Right up front, boomer here, and Wenner's jaw-dropping entitlement and self-aggrandizement embodies why, as a Gen X friend explained to me in the early '90s, they hated us: we had used up all the good stuff and left them high and dry. But somehow to the stereotypical boomer the flush of righteous triumph from a decades-old conviction against the Vietnam war and perhaps for civil rights and even less likely, feminism...yeah, we really set the world right.
That this sort of arrogance blinds some of us to the plight and passion of the youngs who are starting to replace us is a further embarrassment. Instead of mindless smears about their fragility and ostensible cluelessness, it's past time we stepped back and offered our support, if anyone wants it. Some of us might have something to offer in the struggles ahead, but it must be offered with the clear understanding that we not only no longer drive the agenda, we screwed up mightily and owe those who follow us humility and cooperation. I mean, we still get to have opinions, but we gotta stop expecting them to look to us to lead bc of our great accomplishments. It's time we stopped expecting applause for what we tried to do (and in some cases—Vietnam—succeeded at derailing) and owned our failures. Maybe then we can heal the eternal generational schism and together put our queer shoulders to the wheel, as Ginsburg said...
One of my pet peeves is the tendency to equate Boomers with everyone born during the 1946-1964 baby boom. The people you cite in the article are a good illustration that the Boomer generation is better defined as people born 1939-1955. Those of us in Generation Jones, 1956-1964 grew up in very different circumstances to the Boomers.
I'm convinced the decade one spent middle and high school in are a better marker of one's generation, if by defining generations we mean to get at the cultural, social, political, and environmental experiences that shaped attitudes and outlook.
That’s a good way to look at it. The Boomers had to face Vietnam, but American economy was generally good. My middle school, high school and college years included two oil crises, stagflation, and the 1981 recession. Neither period is better or worse than the other, but they were quite different.
Yes, Jann Hammer is garbage. And he is a legitimate Boomer, b. in 1946. More rigor please, though, with your Boomer callouts: Garbage-to-the-max Newt Gingrich (b. 1943) is not a Boomer. Neither is Janis Joplin (again, 1943). Many of the artists who defined the White Man Boomer canon were born before or during WWII. Tina Turner, b. 1939, and so on. The Beatles. Wenner's generation deserves all the opprobrium you can heap on it. But it is diverse. Obama is a Boomer. Not all of us are Jann Wenners. I listened to Cat Stevens and The Band.
Boomer here as well, and avid Rolling Stone reader from 1971 to 1981. The whole premise of Rolling Stone was that it was a revolutionary magazine that was transforming how we regard music, writing, journalism, performance, etc. And Wenner, one assumes, was a catalyst for that by creating Rolling Stone. I think it's a mistake to assume that he, and possibly, Rolling Stone, have *always* been how they're currently and rightly being described in the comments and in Noah's piece. Allowing that, to a great extent, Rolling Stone was coming from a white dude's perspective, because white dudes were in power at the time, it still gave much *more* than just lip service to significant female artists and artists of color. In my late teens, Rolling Stone was how I learned of a) the names and work of so many artist of those types, and b) the tremendous contributions they made, both historically, and currently, to a wide range of musical genres.
What frosts me is how quickly, by the early 1980s, Wenner had abandoned San Francisco for New York, abandoned the renegade vibe that prevailed in San Francisco, and seemed to become just another yuppie asshole. And, based on Noah's reporting, the evolution, unfortunately seems complete.
I just want to highlight the betrayal and abandonment of what seemed to be a decent set of principles and acknowledgments towards who made the great music that Rolling Stone were reporting on once upon a Time, in favor of a rich jerk posture that not only ignores those significant contributions by women and people of color, but actually cops attitude about it. Shame on him.
Ellen Willis appeared in the magazine...but also had a lot of criticisms of Wenner's sexism even back in the day. I think he's kind of been who he's always been; counterculture opposition to the war and some lip service to the importance of Black artists as influences I think went along fairly easily with a lot of casual sexism and racism, unfortunately.
The interview, among so much else, is a potent reminder of who has been keeping the gates in publishing for the past umpteen years to forever.
Right up front, boomer here, and Wenner's jaw-dropping entitlement and self-aggrandizement embodies why, as a Gen X friend explained to me in the early '90s, they hated us: we had used up all the good stuff and left them high and dry. But somehow to the stereotypical boomer the flush of righteous triumph from a decades-old conviction against the Vietnam war and perhaps for civil rights and even less likely, feminism...yeah, we really set the world right.
That this sort of arrogance blinds some of us to the plight and passion of the youngs who are starting to replace us is a further embarrassment. Instead of mindless smears about their fragility and ostensible cluelessness, it's past time we stepped back and offered our support, if anyone wants it. Some of us might have something to offer in the struggles ahead, but it must be offered with the clear understanding that we not only no longer drive the agenda, we screwed up mightily and owe those who follow us humility and cooperation. I mean, we still get to have opinions, but we gotta stop expecting them to look to us to lead bc of our great accomplishments. It's time we stopped expecting applause for what we tried to do (and in some cases—Vietnam—succeeded at derailing) and owned our failures. Maybe then we can heal the eternal generational schism and together put our queer shoulders to the wheel, as Ginsburg said...
One of my pet peeves is the tendency to equate Boomers with everyone born during the 1946-1964 baby boom. The people you cite in the article are a good illustration that the Boomer generation is better defined as people born 1939-1955. Those of us in Generation Jones, 1956-1964 grew up in very different circumstances to the Boomers.
I'm convinced the decade one spent middle and high school in are a better marker of one's generation, if by defining generations we mean to get at the cultural, social, political, and environmental experiences that shaped attitudes and outlook.
That’s a good way to look at it. The Boomers had to face Vietnam, but American economy was generally good. My middle school, high school and college years included two oil crises, stagflation, and the 1981 recession. Neither period is better or worse than the other, but they were quite different.
BREAKING NEWS!
https://www.thewrap.com/rolling-stone-founder-jann-wenner-kicked-off-rock-roll-hall-of-fame-foundation-board-after-statements-on-black-and-women-musicians/
seems like the right move.
I always wanted to say that!
Yes, Jann Hammer is garbage. And he is a legitimate Boomer, b. in 1946. More rigor please, though, with your Boomer callouts: Garbage-to-the-max Newt Gingrich (b. 1943) is not a Boomer. Neither is Janis Joplin (again, 1943). Many of the artists who defined the White Man Boomer canon were born before or during WWII. Tina Turner, b. 1939, and so on. The Beatles. Wenner's generation deserves all the opprobrium you can heap on it. But it is diverse. Obama is a Boomer. Not all of us are Jann Wenners. I listened to Cat Stevens and The Band.
I don't think it makes much sense to be rigorous with very arbitrary generational cohorts!
Wow. I hadn't been aware of any of this. What a jerk. Ditto his editor and publisher.
He's promptly been removed from the rock and roll hall of fame. An appropriate action.
I do agree with Bill Flarsheim - 1955 is the cutoff for baby boom (my generation) - Generation Jones deserves their due.
Ditto. What an ass.
Boomer here as well, and avid Rolling Stone reader from 1971 to 1981. The whole premise of Rolling Stone was that it was a revolutionary magazine that was transforming how we regard music, writing, journalism, performance, etc. And Wenner, one assumes, was a catalyst for that by creating Rolling Stone. I think it's a mistake to assume that he, and possibly, Rolling Stone, have *always* been how they're currently and rightly being described in the comments and in Noah's piece. Allowing that, to a great extent, Rolling Stone was coming from a white dude's perspective, because white dudes were in power at the time, it still gave much *more* than just lip service to significant female artists and artists of color. In my late teens, Rolling Stone was how I learned of a) the names and work of so many artist of those types, and b) the tremendous contributions they made, both historically, and currently, to a wide range of musical genres.
What frosts me is how quickly, by the early 1980s, Wenner had abandoned San Francisco for New York, abandoned the renegade vibe that prevailed in San Francisco, and seemed to become just another yuppie asshole. And, based on Noah's reporting, the evolution, unfortunately seems complete.
I just want to highlight the betrayal and abandonment of what seemed to be a decent set of principles and acknowledgments towards who made the great music that Rolling Stone were reporting on once upon a Time, in favor of a rich jerk posture that not only ignores those significant contributions by women and people of color, but actually cops attitude about it. Shame on him.
Ellen Willis appeared in the magazine...but also had a lot of criticisms of Wenner's sexism even back in the day. I think he's kind of been who he's always been; counterculture opposition to the war and some lip service to the importance of Black artists as influences I think went along fairly easily with a lot of casual sexism and racism, unfortunately.