In a May 13 article in Time titled `The Me Me Me Generation', Joel Stein lambasted those youngsters born in the USA between 1980 and 2000 for their overwhelming self-absorption. For some inexplicable reason his title sounds even more damning than what I have chosen! The sum and substance of that article is that those youngsters are so narcissistic that they cannot see beyond their own noses (assuming they wanted to do that, in the first place) and cannot think of anything other than themselves. Self-centred is an epithet that just seems a woefully inadequate under-statement to describe them, Joel Stein avers, armed with streams of analysis and statistics. I have neither the depth of understanding of the American society nor the analytical ammunition to agree or disagree with him, but what I read certainly set me thinking as to what is the scenario in a more conservative society like the Indian middle class. The single major difference is that in the US, the succeeding generation is not expected to financially support the previous one as a pay-back, just as the latter is not expected to foot the bill for the youngster beyond his school days! In such situations, the quintessentially US tradition of DIY culture kicks in! In view of this, I guess the accusation of self absorption has more to do with the younger generation's desire to cocoon itself with its own preoccupations than with its closed fist when it comes to financial support.
Let us look at this issue in three parts - selfishness in financial matters, self-absorption to the detriment of family bonding and the consequent lack of emotion or feeling for others. For the purpose of brevity let us call the Grandparents' generation GPG, Parents' generation PG and the young generation YG. The disclaimer here is, all statements made are to be seen more in the generational perspective than as referring to a single family unit. And, remember we are talking of the middle class here and let us not focus on standard deviations!
Is YG financially more selfish in India? Whichever way we cut the pie, the answer is not clear. GPG probably had to toil harder to feed many more mouths in a joint family, including distant kith and kin who gravitated towards the sole educated and employed member of the extended family in a town or city for succour. Uninvited they came and latched on, as they struggled out of the morass of poverty and the GPG had that much more heart to oblige. This also meant abysmally low or no savings at all at the time of retirement for GPG, which in turn meant heavy reliance on PG for monetary support in old age.
With gradually increasing access to education as we celebrate it in India - however imperfect it is - as well as to employment opportunities, the overall financial burden on PG has been diluted somewhat. Higher disposable income and reduced demand from sponging relatives due to the gradual disintegration of the joint family system meant PG is not in the same dire financial position as GPG was at a similar juncture in life. While YG recognizes and acknowledges the fact that PG has invested resources in its own upbringing, it does not find anything extraordinary to crow about that. After all, what kind of parents would breed and then dump the children to fend for themselves? So, this argument, touted by GPG as a great virtue because of the more adverse circumstances then prevailing, turns out to be a whole lot of hot air for PG!
In defence, YG insists it gets out of PG's hair at the earliest - it willingly becomes a borrower (YG is definitely more of a risk-taker than prior generations, for the sake of good standard of living!) at an early stage in life to get higher education or car or house. Providing financial support to get girls married off is less of an issue, since girls are given similar education as boys and get similar jobs too. As such, the girls' ability to manage their own lives has increased. Anyway YG perceives the savings of PG as a reasonable reservoir for many eventualities. The clincher is this - GPG typically had no savings at the time of retirement; so PG was obliged to step in, otherwise who will do that? But PG saves enough and plans for retirement meticulously, so why expect financial help from YG? YG is clear that it will gladly support the family when in need. Very logical, one should admit and an incisive case against YG for financial selfishness is not made out. We do read about parents being left in the lurch, but then historically we have always had such cases and all generations should collectively hang their heads in shame for such despicable treatment of progenitors. But then, are parents always reasonable and is the YG always guilty in such cirumstances - who is to pass judgement on that?
Question: Is Y generally devoid of the ability to connect emotionally with others inside and outside the family?
There is clearly a problem here. There seems to be a gradual deterioration of the emotional bond between the generations. The environment in schools and homes are no longer what they were twenty years ago. Both parents of PG probably worked or were busy with their own inerests, resulting in lesser attention being given to YG. Availability of separate bed rooms with TVs, mobile phones and gaming for children ensured that YG spent their free time (may be, most of their time) cocooned in their own small world, cut off from the extensive human contact the earlier generations enjoyed in joint families and with the outside world. The downward spiral in terms of emotional bonding had begun and YG connected better with a few friends, that too through social media than with family members. Later, when youngsters saw some moolah without too much pain or struggle and realised that they need no longer be under the thumbs of their elders for survival, the tenor of their interactions with the elders changed. What aided in this process is the enormous influence of higher education, media and travel, which exposed the youngsters to wider horizons in all directions, desirable or otherwise. They started questioning beliefs and expectations, which were dictated by societal norms of yore, while purposefully moving away from the submissive tone adopted in their interactions with elders. Things tended to become matter-of-fact, more pragmatic than emotional. These features ended up being interpreted as disrespectful and offensive behaviour by GPG and PG, while YG continued its merry ride on its own revolutionary road, which became the new-normal! When you look from this angle, yes, YG does come through as less emotionally giving and more selfish than the earlier generations. This is evidenced by the plethora of troubles marriages go through nowadays and the phenomenal rise in suicides and divorces - some of them for the flimsiest reasons. These things do point to an inherent inability to deal with other people with tolerance and the desire for quick retreat into one's own personal space for security, regardless of the damaging fall-out all around.
But, let us temper that observation a bit. We see more youngsters seriously involved today in all sorts of attempts to teach/educate the poor and readily helping with other social causes - be it cleaning a neighbourhood or fighting the mafia to save a water-body in a city. They are much more politically and socially aware (I am not talking about discussing political issues threadbare from arm-chairs!), thanks to the media in general and to being part of the social media networks, making them willing participants in political and other rallies demanding changes for the better. I have personally known many young men and women who have ventured into disaster-hit places far away, to bravely put up with dismal conditions and help the affected people. All these are definitely not the signals a completely selfish brat-pack would send out. So, YG is not without its redeeming features here too.
What is happening is, overall, financial independence has given youngsters the ability to operate independently outside the influence of elders who are anchored in their conventional wisdom. Enormous amounts of time and money is spent by YG in what the elders see as trivial pursuits, primarily to pamper its own superficial cravings and to satisfy its urge to be abreast of peers in such material endeavours. While GPG and PG may have watered down their expectations from YG, based on experience, the chasm between what they want and what they get from YG is too big to bridge. And, I see no reason to hope for a change in YG's ways - it is probably far too enamoured of its new-found ways and more importantly, has neither the desire nor willingness to change!
