The Decade With No Name
 

So here we are mid-way through the penultimate year of this decade ... and as I predicted nine years ago, it has become the Decade With No Name.


Nothing has stuck. Not "The Aughts" or "The Ohs." I suppose the closest thing is the tongue-twisting ease of saying "The Two Thousands."


Not only is there no handy moniker for this numerically challenged decade, there's been no particular style or focus that I can see.


I guess it's best for there to be some distance to discern that sort of thing, but I'm getting a big picture of NOTHING - - whereas pretty much every decade until the 1990's had at least the reputation of a distinct style that immediately comes to mind when we say The 50's or The 60's. Works for the 70's and 80's, too. The 30's and 40's were less distinct and somewhat interchangeable, but the 20's were very distinct indeed.


So what happened? Turns out the characterlessness of the 90's was not the unique character of that decade. It has persisted now for 20 years to the end of the, uh, um, the Two Thousands.


Is this the end of style as we know it? Have we finally arrived at a homogenous future of blanditude?

2010 certainly won't be as futuristic as I'd hoped. But far more disturbing is the lack of identity. It's not even the dystopia of BladeRunner. It's just bleh.


BlehRunner. Our Future is Now.

I imagine that a couple decades from now they/we'll be calling it "the turn of the century" just as those of us born before the millennium refer to the 1900's as turn of the century.

Or, if we wanna be unique and get it to take quicker, we could call it "the turn of the millennium", but that's even more of a mouthful, isn't it?

That's our Steve, the eternal optimist. :D

For once, I completely and totally agree with Steve.

In Australia, it is accepted use throughout the country to refer to this decade as the "Naughties" Ye may titter, titter ye may, but everyone here is using this nomenclature (much to my secret delight)

Wouldn't The Naughties have been better for the 90's?

The Roaring Twenties! The Naughty Nineties!!!


Is it a lame rhyme on The Aughties?


You couldn't say that, I suppose, down under ... because in Australian that's how "The Eighties" would sound.


Still ... I'm a little jealous. At least there's a name.






But the toilets still swirl in the wrong direction.

Well, it "ought" to have a name.

So does "aught".

Well, one of the early suggestions was "The Zeros." Never caught on, for obvious reasons. But at least it's fitting.


That's not to say I haven't enjoyed the, sigh, the Two Thousands. I have. Immensely.


But as a decade, it's the second featureless one in a row. And I'm tired of that.

Eh. It'll work itself out. Or not.

Regarding the "characterlessness of the 90's", I totally disagree. Of course, I came of age in the 90's, so you'll see it differently from me, but is a decade featuring this list "characterless"?

(Please excuse my use of sound bites but it's a concise way to describe how the decade was distinct.)

End of Apartheid, Fall of Berlin Wall
Nirvana/Pearl Jam
Gen X's slacker culture
Ska's 3rd Wave, leading into Rockabilly, Swing, Punk revivals
Peak of Rave culture
PC Gaming as we know it comes into being - First Person Shooters (Doom), Real Time Strategy (the original Warcraft).
Columbine

And, oh yeah, the invention of the World Wide Web, causing The Internet To Go Public.

The world was a very different place after the 90's ended.

Yes, the '90s already have a name: Post Cold-War.

Similarly, the '30s and '40s aren't so much defined by the numeric appellation as by The Depression and World War II.

I suspect (though futurism is a fool's game) that eventually this last decade will primarily come to be defined by 9/11 and the spasmodic reaction to same.

Besides the "names" we give periods tend to be erroneously reductive rather than helpfully descriptive so if we can skip that for a couple decades I'm all in favor.

I don't have any suggestions for what to name the decade - but everytime I see this thread title I think of that song with the line: I've been to the desert on a horse with no name

Don't know about the other stuff, but I'm pretty sure the Berlin Wall fell in the late 80's

Barely, it fell in November 1989. Besides, "the '60s" didn't really start until 1963 or so. As cultural movements the "decades" are generally only rough approximations. "The '50s" similarly start in the late '40s and started to crackup with the Civil Rights movement in the late '50s leaving a period of the better part of a decade that people aren't really sure which they should be assigned to.

Well, I guess for me the fall of the Berlin Wall was the culmination of the Red Scare. The 80's for me included red/commie jokes and such, as well as Reagan/Gorbachev talks, so the fall of the wall fell squarely in line with all that 80's-esque stuff. Maybe that's just me.

But it also marked the beginning of the Post-Cold War period which was a major psychological shift from what had come before.

I guess it is like asking to which apartment the wall dividing me from from our neighbor belongs.

Good metaphor

True, the decades don't correlate exactly with the chronology of the numbers. What we think of as The Sixties is likely '63 through '71 or 2. Same true for all the others, but it's pretty darn close.


But as for either the Berlin Wall or Nine Eleven, I posit that political events ... with the lone exception of WWII ... don't make up the "style" of the decades, at least the styles that I'm thinking of.

Perhaps political events and climates made what we think of as the 50's or 60's or 70's possible ... but it's the pop culture (some of it politically influenced), the music, the fashions, the zeitgeist if you will - - that characterizes these decades and gives them the unique "flavor" we've come to associate them with.


So, I'm gonna have to say meh to the Berlin Wall as characterizing any decade, imol. And I think most of the other things on CP's list were 80's as well. Or reeked of them, at any rate.


But, heh, DURING the 80's I wasn't so sure that decade had a character. And, of course, it infamously did.

Please, one has only to watch an episode of Beverly Hills Teens to see what the 80's was about (cartoon I used to watch, silly stuff)

Of course, the 80's to me was all about punk rock (which was actually a late 70's thing for me in the beginning).

I don't remember the 90's and it's better than way, Decade of Turmoil is what I call it. But, materialism was the social definer.

The millennium decade I DO remember. ;) But, I think the economic problems are what is going to define it and the return of crafting/hand-made culture will have a sociological impact on the future.

Of course, I'd argue that you have it backwards and that it was the political environment that was driving the pop cultural environment and thus the geopolitical events are the essential mileposts.

But it doesn't really matter.

Millenni-Os.

It's more than just delicious, it's nutritious!

I heard it was full of trans fats ;)

That's a terrible thing to say about the trannies on this board.

I tend to associate decades' "flavors" more strongly with their political environments than their pop culture. YMMV

So, if the 90s brought us grunge, emo, house, electronica, chill, and other categories I still haven't caught up with, can anyone name a musical style or trend that emerged here in the "naughty aughties?" I hope it isn't just "Disney-tween-pop" that will define this dwindling decade!

It's interesting to me that most recent decades carry with them an immediate mental image, the 50's greaser, 70's Disco, Roaring 20's etc...

But when I think of the last 0's - 1900 to 1910 - Not much comes to mind. Perhaps being dull for the first decade or two is the norm for a new century.

Two thoughts immediately come to mind on that:

1. It wasn't really until after World War I that the United States began to dominate the world stage and therefore play a major role in setting the tone.

2. Mass communication and easy movement across regions is probably an important element in creating a widespread national "meme" for an age. And the late teens are when those really started to come together with radio and movies making it possible for the entire country to be simultaneously consuming the same popular culture and the cheap automobile allowing for a level of personal freedom in movement hardly dreamed at before.

Hmm, I'm intrigued.

Again, I was 13 in 1990, so for me, the 90's were very specific pop-culturally, very different from the 80's. Grunge was a real deal for me, the same way disco was for people in the 70's or even, dare I say it, the Beatles were for that generation. I saw Pearl Jam on SNL and fell in love, buying Ten the very next day. I went to thrift stores and bought flannel shirts, tore my jeans, wrote bad poetry. I watched MTV daily then.

If you want to say that the 3rd wave of ska reeked of the 80's, then you're ignoring how much more mainstream the 3rd wave was (in America, at least, the 2nd was more hyped in the UK). Save Ferris, Dance Hall Crashers, Reel Big Fish, Goldfinger, almost-made-its like Mealticket and Skankin' Pickle...it was everywhere, and of course the bigger, more mainstream names of Sublime and No Doubt broke through into standard 90's fare.

Slacker culture was a real thing, and the ripples continue today. Before then the concept of living in your parents basement and working retail for years into your 20's was nowhere near as average and accepted. (Maybe it just appears this way, but appearances are what we're talking about here.) Clerks and Reality Bites are the obvious examples.

I think I'm officially too old now to help you with that one. Ask someone who was 13 in 2000...

I think of the guy on the huge bike.

Perhaps that can be pushed further to say that now that things have splintered into sub-cultures via the internet, these national memes are mostly no more.....or perhaps, that they now move so quickly that characterizing this decade will be much harder.

I don't think you can tell what the decade was about until it's years later and you can look back and see what's changed since.

The internet itself, while transformative, can't be said to be a "90's" thing. It's going to continue well into the future, and won't be a unique attribute of one particular decade any more than, say, the automobile was of the decade it transformed.


For something to be decade-flavorful, it has to have either disappeared or morphed nearly beyond recognition. If the styles and music of the 20's or the 50's had continued on, they wouldn't be the styles of the 20's or the 50's.



I dig CP's particulars about the 90's, but it all still seems a continuation of the 80's to me.

Off by about 20-30 years. The penny-farthing was at peak popularity in the 1870s, early 1880s.

You're right about that.

Here's the part where I just call you an old man. ;) I do believe that the older one gets the more things seem to be a continuation of the past. Already, I'm feeling these effects.

I can't believe I'm wrong about the bike! There goes my pre-WWI house of cards. (To be honest, I think Alex is right about pre-WWI America's lack of tone.)

Also, I agree that "the Post 9/11 World" is going to be the buzz phrase that sticks, same as "the McCarthy Era".

There's also the fact that for people who lived through the times the sense of the zeitgeist is going to be extremely different from person to person.

I'm only two years older than CP but I've never heard of most of the bands that she mentions as defining the era for her. For her grunge was real but for me (and I lived in Seattle at the time) it was something broadly mocked except for specifically the music. For my mom, coming of age during the late sixties, early seventies the counterculture was pretty much a non-event happening elsewhere.

Heck, while we all agree that there was something we label "the sixties" people have been arguing ever since the sixties over what exactly that was and its essential elements.

Good point on the nichification of culture. Maybe this decade will come to be known as the Balkanizing Aughties.

I think this decade will be more characterized by what has occurred with social networking and media revolution due to advances made possible by technology and the internet. Some of this started in the '90s, but this is the decade where it caught on with the masses.

Actually, most of the bands she listed were Ska bands, not nearly as big of a phenomenon as grunge was, with Southern California being the epicenter. So it's not too surprising that, especially someone as admittedly music-ignorant as you doesn't know them.

The 50s and 60s are VERY much defined by their car culture. Even though the car existed before, and existed afterwards, you can definitely point to the automobile and how it fit into the culture of that era as being connected with that era and only that era. Drive-in theaters, the iconic image of a diner with a battalion of fins parked out front, teens cruising the main drag a-la American Graffiti. These are uniquely 50s images, the fact that you could still find examples after that being irrelevant. So I have no problem defining the 90s by the mainstreaming of the internet and email, and the Milleni-Os by the emergence of social networking. While part of a continuum, the use of the internet in the 90s is very distinct from what emerged in this last decade and I think will be remembered as such. As different as the pre and post oil crisis car culture.

Of course there's going to be bleed over in either direction when trying to use the artificial dividing line of years divisible by 10. The Beatles' early success was with 50s music. It was well into the 90s before flannel really supplanted hypercolor shirts and acid wash jeans. But then, it's less about "this social trend was seen only in this decade," it's more about a few seminal moments and the cultural reaction to them.

Maybe so, but correct where I'm wrong about your list of stuff not being 90's (despite that you became aware of those things then).

Pearl Jam? 90's really? Could be wrong, but I thought they were around in the 80's. I'm no expert on Nirvana, but weren't they the epitome of grunge, and wasn't grunge an 80's phenom? Same with Gen X. I thought that was a term coined in the 80's. Need research. Where's Alex?

"Ska's 3rd wave?" Well I think 3rd wave says it all. Same with "Peak of Rave Culture," and "PC Gaming as we know it comes into being." All these phrases imply something existed before. I acknowledge your perception of these things coming to the forefront of culture in the 90's, but I knew them all quite well in the 80s' -- so it doesn't wash for me ... ya know, as an Old Man.

Maybe it is a function of age that cultural transfer points get indistinct, but I don't think so. I pretty distinctively remember the differences between the 60's, the 70's and the 80's. And not simply because I was young(er).



Really? Where? I've never seen any such arguments. It seems, and always has seemed from living through it and paying attention to most things referencing it, that the themes and essential elements of the 60's are pretty much agreed upon. Our mileage obviously varies.


And going to Betty's earlier point, even as a child, I was distinctly aware of the Sixties' distinctiveness from other decades, as it happened. It was a revolutionary era, and I'm pretty sure it was perceived that way by tons of people at the time.

But that point is more true for me of subsequent decades. I was aware of the 70's as a separate culture primarily for being so very different from the 60's ... and didn't really grok 70's culture till it was nearly over. Same for the 80's.


But in looking carefully now at the Nineties and the Naughites, I'm really not seeing any age-worn loss of perception. They're just relatively bland to the 8 preceding decades, and relatively the same as each other relative to those same 8.

I think to evaluate the high points of any decade, you imagine what a young person would say, to those who had gone before, "Oh my god . . .

"You did what?" "You had to do what?" "You had what?" "You didn't have what?" Measured that way, from a technological standpoint, at least, this decade is the decade of thinness, capacity and online transactions as the default preference.

Pearl Jam formed in 1990. Nirvana technically started in the late 80s, but Dave Gohl didn't join until 1990 and they didn't become popular until Nevermind in 1991. So as a cultrual point, those two are without a doubt products of the 90s.

And your insistence that something must exist exclusively in a particular decade to be considered iconic of that decade doesn't wash with me. It's not about exclusivity, it's about cultural impact. The internet can be traced back to the late 50s, but it is without a doubt a defining phenomenon of the 90s.

The internet is without a doubt a defining phenomenon of the 90s, but a particular USE of the internet (social media) is a defining phenomenon of the Milleni-Os (the same way that a particular USE of cars as a social tool for teens is a defining phenomenon of the 50s).

Coffee has existed for centuries. Coffee shops have existed for decades. But with grunge came the Seattle influence, came the rise of Starbucks. An defining phenomenon of the decade.

I think we need Madz and Tori in here. Describe to them checking your email once per day because you only had a few hours left that month to log into AOL, having a cell phone only in the car for emergency purposes, renting VHS movies from a store instead of having DVDs show up in the mail. Then ask again if the Milleni-Os (yeah, I'm not giving up on that one) are indistinct from the 90s.

As I said before, you can always find ways to blur that line. That goes for every single decade. Time isn't actually broken up into distinct units of 10 years, it just happens to be a period that generally encompasses enough cultural change that artificially drawing those dividing lines highlights some important cultural touchstones.

Excellent post.

I got to thinking... I wonder if people in Madz and Tori's generation can imagine life without the internet, cell phones, or even VHS/DVDs. We've come such a long way since I was their age.

Speaking for Madz - no she can't. Her battery on her phone dies and she's lost for the two hours it takes to re-charge it. God forbid she not reply to her friends texts instantly. God forbid they actually dial the phone and speak to one another.

She still has VHS tapes although now that we have Blu Ray even the DVDs are old technology to her.

I'm not sure she's ever even seen an encyclopedia.

I agree that was a great GD post with much food for thought.


But I don't see what the old technology argument has to do with it. One could say the same for people of my age ruminating on life without the refrigerator or the telephone. I suppose the best analogy is the transition from stuck-with-land-lines to cell phones. Is that some kind of 90's touchstone? I don't think so. And to me, it argues for the exclusivity factor. We'll have portable communications devices for the foreseeable future. I doubt anyone will associate that with any particular decade.

Would flappers be instantaneously 20's if they endured in the 30's? Poodle skirts as 50's if they remained in the 60's? I guess my examples work easiest with fashion, but I think this factor applies more widely.


It was earlier noted that the effects of the "distinct decades" seem to run from the 2nd or 3rd year to the next 2nd or 3rd year. Certainly true with the 50's clearly brimming through the early 60's, and the 60's clearly running thru the early 70's. So anything in the early 90's, I consider part of the 80's phenomenon. But that's just me ... as someone who has personally observed this lag-trend for nearly 5 decades.


And, heheh, perhaps Starbucks is an 80's thing ... but not coffee. If anything, I think coffee is more iconic of the 30's than the 80's ... but it certainly had peaks of popularity in both. So coffee goes to demonstrate my point. Continuous popularity for 80 years excludes it from the flavor of any particular decade. I think the same will prove true of the internet.

What I think this thread argues for is the fact that there is no rules committee on these things. Different people buy into them in different ways.

But when the National Board of Naming Approximately Decadal Quasi-Social Phenomenological Clustering is formed, I'll support your nomination to it.

Perhaps there's no rules committee. But I think the clear trend for people to have a definitive concept of The Fifties or The Seventies or the Twenties or the Sixites argues that there are definite guidelines, if not rules.

I agree people tend to have definitive concepts of those decades. I disagree that they tend to all be the same definitive concepts except in the broadest -- and therefore most meaningless -- strokes.

You and I don't even agree on whether they're primarily defined by pop culture or econopolitical events.

Plus, if only four decades have achieved such it is hardly remarkable that the last two haven't (if one agrees with you that they haven't). Especially since at least one of them (our conception of the '50s) is almost entirely fictional.

I'm afraid I have to correct you on one of these. The 50's as we know it really began in the late 40's, especially with regard to fashion. Christian Dior's New Look of 1947 was a defining moment in fashion history, and marked the change from fabric-conservative 40's looks into the decadence and femininity that would define women's fashion in the 1950's. Included in that, would be the silhouette that would later become the iconic poodle skirt.

I think it might be fair to conclude that the 50's as we know it actually ran for about 15 years (sort of like Disney anniversary years?)

Yeah, as mentioned before, many of these "decades" don't quite match the calendar.

The 50s to me run from the end of World War II to 1957 or so. And are all about the United States dealing with its new position as the most powerful nation in the world, the burgeoning communist "threat" and a booming economy.

'57 to '63 is kind of a gray area as the Civil Rights movement starts to fracture the perceived conformity and "go along get along" tone of the '50s but the sixties don't really get going until the Vietnam War gets added to that mix and as a nation we start to struggle with the fact that maybe the government is an active source of wrongdoing. Then the sixties last until 1973 or so when the wind down of the Vietnam War eliminates the bete noir of the counterculture forcing it to see if it can survive all on its own.

Combined with proof that the government isn't to be trusted and economic malaise the '70s really only lasts 5 or 6 years until 1982 or so when Reagan policies really begin to creep in and AIDS lays waste to the ideas of relatively riskfree promiscuity.

But that's my view of it all. The actual "pop cultural" artifacts of each era are secondary byproducts to the larger social phenomena producing.

I think it might be fair to say that most people, unlike our beloved Alex, don't think of the nostalgic past in anthro-political terms. ;)

Watergate, Vietnam, Berlin Wall falling, Desert Storm, I Have a Dream, Great Depression. Those define decades just as much as bell bottoms and hoop skirts ever did.

Desert Storm, really? ;)

Yes, really. Green night vision images of anti aircaft fire still = Desert Storm and the 90s to me.

Yes, really. I'm another who thinks of decades first in anthro-political terms. When I think of the fifties, the first things to mind are red scare, McCarthyism, Brown vs. Board of Ed, I like Ike. Thoughts of cars with fins, hula hoops and Elvis are secondary.

I will put you two on the mailing list for my cult newsletter.

I'm only partway in. I consider both sides of the coin relatively equally. I think the political and the cultural/pop cultural are rather inseparable.

I think the big political and socio-economic crossovers are considered by the larger populi as endemic to their times. Yes, the Great Depression certainly DEFINES the 30's in America.

Vietnam is essential to everyone's consideration of the 60's.


The Cold War went on so long I don't think it can be ascribed to any particular decade.

But wow, the 10-day Desert Storm action being essential to the 90's? My mileage certainly varies on that one.


I'm not making anyone wrong. If that's 90's to you, then it is. There's nothing incorrect about picking and choosing which elements of time you assign in your mind as quintessential to any artificially-defined time period.



So yeah, I suppose even I can come up with a political element or two that are quintessential to the Milleni-Os (sp? - but I love that term). But no pop-cultural ones spring to my mind ... for the last 20 years. No fashions (seems everything is a re-tread of earlier fashions). No music (nothing seems a new and unique style). I'm getting the distinct feeling It's All Been Done.

I think we're in the Neo-Retro decade.

Megadittoes.

Music - compare the lineups of Lollapalooza (the touring one that lasted from '91-'97, not the current Chicago incarnation) to those of Coachella if you want an overview of the shift in music. Arguments can go on forever over what, if any, of the music in the Milleni-Os can be considered "new", but the overall musical landscape is marekdly different. An argument could be made that it wasn't a decade of particular musical innovation, but that doesn't mean that the musical trends don't have a unique signature in terms of what was being listened to and what was making money.

And for that matter, what about distribution? iTunes, MySpace, file sharing. Perhaps stylistic innovation was simply overshadowed by industry innovation this decade. And that HAS produced it's own style. The biggest musical style innovation could easily be considered the rise of the YouTube-friendly song.

There are probably an infintie number of ways you can categorize a decade's culture. Music, fashion, politics, business models, art, architecture, travel patterns, etc. etc. etc. Just because you can pick one of those out and show that it didn't change much from the decade before doesn't mean that everything taken together doesn't add up to significant cultural shift. All it means is that particular element didn't carry as much social significance over that period. It so happens that technology took center stage this decade.

Woo hoo!

Some very interesting points. I think that styles, music, fashion, etc. are, to an extent, inseparable from the socio-political climate in that they are often a reflection of, or a reaction to, what came before.

Take, for example, the gilded age. The decadence reflected the benefits brought by increased industrialism and the rise of the machine age. It also reflected the vast gulf between the upper and lower classes. Society's rules and strict code of behavior reflect the end of Victorian times and perhaps the peak of Victorian rigidity.

Then WW1 came along, and with it, a need for war-induced frugality. Skirts got straighter, used less (by comparison) fabric. Women showed their patriotism by getting involved in the effort in any way they were allowed (eg: volunteering, nursing, etc). Between this increased activity/work (most importantly, the acceptability of work-like behavior by even the higher classes, who ruled fashion at the time), and the increasing popularity of sports (decades later than men, but doctors were beginning to extol the virtues of an active life, making such behavior more normal and less shocking), women needed clothes that allowed them the freedom to move. This further affected hemlines and silhouettes.

The decadence of the 20's, like the decadence of the 50's, reflected society's desire to "return to normalcy" following a period of war and frugality.

Just a small example, but you can see that politics and culture are inseparable because one affects the other in both direct (hippie peace symbols) and indirect (large skirts) ways.

And I just thought of some markers for the decade we're now leaving. There was a decadent period marked by growing materialism, which saw the rise of the iPod, flat-screen TVs, and smart phones. Also we've seen the rise of "geek culture" which, though it began in the 90's, wasn't really a popular movement until it gained momentum.

So do I, I just think one is the product of the other.

Perhaps the uniform of the Aughts will be low-slung jeans and a caffeine-molecule t-shirt :)

It's 90's, not 80's, that GD was referring to as a Starbucks/coffee decade.

I can't believe you thought grunge was 80's. :p Here's a great way I once saw the shift into the 90's described:

Michael Jackson's Dangerous was on the top of the charts in the Xmas sales of 1990. In January of 1991, Nirvana's Nevermind took off like a rocket and Dangerous fell off a cliff. The theory the author put forward was that kids got MJ's album in their Xmas stockings and returned it to the stores to swap it for Nevermind. (Or more likely, they spent their Xmas cash on it.) Let's say it together: AND THE WORLD WAS NEVER THE SAME.

As someone who had never known an America At War before then, seeing news about the Gulf War was a seriously big deal for me. Agreed with GD on the goggles!

I thought the late 70's and early 80's were very influenced by the 50's. The Ramones used simple riffs and lyrics like Ba-ba-bamp-ba ba-ba-ba-bamp, reminiscent of 50's doo-wop. Poodle skirt fashions, Happy Days and of course Grease. Tie-dye came back in the mid-late 80's as part of a 60's throwback.

I disagree. The internet came first, now net neutrality and censorship are political issues. Napster was some guy programming, now it's big legal history. iTunes and cell providers didn't come out of government maneuvers. Twitter is what moved the Iranian protests forward...

Aaah the 90s. Thank god all that plaid stuff is relegated to the world of lesbian fashion.

I agree with CP, GD, and of course NA

Of course decade borrow and reinvent themselves from the past - many of those 80's looks were reworkings of the 40's. Ironically, I think one of the "looks" our millennial decade will be remembered for is Steampunk, where we've turned to a past imaginary century.

Interesting theory. I suppose sort of like how hippies were a fraction of the population, yet have come to represent the time?

or beatniks, or ravers, or punk rockers, or flappers...

Well put, although I do not instantly think of goths when I think of the 90's (ravers yes, to some extent), so I suppose only time will show us what the standout style of the decade is/was.

I do think the recession will be the marker for the change into whatever the next "decade" will be (eg: whatever we'll remember the 20-teens for)

I am not saying that the flow is 100% in one direction. That would be nonsensical. I'm saying the direction of influence is predominantly in one direction.

And Twitter has not driven the Iranian protests, though it is certainly a popular idea among Twitterers.

Would you say it's been a significant organizing force?

It hasn't driven it, but it did facilitate it.

According to most of the people I've seen interviewed about it actually in Iran? No.

But I'm sure that it played some role.

It certainly played a role (for better or for worse) in worldwide reaction.

No argument there.

I believe it was only the first day or so where twitter made a big difference. The gov't had shut down all hardwire internet access in an attempt to smother organization and transfer of video/photos, but cell service was still up.

Since then I heard that they turn off all internet service (including on phones) from 4pm until the morning. I don't know if this is still happening.

This is a fascinating thread. I really agree with the things GD, Alex, Tom, CP, and Morri are saying

And, Moonliner, my image of the last turn-o-century is very clear: RAGTIME.

This goes along with my theory that every new pop cultural era looks back by about 20 years. This, I think, is due to two factors. One, those who grew up in a decade look back fondly and depict it when they're taking the reigns. And those who are consuming it are connecting - even if subconsciously - with their parents' youth.

Think about it:

1970s. Happy Days. Creators grew up in the 50s, depicted it.
1980s. Wonder Years. Creators grew up in the 60s, depicted it.
1990s. That 70s Show. Creators grew up in the 70s, depicted it.
2000s. Well, it would've been if it hadn't been canceled. Freaks and Geeks. Creators grew up in the 80s, depicted it.

Chris and I are in the process of composing our lists of what we were paying attention to culturally during the past 5 decades.

A couple of things that we realized during this process:

• What comes to represent a time period always seems to be the underground, the alternative, and what was not mainstream during that time period. The 80's All Stars perform in Devo Flower Pot Hats, but Devo was NOT popular when they first hit the music scene and were definately counter culture for a very long time. Beatnicks and Hippies were definately NOT the norm nor were Punk Rockers. There was no Hot Topic until 1988.
• This decade is the decade of Andy Warhol - everyone seems to be able to have their 15 minutes of fame. It's also the decade of the fall of privacy. YouTube and Social Networking have been the big movers and shakers in this respect.
• As far as my earlier comment about this being the decade of Neo-Retro, I think that has to do with the access everyone has to information from the past. When I was younger, it was MUCH harder to discover music and style from the past. I remember sifting through record bins at Music Market to find the first lady of Rockabilly, Wanda Jackson, Ska first wave artist Desmond Decker, early Glam, Louis Jordan and Wynonie Harris so I could swing dance, etc. I had no search engine to help me find other gems of whatever era I was into. Now, with just a few clicks, you can have a good overview of whatever style you want to reinvent or emulate.

Anyways, we'll have our own list by decade coming soon. We've always been a bit "counter culture" so we'll see how that fit with my theory of decade representation.

I knew you guys were old, but... wow. You really look young for your age.

What you talking about?

50 decades=500 years

Seriously, I think MP used his moderating powers to try and make me look like an idiot. It says 5 decades people!

I think this is the "I" decade where everything is individual.

I thought maybe you were taking about the iMac, iPod, and iPhone.