion is in the context of how creative scenes
| like those of 60s NYC develop.
|
| We were discussing "one crucial factor in the city's
| creative energy: cheap rents".
|
| Apparently we now need to discuss another crucial factor
| notably absent in small towns: "density of and proximity
| to other creative types"
| kurthr wrote:
| Real estate and rent, just like bitcoin, designer fashion,
| "art work", and watches. Unfortunately, you need somewhere to
| live. If it's more profitable to hold empty real estate than
| or less dense/improved property waiting for it to go up then
| that's what will happen.
|
| If people can effectively speculate on something in a
| leveraged high liquidity environment, they will, and prices
| will go up. Look at the terrifyingly overbuilt real estate in
| China with pricing comparable to NYC or London and huge
| vacancy rates.
| fiftyacorn wrote:
| Barry Miles book "London Calling" about the evolution of london
| counter culture post-war also cites this with all the artists
| living in squats
| awongh wrote:
| I always believed in that narrative but nowadays I do think
| there's some selection bias at work- no one mentions all the
| other places that have some creative people that were never the
| birthing ground for a cultural movement.
|
| Because after a certain point I realized- lots of places are
| cheap (sure slightly less now) but not everywhere is going to
| produce some kind of large scale cultural movement.
|
| The one that a lot of people seem to know is Detroit- for the
| last 20 years everyone has been saying _wow, lots of artists,
| wow, you can buy a house for $10_ or whatever, but that hasn 't
| been enough.
|
| Sadly a part of me believes that maybe physically localized
| culture isn't a thing anymore with the internet. Being able to
| make beats / tiktoks anywhere is too much of a counter-force to
| people being in the same physical space, no matter how much
| people seem to love the idea- and this is the true boring
| reason why this doesn't happen anymore, not that *blame the
| boomers* rent has gone up.
| msgodel wrote:
| I think for localized culture to develop it needs to be
| exclusive in addition to the need for it to be cheap for
| people to focus on cultural rather than economic output.
|
| Outsiders hate being excluded though so the barriers all get
| knocked down. In face our modern social norm considers any
| kind of exclusion a moral failure, even excluding people who
| dislike the social norms. Maybe this results in a more
| efficient (perhaps even more pleasant) society but the cost
| is unique local culture.
| flir wrote:
| I think it's more about Capitalism. It took about 6 weeks
| for grunge to make it from a Seattle basement to a Paris
| catwalk, and that was three decades ago.
|
| If it might make money, it'll get amplified.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| Nirvana debuted in 1988 and it wasn't until 1991 that
| they hit it big and brought grunge to the larger music
| world outside of the region.
|
| We were drowning in crappy corporate driven pop prior to
| that for years (with bright spots like techno,
| industrial, etc.)
| awongh wrote:
| idk, I think cultural elitism is alive and well.... no
| matter which area of culture you're in. If anything
| "curator" culture is making it worse, everything needs to
| be categorized, rated and put on tier lists.
| flir wrote:
| Shades of The Tipping Point. You can't replicate it because a
| slightly different melting pot is at the root of every
| cultural explosion.
|
| (But I reckon cheap rent, leisure time and a laissez faire
| attitude to drugs are almost always in the mix).
| twic wrote:
| I think you need a place with cheap rents that is within
| striking distance of places with very expensive rents.
| Artists can afford the former, but their customers (literal
| art buyers, or culture vultures of various other kinds, media
| execs, journalists, etc) are located in the latter.
| awongh wrote:
| The counterpoint is in the GP post though- Athens, Georgia.
| It's sort of close to Atlanta, I guess?
| quesera wrote:
| Athens GA is a big college town though. The dynamics and
| lifecycles are different.
|
| Agreed that being two hours from Atlanta is too far for
| high relevance.
| quesera wrote:
| Right. Necessary, but not sufficient.
|
| San Francisco was inexpensive up through the 1980s, and the
| _non-commerical_ creative side of the city started draining
| out in the 1990s (first slowly, then much more quickly -- it
| 's all long gone now. Apologies to anyone who would like to
| believe otherwise :).
|
| This is also true of New York, on approximately the same
| timeline.
|
| In the early 2000s, Austin and Portland tried to take up the
| creative mantle, with some success. Both are struggling to
| maintain it now, for the same reasons but on a slower
| timeline.
|
| Cheap rents are a prerequisite, but there are other sparks
| required for a place to catch fire.
|
| I don't know of any US cities that are doing anything
| interesting today. Not at the scale of SF and NYC certainly,
| but also not even at the scale of 20ya Portland and Austin.
|
| I think part of the issue is that rent is not adequately
| cheap in _any_ US cities now that have critical mass plus
| tolerable living conditions (climate, economy, politics).
| This worries me.
| awongh wrote:
| It seems relevant that now it's extremely accessible for US
| people to move abroad to another country. It feels like
| Mexico City, Costa Rica, Bali, Thailand, etc. have taken up
| some of the slack from Austin and Portland.
|
| Edit: More specifically in terms of cost of living anyways.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chattanooga, the (far) suburbs of
| Nashville...
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Pittsburgh was on that list.
|
| Then we got Uber and Google, and our nationally-cheap
| housing prices have jumped up closer to the norm - which
| is too high for the bottom half of earnings population.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| I was close to moving to Pitt a while back and was
| stunned when the house I was looking at doubled in price
| in less than 6 months...
|
| Indianapolis has been going through the same thing (we
| are getting some of the overflow from the housing crunch
| in Nashville, etc.)
|
| I snagged a house at a decent price last year after
| looking for over a decade.
| thomassmith65 wrote:
| Mark Fisher was arguing the point about cheap rent ages ago in
| _' The Slow Cancellation of the Future'_. As an example, he
| used London squats in the 70s enabling punk rock.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-12 23:01 UTC)