obama – The Gen X Files

What Generation is Obama?

Obama was born in 1961, but what generation does he belong to? And why does it matter?

Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961. It seems pretty simple to use this date to determine what generation he belongs to, but generational boundaries are always contested. Some say he is a Baby Boomer, others say a Generation X’er, and still others have made up additional generations to assign him to.
So who is the final authority on the generational boundaries? The short answer is that there isn’t one, and that because generations are nothing more than a theory there probably never will be. Generations serve different purposes for different people. Some use them for understanding the cycles of history, others to understand marketing or political trends and still others for self-identification. Most theories ascribe some sort of characteristics to each generation that can be discerned both in the group and in individuals. Some may think that this is nothing more than stereotyping, but people born at certain times, growing up under certain conditions will have some similar attributes. For example, kids growing up during the high times after WWII were told to have high ideals and go out and change the world. And the Baby Boom generation (born 1943-1960) did just that, much to the chagrin of their parents. The kids growing up during the turbulent 60’s and 70’s had a very different experience during a time when kids were largely ignored. Generation X (born 1961-1981) took that message of alienation in their youth and applied it during their “slacker” young adulthood.
As you can see from above, I am already applying some specific dates for the generational boundaries. These dates are drawn from the work of Neil Howe and William Strauss, authors of “Generations” and many other books on the topic of generational research. Howe and Strauss use their extensive historical research to determine the generational boundaries based on cycles over the last 500 years. Although their research is considered the gold-standard of generational theory, there are other opinions about the generational boundaries.
Demographers often place the end of the “Baby Boom” in 1964, when the birth rate dropped down below it’s historic highs. Although this might seem a convenient boundary for the generation, much of generational theory has to do with attitudes and social norms rather than birthrate. The shifts that happen are often imperceptible at the time, but over the years it becomes clearer where boundaries lie. Using straight demographics does not aid in understanding the changes in cultural attitudes.
Another theory put forth recently is that there is a “in-between” generation, named “Generation Jones” (by political pundit Jonathan Pontell) that covers the switch from Boomers to X’ers (1954-1965). There is little research behind this theory, but it is popular in the media right now. Although it certainly makes sense to segment portions of a generation for specific characteristics (useful in targeted marketing) calling them a new “generation” is misleading. Since generational characters change in cycles, we should be able to identify “generations” similar in character to Generation Jones in earlier cycles. So far, there is no evidence that this is the case. Although Generation Jones may be popular in some circles, it has yet to prove it’s value as a social theory.
This brings up a question of why the generation of our leaders is of consequence (I have written a bit about this in the past). Much of the time this is not terribly important, but during a crisis as we are facing right now, it is a critical question to answer. The character of the Baby Boomers and Generation X are very different and our top leadership reflects this contrast. Baby Boomers, as a generation, tend to be righteous in their beliefs and will push society to move towards specific (often unbending) ideals. Generation X is much more flexible when it comes to ideals, and prefers to focus on achievable goals. George W. Bush and Bill Clinton were both Boomers presidents that expressed polar views of their generation. They both marched steadily towards their specific ideals, often losing focus on the practical repercussions of their decisions.
Obama, as a Generation X’er, does not seem to have the same righteousness of our previous two presidents. Although he is certainly has a direction for the country, it seems to be based much more on pragmatic goals (both short and long-term) rather than an ideal state that we should try to achieve. He is willing to compromise ideals to try to attain practical ends. I think he was surprised that he could not get bipartisan support for the recent stimulus plan from the Boomer dominated legislature. That battle was a good example of the contrast between the survivalist attitude of Gen X (Obama) and the idealistic attitude of the legislature (Boomer). In many cases the Boomers are willing to sink the ship rather than compromise their ideals.
Many of the Millennial Generation (born 1982-200?) were big supporters of Obama because he represented shift away from the old battles of the previous two administrations. They have even gone so far as calling themselves “Generation Obama” which refers to the age of his supporters not of the President himself. That the Millennials have so quickly tired of the Boomers’ ideology is surprising in some ways because they were raised by Boomers. But perhaps that is part of their own youthful rebellion against their parents. The optimism and positivity of the Millennial generation is not something you find in their pessimistic Boomer parents. And the practical optimism of Obama seems to really appeal to the younger generation today. Although Obama and other Gen X leaders won’t say we are going to make a perfect world, they do exude confidence in our ability to make positive change. It’s more pragmatic, but also much more achievable.

Presidents’ Generations

There has been a lot of talk about Obama’s generation lately. Many demographers would say he is a Boomer (the strict definition of the Baby Boom goes through 1964) others (myself included) say he is a Gen X’er (based on the definitions of Strauss and Howe). Others categorize him as part of a newly discovered generation, Generation Jones. For me the interesting thing is not the name of the generation he fits into, but the character of that generation when compared with the past.
One of the main features of the generational theory put forth by authors William Strauss and Neil Howe is that there are repeating “archetypes” or characters of generations throughout American history. There are four archetypes they identify: Artist, Prophet, Nomad and Hero. Each carries its own signature style and has specific attributes depending on what age bracket they are in at the time. I have two webinars (part 1 and part 2) that can be useful for an understanding of the generational cycles if you want to know more about them.
The other important feature of their theory is that there are “turnings” or cycles in history where certain events are likely to occur. These are the High, Awakening, Unraveling and Crisis. We are currently in the Crisis phase according to their theory, having recently moved out of the Unraveling. Again, if you want to get an overview of these turnings refer to my “start here” page or the Lifecourse site that Howe and Strauss put together.
Thinking about the archetypes and turnings in US history, I created a spreadsheet that contains the generational archetypes of each of the US presidents. It also has the turning during which they started their presidency. And finally, it contains the “ratings” of each president based on expert ratings (found on Wikipedia ).
I have posted the spreadsheet for your viewing pleasure. You will need to sign into Google to use the sort functions on the spreadsheet (please don’t change any of the values for now). Go to the “Presidential Archetypes” page. As with all my diagrams, the archetypes are color coded with the following colors:

Orange = Artist
Blue = Prophet
Green = Nomad
Yellow = Hero

The Red color in the ratings section refers to the bottom quartile of ratings, while the Green refers to the top quartile.
Playing around by sorting the results generates some insights. The top three presidents according to most of the surveys came from Crisis eras (Washington, FDR and Lincoln). By contrast, the Unraveling periods produced consistently low results for most of the presidents during those periods (Woodrow Wilson was the one exception). If you try sorting by Archetype (select that column, go to Tools>sort by colum Z -> A, or just click on the bar below the title of the column – again, you must be signed into google to use this function) you will see that Prophets contain mainly either top or bottom ranked presidents; there are few that are in the middle. This fits well with the polarizing character of Prophets. Heroes have lots of highly ranked presidents and only a couple in the bottom quartile (Carter, Nixon and Ford). Nomads are less remarkable in their presidencies and with just a few exceptions don’t rank in the top or bottom quartile much at all. Artists are similar to Prophets in that you either love them or hate them.
So what combination of Turning/Archetype creates a great president? It’s hard to tell, but it is clear that Prophets that preside during an Unraveling don’t fare very well (Fillmore, Pierce, Harding and Coolidge), a trend that is likely to be born out by our previous two presidents (G.W. Bush and Clinton, both Prophets in an Unraveling) once we can look back on this period with a historical eye. Prophets can do amazingly well during a crisis (FDR and Lincoln) but also really badly (Hoover and Johnson).
Presiding over an Unraveling, when society is falling apart, is unlikely to reflect well on a president regardless of their archetype. Hero’s seem to do well during a High (Jefferson, Madison, Kennedy, Johnson) but less so during an Awakenign (Carter, Ford and Nixon).
Take a look at the chart, do some sorting and poking around and give me your insights and observations.

Presidential Precedence: Obama is most like…

I did not follow the Presidential race/inauguration/early days very closely, but I did hear a few things that made me think about the generational aspects of President Obama. Leading up to the inauguration there were many references to former presidents, particularly FDR and Abraham Lincoln. There are some similarities between Obama, FDR and Lincoln, but they have little to do with leadership style. The similarities are in the character of the time that they came into power.
According to Neil Howe and William Strauss in their book “The Fourth Turning“, there are specific cycles in time which repeat on a regular basis. They work like this:

The First Turning is a High. After prevailing through a massive crisis, society is united and feels strong. An example of this period is the American High, 1946-1964
The Second Turning is an Awakening. Young people start to question the established values of the society. An example of this is the Conciousness Revolution, 1965-1984
The Third Turning is an Unraveling. Society starts to pull apart as the old establishment is broken down and values become fragmented. An example of this is the Culture Wars, 1985-2005
The Fourth Turning is a Crisis. Society is challenged by a massive crisis that requires everyone pull together to survive. An example of this is the Great Depression and WWII, 1929-1946. We are in a Crisis turning now as well (started in about 2005) and will probably remain so until about 2025 when it will come to a climax.

The similarity between Lincoln, FDR and Obama is that they all came into power during a crisis. But that is where the similarity ends, and another surprising relationship begins. Lincoln and FDR were both part of a generational archetype that was known as the “Prophet” generations, similar in character to the Baby Boomers. Lincoln was part of the Transcendental Generation and FDR was part of the Missionary Generation, both of which fit the Prophet archetype. Prophets are described as:

A Prophet generation grows up as increasingly indulged post-Crisis children, comes of age as the narcissistic young crusaders of an Awakening, cultivates principle as moralistic midlifers, and emerges as wise elders guiding the next Crisis. (from http://www.lifecourse.com)

Obama is not part of a Prophet Generation. Born in 1961, he is Generation X, which is a Nomad Generation:

A Nomad generation grows up as under protected children during an Awakening, comes of age as the alienated young adults of a post-Awakening world, mellows into pragmatic midlife leaders during a Crisis, and ages into tough post-Crisis elders

So when is the last time we had a pragmatic Nomad leading the country during a crisis? Take a look at this chart that shows the various generations and turnings visually (click on it to see a bigger version):

The colors represent the archetypes of each generation, Yellow for Hero (GI Generation, Millennials), Green for Nomads (Lost, Gen X), Blue for Prophet (Missionary, Boomer) and Orange for Artist (Progressive, Silent). On the far left is the founding of the nation with George Washington as president, and on the far right is the current day, extrapolating Obama out for four years. I have more detailed versions of this data that I will put up in a future post, but this diagram gives an overview of the presidential generations through our brief history.
There are lots of things you might pick up from this chart, but if you look for the crisis periods (1940’s and 1860’s, WWII and Civil Wars respectively), you will see the previous two have mainly blue bars, meaning they were Prophet Generations (Lincoln and FDR). The previous crisis was The American Revolution (way over on the left side of the chart) and it had a green (Nomad) leader: George Washington.
So who does Obama most resemble in terms of generational character combined with social cycle? He is Generation X, which is a Nomad generation (green in the chart), leading during a crisis. The last time we saw that combination was our first president, George Washington, a Nomad leader during the crisis (American Revolution). What does this mean for his potential in office? Having a practical leader who pushes getting things done during a national crisis is something our country has not seen in over 200 years. I may examine that in a future post.

You can download a high-res PDF of this chart

GenX: Pragmatic or Disillusioned?

Gen-X’ers (born 1961 – 1980) had a relatively tough go of it when compared with other generations. In our early childhood we were either ignored or reviled (60’s and 70’s), and once we got to young adulthood, we were alienated and generally dismissed.
By the time we hit midlife (in just the last few years for the first Gen X’ers) we were a pretty jaded bunch. But we also had something unique from all those years attending the school of hard knocks: pragmatism. This generation, more than any other, does not have any illusions about the way the world is. We know what we need to do to get by in the world and we generally set about doing it. For the most part we don’t have high ideals or visions of world peace, but we understand how to get things done.
Barack Obama is an excellent example of this ethic. Although he talks often of ideas, hope and vision, these are more of a marketing effort to get the Boomers (born 1943-1960) and Millennials (born 1981 – 2005) to get on board with the direction. That, in itself, is a very pragmatic move. Rather than grabbing onto an ideology (as a Boomer might) he focuses instead on the goal and considers everything he needs to get done to get to the goal. Gen-X’ers are generally great marketers because they can craft the message to meet their market. I realize that there is some argument about whether Obama is Generation-X or not – more on that in a future post.
Individualism is also a hallmark of Generation-X. From our early years we had to go it alone, and most of us got pretty good at it. Later in life some of us are discovering that it can get pretty lonely without a cohesive peer group, and we are reaching out for community (see my previous article on Gen-X community). That, I believe, is the beginning of the disillusionment that also seems to nag our generation.

No Illusions lead to Disillusioned

The world that Gen-X grew up on was not desperate, not when you compare it with earlier cycles, such as the period between the Great Depression and the end of WWII. It was, however, a time of great discord and chaos. Institutions crumbled, and opinions became more varied and oppositional. It was near impossible to have a cohesive world-view, and the only one that worked well was Machiavellian: The ends justify the means. Gen-X knew better than to harbor any illusions about what was coming next, and that has led to a general sense of disillusionment.
In my own life I have played out this cycle in many ways. As a youth I was fired up about politics and ideology, but it quickly became apparent that the world had enough ideologists, and making a living should be my priority. After paying my own way through college and graduating at the age of 26, I started looking for job. My degree was in Fermentation Science, and I had several years of winemaking experience. But there were no jobs in winemaking up in Oregon where I was living, and the future started to look pretty bleak. What other skills did I have? Even with a college degree that was very vocational, my prospects were limited.
Eventually I found a position at a local brewpub that was starting up, and I became the head brewer for the place. It was a great job, and fit perfectly with my background, but I found that after just two years I was getting restless and bored with the work. By this point I had started a family (Caleb was born in 1996) and I knew I was going to be the main provider.
Thinking back through the early portion of my career I am struck by how on my own I was professionally. There was no institution or organization helping me find my way, and I am not sure if I would have accepted help from one anyway. Like most in my generation, I was used to going it alone. I certainly had lots of individuals that helped me along the way, but I never had the feeling of a team moving through life together (for more on this topic, see my post on Generational networks).
Fast-forward to today. I am 42 years old, with a wife and two kids (ages 8 and 12). I have worked for various companies over the years, taken time off, traveled the world with my family and found my own way for the most part. My career has been varied, from winemaking, brewing, teaching, programming, managing, selling and marketing. I am comfortable in many disciplines and work very independently, but I still don’t have a sense of belonging to a group with a greater purpose. Although some might think this is the perfect recipe for finding religion (and I did get laid off in January), I don’t think that is in the cards for me either.
Disillusionment is the obvious reaction to all of this. It’s not like some institution is going to fly in and save the day for me or anyone else in my generation. Depending on their needs there are companies out there who could really use my skills, but it won’t be about community. After many years of playing the market, I have not developed anywhere else to play. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
I won’t personally go the direction of disillusionment. It’s not in my nature. I see disillusionment as the combination of pragmatism and pessimism. It is a great source of depression really. My attitude is a combination of pragmatism and optimism, and always has been. Have a positive outlook, but look at everything with a clear eye. That is the gift that our generation has to offer.

10 Ways To Know if You are Gen-X

10 Ways To Know if you are Gen-X

You know what a latch-key kid is. You probably were one.
You can name at least 5 kiddie horror movies in addition to Rosemary’s Baby that all came out while you were a kid.
You are certain Obama is a Gen-X’er.
You know at least 5 people who were laid off in the last month.
Friends your age call you an optimist because you don’t believe in Peak Oil or other doomsday scenarios.
You shot Coca-Cola out your nose the first time you saw a “Baby on Board” sign in the back of a car
You think the designation “Generation X” is stupid.
You’ve had more jobs in the last 5 years than your parents had in their lifetimes.
You don’t trust your kid’s teachers, especially if they are over 50 years old.
You remember riding in a car at age 6 without at booster seat!

The X Community

After 42 years making it (mainly) on my own, I am starting to consider the wider view of community. I have been doing research on generations recently that has expanded my understanding of my own generation’s role in history. If you are a Gen-X’er (born 1961-1980), maybe some of this will ring true for you.

Growing up in the 1970’s and 1980’s it was clear that kids were not exactly a top priority in society. The string of movies about children who were terrifying (from Rosemary’s Baby to Halloween to The Omen and many more in between) set the mood for this period, when adult focus was on adult issues. Although many parents strove to provide a happy home-life, the expectation for children was that they needed to figure it out for themselves; Because, after all, out there in the “real-world” no one was going to help you make it when you grew up.

This rang true in my childhood. I was often left to my own devices, expected to play independently and just figure things out. My parents were busy with work and self-discovery, and although they set an example of looking inward, the instructions on how to go about living life were lacking. Although I can’t ever remember a time I really missed this guidance, it is another hallmark of Generation-X . Taught from an early age to figure it out on our own, we generally do just that.

This was a time of adult’s problems and issues. One example that comes to mind was the treatment of one of my hometown’s primary school teachers. I can’t remember if he was openly gay or if someone just came up with “proof”, but there was a huge debate in town and many parents were involved. My Mom was a friend of the teacher (and still is, I believe) and supported him strongly at PTA meetings and other community debates. I don’t even clearly remember how things ended up (I know he got out of teaching eventually). However the energy expended on this issue was clearly about “the kids” rather than adult rights and adult choice.

I was speaking recently to a Boomer aged friend of mine, describing this childhood experience, and she said, “Yes, we all have to rebel against our parents”. I replied, “Well, no, I never rebelled against them. There just wasn’t enough there to rebel against”. I don’t resent them for it, but they didn’t force their values upon me strongly enough for me to bother resisting. But I, like most of my generation, was pretty much on my own.

Not that I didn’t dream of some utopia with a strong community. I grew up in a small town (Healdsburg, CA) where we knew most everyone in town. We lived way outside of the town (pop. 6000 at the time we moved there in 1973) a mile up a dirt road (and you can believe I will using that on my kids when they whine about having to bike to school). Given that we knew all the people on the long dirt road we lived what on sort of felt like a commune. It’s not that I lacked idealism growing up: I remember musing with friends about how we could start a community somewhere, away from all that mainstream crap.

By the time I was 19, I was ready to get out and see the world. I traveled to Europe for 6 months (much like my Mom had done when she was 19) but came back and realized that there was not necessarily any specific life-track waiting for me when I got returned. I made my way through Junior College and then on to UC and started a career and family. And although over this time I built an impressive professional and personal network, there was rarely a feeling of community in any of it.

There are a couple notable exceptions. One was a job I had with PeopleSoft. PeopleSoft was started by Dave Duffield and although I joined after he had left the company, it still retained much of his paternal spirit. During my four years at PeopleSoft I got a sense of the belonging that my Father often talked about during his 33 years with Hewlett-Packard. But by 2005, PeopleSoft had been acquired by Oracle (in a hostile takeover) and I moved on, my view on the (un)reliability of institutions unconsciously reinforced.

The other exception has been our kids’ schools. They have attended Waldorf Schools, mainly in Portland, OR, but more recently in Fair Oaks, CA. Our family started to see the seeds of real community at Cedarwood Waldorf School. We own a home right next door to the school, and participated regularly in the activities associated there. I served on the school board and we volunteered our time and money in many ways to help the school and its community. I think this experience was not particularly unique for many Gen-X’ers: Our kids lead us to our first real chance to form a community. Some of us respond well to this opportunity, others, poorly. The experience, for most of us, is at least unfamiliar if not downright foreign.

Since we moved down to Sacramento in August of 2008, we have been forced to adjust to a new community, although it is also formed around a Waldorf school (Sacramento Waldorf School, in Fair Oaks, CA). The similarities between these communities are more striking than the differences. The same Gen-X parent temperaments are all around: individualistic, demanding, talented, insightful and tough. We’re a pretty bristly bunch in general, and just being around our own kind does not change that. But we do seem to recognize the need to pull together for a common cause, especially an important one like the future of our children. The real challenge is figuring out how to keep the focus on the common good (“the children”) rather than the individual good (“my child”). That struggle, I think, typifies the Gen-X challenge of community. With so many years being ignored or alienated, it’s hard to trust that the community will really take care of everyone.

But there are glowing examples I have seen already in our short time here in Sacramento. I helped put together a site for our friends, the Nuttings, when their Son, Elias, was going through surgery in November ‘08. The Nuttings, like us, are Gen-X’ers, but they have a unique sense of community. Working on the site gave me a window into the possibilities of community, observing how they gave without expectation and received without debt.

The wonderful thing about this dynamic for Gen-X’ers is that we have a unique opportunity not granted to many generations. While our elders (the Boomers) got solid institutions and a strong social glue (which they rebelled against) and our kids (the Millennials) will grow up protected (perhaps over-protected) and build the new future, Gen-X’ers have a different path. Our opportunity is to create community without first-hand knowledge of what solid community feels like. It is to build bonds to things we did not know existed. It is to break down walls that we have never really acknowledged were there in the first place. It is to build up belief in the face of our own skepticism.

I have always had a soft-spot for that character in a story who was tough and pragmatic, but eventually realizes that it is real connections between people that matter most. Generation X was never granted that sense of community. We have to form it of our own will, and when we have, it will be an accomplishment.