Debating the 1990s
04/13/2024
There's a bit of a back-and-forth going on at Bleeding Fool over the worth of the 1990s.
I think the perception of any period is heavily colored by one's personal experience of it - either having lived through it, or its art, politics, and entertainment.
It's hard to separate a time of personal misery from the larger zeitgeist. Still, I think my take is an objective one. The pre-9/11 world was a better one, and while I found myself frustrated and depressed during that period, I still had a lot of fun. Indeed, I recognize that with better judgement, I'd have had a better decade.
The other issue with sitting in judgement is that culture and life don't simply flip with the page of a calendar. The decades bleed into each other, and what one thinks of as the epitome of a particular era may have happened before or after the actual dates in question.
For example, the decay of Protestantism didn't start in the 1990s, it was merely revealed then.
One can't look at the cultural tides in music, art, entertainment and politics in isolation.
At the same time, it is easy to fall into the trap of overdeterminism - the notion that the out come of a recent event was inexorably set in motion by a distant one. I see a lot of otherwise reasonable people insist that the Union victory in the Civil War is the direct, inevitable cause of all our contemporary problems. Apparently the people living and ruling in intervening decades were denied any form of agency. It's very much a Calvinist approach to history.
It is true that historical writers often were able to predict the future by examining contemporary trends. C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton and even J.R.R. Tolkien did this. But as Tolkien in particular might admit, nothing was fixed - no one was forced to follow that path. It's also true that many dangers fail to materialize, or that their impact is mitigated.
There are many currents in the stream of history, and some of them are hard to see. It's also the case that there are other powers at work, the Unseen who most analysts completely ignore.
Combine a purely secular materialist frame with overdeterminism and the result will likely be devoid of any useful analysis.
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.