Beating a Dead "Cogitative" Horse?

I'm not one for regurgitating questions in an evolving sort-of way...okay, maybe I am.  The discussions on a most recent blog posting, took on a very thought-provoking notion of our society's loss of culture however, and I just can't help myself.

I won't reiterate that particular jargon here (please read it), but several well-thought-out theories and comments on our [national] cultural identity over the past decade led me to re-clarify my own interpretation of cultural icons or images.

The argument was three-fold:
1.  There was a noticeable decline of "new" cultural icons created in the last decade when compared to previous decades.

2.  The last decade showed a more varied, less "monolithic culture" than perceived in previous decades.

3.  Our current era, there is less variety in "the powers that be" that end up creating or distributing ideas, images and the like through media.

I say all of these assessments are true, at least to some extent.

What I think we must first distinguish between is culture and image.  Culture is as culture does and what ever is happening or not happening, and however we are reacting or not reacting; that determines what our culture is currently.

Image however, that is the crux of this discussion.

I definitely agree that in this past decade, there is most definitely a perceived loss of "mainstream" images that reflect our current culture (And no...your Obama family poster you bought on the sidewalk of 34th and 8th doesn't count.) And because media is so varied (blogs, Google, Twitter, movies, cable, etc.) that variety of images and icons seem too numerous to catalogue properly.

What is at such juxtaposition with this notion, however, is that the media makers are becoming monolithic.  (I mean, look at ClearChannel or Fox, or Wal Mart...)  Could these image and icon creators may be creating an era of perceived diversity?  Or have these monolithic media giants helped to spur on a counter-culture of image and icon makers?

This circular discussion is made up of many points, for sure.  One thing I think most of us could agree on perhaps is that this past decade's culture might be harder to label or summarize than previous decades.

Of course perception is poised in progress, so I assume that in 2035, our view of 2000-2009 might shake out even further. 

The Pervasiveness of Retro Culture?

I can't take credit for this posting's title, but this posed question yesterday is too interesting to not explore a little further.

Jake Rollefson argues that with this new era we live in, we are not producing much "new" culture" and are looking to our past cultures.  In short, we are all "retro-centric."  While he hits home with alot of his observations, the actual act of looking back or infusing the nostalgic past with the present is not out of the ordinary for our culture.

Look at the 1970s' obession with the 1950s.  Or perhaps the 90's grunge era that borrowed ideals from the 60s.  Take a look at these for additional reading:

How the 70s made the 80s Look Like the 50s

50's Nostalgia in the 70's




The Retro Explosion

What I think is a larger question, and one we should examine, is when we do look at reto-symbols: what context are we viewing them in?  For example, in the 1970s after an era of countercultural revolution, war, assasinations of global leaders and larger, conflicting world perspectives, the American culture hightened it's fascination and nostlagic longing for a simpler time: an idealized 1950s.

At present, what could be causing us to turn backward to many eras is--as Jake would term it--"lack  of culture."  I would argue rather that it is a decline of cultural kitsch, things, or icons that cause us to seek those items or images of the past.  Part of this steady interest in what is retro could definitely lie in the accessibility of these items: Ebay, Ipod, Google, etc.

Perhaps the dawning of online social networking, has increased a need to connect, and a defining common denominator would be these iconic symbols of our childhood: Remeber G.I Joe?  Star Wars?  Larry Bird?  The Ford Thunderbird?  The Beatles?...  We can quickly gravitate toward and communicate with those who understand our symbolic childhood code.
Of course, another question this raises is the children who have grown up during the 2000s, what icons will they hold on to?  An image of Facebook?  WebKinz? An iPod? 

What is so hard to isolate in our current state of retro-mania, is that it ends up being so personal for each individual.  I like watching the Golden Girls not because I was invested in the late 1980s cultue, but because it reminds me of spending Saturday evenings with my grandmother.  My sister has picked up music from Bob Dylan not because she is invested in the ideologies or social turmoil of the 60s, but she recognize a really good songwriter.  My mother can watch any Andy Griffith Show episode any time she wants and enjoys being nostalgic for a period of time she actually remembered experiencing.

When studying icons and symbols of various eras, I think it is important to isolate what context those symbols are currently being viewed in and how that could, or could not, be in juxtaposition with the here and now.  What do you think?

What reto-icons do you still seek?  Why?  What do they remind you of?  Do you find a certain retro-era being celebrated more than others in our current culture?

I'm interested to know your thoughts.