Up With Grups
I’ve never been a Star Trek fan nor am I a proponent of labels. While it is somewhat cliché to say, people are indeed more complex than stereotypes allow. Stereotypes will always fall short, but they are also, often based on some truth and society needs hooks to hang on, so the production of labels continues.
One current stereotype/label is that of the “grups” also known as “yippies” (combining yuppy and indie) or “yupsters” (yuppy and hipster), or the “alterna-yuppies.” This group, like all stereotypical group classifications, is difficult to peg. The term “grup” comes from an episode of Star Trek in which Captain Kirk and the team find themselves on a planet inhabited and ruled by children. The children refer to the team as “grups” which is short for “grown ups.” The planet is infected with a disease that greatly slows the aging process, killing anyone who “grows up.” You can see why the term was quickly chosen. Pop-culture relevance with a bite, who could ask for anything more?
New York magazine has recently written about this idea and R. Albert Mohler Jr. recently commented on it on his national radio show. What are we to make of this? Is there truth to this trend and if so, what are we to make of the commenters’ comments? Am I overly sensitive because I see myself in some of these descriptions? Questions abound while answers do not.
In trying to summarize the issue, New York magazine says: “This is an obituary for the generation gap. It is a story about 40-year-old men and women who look, talk, act, and dress like people who are 22 years old” and Dr. Mohler asks “Why do adults now not grow up? The distinctions between teenagers and adults are disappearing and it’s not because the teenagers are growing up, it’s because the adults aren’t.”
The problem (it seems to me) is that this conversation has become skewed, trying to cover two separate issues, yet combining them into one. I wholeheartedly agree that a prerequisite for adulthood is the taking on of and handling of responsibility, which much of this discussion handles well. Many adults refuse to take on responsibility, instead seeking a carefree existence of entertainment, but then again, isn’t this exactly what many of our retired people are also doing? If we’re going to point fingers, let’s be consistent.
However many comments seem to break down the further they are pressed. For example, both Mohler and the New York piece spend considerable time and energy examining music and dress. New York quotes someone as saying, “My father did not wear T-shirts. He did not own sneakers. He may have had one pair of jeans, crisp and stiff and store-bought blue, to wear on the weekends when we’d do things like go apple-picking. At all other times, he wore suits,” while Mohler adds “that’s what adults did, that’s what men looked like, you didn’t look like teenagers w/ messenger bags over your shoulder listening to an iPod, sitting with slumped shoulders waiting
for the bus to pick you up.”
The problem with this discussion is subtle but important. Notice that running through both the New York magazine piece and Mohler’s radio show, there is a heavy emphasis on clothing and music. All the while, the overarching argument is that there is a generation that shies away from responsibility. The sublte equation then becomes that if one dresses in this manner then they are also irresponsible. I’m fairly certain that Mohler would argue that yes, the two go together and are indicative of one another, but I’m not so sure.
For example, I do not wear suits to baseball games, I carry a messenger bag, I own an iPod (that does have Death Cab for Cutie on it), I own and wear T-shirts and sneakers. Listening to Mohler speak, that means that I’m not an adult and that I’m destroying the generation gap. Yet, is it possible that Mohler’s may be a rather superficial understanding at this point? For all of Dr. and Mary Mohler’s calls to modesty, there is also an implicit vanity. When Mary Mohler tells females that they ought not even go to check the mail without first “putting a little paint on the barn” (wearing make up), I’m more than a little concerned that what’s at issue here has nothing to do with adulthood and responsibility but external expectations and “looking the part.”
While dress and music are often overflows of the heart, must that always be the case? Is it a prerequisite of entering adulthood to trade in the Smiths for Bach? Is a messenger bag a sign of adolesence while a briefcase has some magical maturity essense? Is it possible that some of the external expectations of adults have (for some) changed while for others they haven’t and will not? Moreso, who defines what music or dress is appropriate for an adult and what is not? At what point does this conversation simply move into subjectivity?
Aren’t the true tests of adulthood the ability to take on and fulfill responsibility, the ability to provide for one’s self, care for others, etc. or is it dress and music? Can the two be discussed separately? Mohler’s concerns at this point seem to chase the outer issues of dress and music while only skirting around the true issues of the heart and it’s difficult to separate them in his speech.
It must be remembered that none of this takes place in a vaccuum. We live in, are shaped by and shape culture. The culture of adulthood seems to have taken some shifts that Mohler is uncomfortable with. While I wholeheartedly agree that we must combat the move away from taking on responsibility, I’m not so sure that the right approach is to attack dress and music. Is it possible that some of those things change with culture and that that’s not a bad thing?
- Read New York magazines piece “Up With Grups.”
- Listen to Al Mohler’s radio program “Understanding the Grup Generation.”
- Read the New York Posts‘ “Rebel With a 401(k).”
- Read Newsweeks “The Rise of the ‘Yupster.’”
- Read the Independent’s “Are You a Yindie?”
I’m reading this in my office wearing sneakers, cargo pants, and a T with my iPod next to me as I get ready to take on my work responsibilities for today - planning Easter week worship services and making arrangements for an international mission trip to a closed country. Oh, and I’ll be looking at homes later this week for my wife of ten years and I to purchase.
I maybe wearing Tevas in the church office right now, but my t-shirt is neatly tucked into my jeans (which happen to be Levi’s - does this make me a “master grup” - spare me the honor). That being said, I’m sick of all the effort that goes into naming and labeling the next generation. What are we the “X” generation or the “Y” or the “grups” of the “yupsters”? Enough already, it’s so sad to see the culture ravens buy into marketing gimmicks.
Well said, Brent. Thank you. It seems that the heart of the issue must be directed far beyond preferences such as how to dress or types of music listened to. If responsibility is the issue (and I believe there is one in our generation), then let’s keep talking about.
The good thing is that those who are responsible will usually reap the benefits of this rewarding value naturally. Those who are trying to fit an appearance mold will ultimately fool no one except for themselves because they will never know who they are. If people see character and wisdom, they can easily overlook an issue of mere tastes, so long as it is not imposed on everyone else.
I’m bare-footed.
I believe that we can not fully show our maturity if we continue to dress like children. Paul says that when I became a man I put away childish things. This can also mean the way that we dress. I know that as ministers we should seek to portray an inviting but authoritative appearance. All people respect a man in a suit. There is NO excuse for going out looking like a slob. God will bless those men and women who put their best foot forward when approaching the world. If we LOOK the part, our actions will surely follow. This is why I am always in, AT LEAST, a shirt and tie. I will put on the coat when I go outside or if I have any important handshaking to do.
okay jokes over….
I am really wearing berkinstocks(to Dr. Russ Moore’s disappointment), a pair of jeans that my wife told me either needed to be patched or thrown away, and a T-shirt one of my old college roommates left at my place. I am just keeping that worn in feel for him until next time I see him. Yeah that’s it! I say wear what you want. Let your actions speak for themselves. If my wife would let me, I would do the whole John the Baptist animal skins thing, with a Legends of the Fall grizzly coat for the winter. YEAH!!!
Most of my friends would be categorized as Grups, but I’ve never seen a good treatment on what they are and what they aren’t. I do think a look beyond the clothes and music is required, and that responsibility and willingness to delay gratification are much more important factors.
David
p.s. There’s a little girl in dire need of prayer. Read about her here.
There is a saying that no one takes you seriously until you turn 30. Maybe that should be amended to say “and you wear grown-up clothes.” Just kidding; kind of.
I try not to label people based on their attire, but unfortunately different segments of society have certain expectations. My younger brother used to always wear a bandanna on his head, a wife-beater t-shirt to display his tattoos, ripped up jeans, and piercings in his ears and tongue. Amazingly enough, he never could get or keep a decent job. He did this until he was in his 30s and finally had to “grow up” and wean himself off my parents’ teats. I told him unless he owned his own company and only catered to like-minded people or won the lottery, he would need to conform somewhat to the norms of mainstream society to become a productive citizen.
I have to wear a suit to work, so I like to dress down in jeans and t-shirts whenever possible, but one fashion trend I’ll never understand is the whole low-rider baggy pants phenom. Why people think I want to see their butt crack and the color of their underwear is beyond me. I even see this attire at church. There is a balance between wearing a three-piece suit to church and exposing yourself, and I think this comes much closer the latter category.
The saying “dress for success” has some validity to it.
sb
Kyle displays the “butt crack and the color of his underwear” as some sort of mystical devilry to catch fish out on the lake. Unfortunately, I know this to be true because I have seen it with my own two eyes (major corrective eye surgery has helped with most of the damage that was done).
On a more serious note, I realize that my previous post had all the characteristics of a whiny rant. Brent, I really appreciated your blog today. The words “vanity” and “modesty” can seem interchangeable in some women’s talks, and this notion we must in every way conform to the image of our elders just doesn’t jive with me (and it didn’t jive with them in regard to their elders, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum).
Paul saw wisdom in “becoming all things to all men” for the sake of the Gospel. Maybe there are a lot of times that it simply comes down to wearing a tie or tucking in a shirt so that there is no stumbling block in the way of the best communication of the Gospel…..it always depends on the context. Rebellion is no good either.
Brent, I still think you said it best. Your bloggin’ rocks!
First Twixters, not Grups……
The new stereotype of emerging young adults. Are you a Grup?……
First off, I really enjoyed reading your post. I think you offer a great discussion and bring up the distinction between clothing/music and responsibility and the level of one’s “adultness.”
2nd, Chris’ comment from above seems to be a bit far reaching. I have never read in Scripture that one’s dress or appearance can prevent or hinder people from conveying truth (certinally there are effective cultural sensitivities to respect, etc) To argue or debate the point of casual vs. business/formal church attire seems meaningless and non-essential to knowing God and making Him known for the sake of His glory.
3rd, I think Sean makes a good point about the interchangability of the words “vanity” and “modesty,” although I would extend that concept beyond just “women’s talks.” Coaching high school guys and girls has really shown me that self image is an increasingly crucial issue for young men and not just women. Your posting is a good reminder that intimately knowing the Father and understanding how He views us is far more important than a fleeting label like “grups.”
Great post. I was talking to my friend Amanda the other day and she was telling me that she needs to grow up. The thing is that she did not even think about what she wore or what she listened to, but about getting responsibility and making commitments. We all need to grow up, but look and listen to what ever you want.
thanks for the thoughts!
if our maturity is to be rated by our clothing, then maybe the question should be “where was the clothing made?” nice suit Mr.____ oh, it was made in a sweatshop?
is that mature?
i wonder if the “immature” people are more responsible with their purchases than the “respectable people”- maybe there IS a way to distinguish who is more mature based on clothing-
who is buying clothing that expliots child labor? I know it’s not exactly the topic, but i am kind of a hairbrained idiot….