Things That Make You Go Hmmm: Why 2018 Was a Year of Nineties Obsessions
What’s behind our Obsessive love affair with the last decade of the 20th Century?

By ROB SHEFFIELD

The hardest-working decade of 2018? That’s easy: the Nineties. The whole concept of the Nineties continues to haunt the pop imagination, epitomizing everything our sorry excuse for a decade fails to be. Let’s face it, the “teens” never became a thing, just like the “zeroes” didn’t. So as we head into the final year of this decade which is bizarrely not one, we look back to the last one that counted. Decades are more popular than ever these days, as a useful shorthand for how culture changes over time. But more than ever, we’re not living in one. As people loved to say back in the Nineties: What’s up with that?


Charli XCX captures this whole cultural malaise brilliantly in her Troye Sivan duet “1999,” which she dropped this fall: “I just wanna go back to 1999 / Sing ‘Hit me baby, one more time.’” In the video, they re-enact Titanic, starring Charli as Kate and Troye as Leo; Charlie turns herself into Left Eye and the Spice Girls, while Troye turns into all five Backstreet Boys. But my favorite scene is when they dress up as Marilyn Manson and Rose McGowan on the VMAs red carpet. Charli was born in 1992 and Troye in 1995, so neither one is reliving their teen memories. Instead, they’re dreaming up a fantasy decade they missed. How did we get here — borrowed nostalgia for the unremembered Nineties?



That Nineties fever is everywhere this year. Country singer Jimmie Allen dropped “21,” pining for the good old days of Matchbox 20. (“If I had a time machine, I’d point it to me and you and Matchbox 20” — that might sound like a crazy way to waste a time machine, but he’s not crazy, he’s just a little unwell.) American Idol runner-up Lauren Alaina took aim at country-radio misogyny with “Ladies in the 90s,” shouting out to Shania, TLC, the Dixie Chicks and the Spice Girls. As she sings, “I was raised on radio waves where the ladies dominated!” (Unlike the Nashville of 2018, to say the least.) Alaina’s currently on tour with Jason Aldean, whose best hit was “1994.”

It’s one thing to hear time-travel trips from veterans like Maxwell (“1990x”) or Redman, in his excellent summer jam “1990 Now,” with his salutes to Deion Sanders, Goodie Mob, El Nino and Living Single. These guys were there; at least they have their memories. But it’s weirder to hear U.K. ingenue Anne-Marie chirp her huge global synth-pop hit “2002,” an ode to feeling nostalgia for everything at the same time. “Oops, I got 99 problems singing ‘Bye Bye Bye’ / If you wanna go and take a ride with me / Hit me baby, one more time” — geez, what a mess. These songs aren’t even from 2002 (depends on whether you hear her “oops” as Britney, Tweet or Blu Cantrell) yet that just makes it more poignant. She really raises the ante on King Princess singing “I love it when we play 1950.”


Decades are big business these days — the “I Love the 90s” revue just opened a permanent Vegas residency. Sugar Ray’s Mark McGrath likes to tell the crowd: “Welcome to the Nineties. Some of us never left.” When I asked McGrath about it last year, he lamented how the post-Y2K era never got its own identity. “What would you call it, the Noughties? The 2000s? No one knows what to call it. No one knows when it started or ended.” The collapse of the music business added to the confusion. “There was no Nirvana in the 2000s, no band to come along and usher in the new decade. So they didn’t have a new decade. Nothing replaced the Nineties, even though the decade was over.”


His fellow philosopher Vanilla Ice makes a similar point. As Vanilla told me, “I call it the lost generation, because from 2000 to 2017, nothing really defines that whole generation in pop culture. Like, how would you look back at 2000 to 2017 and remember anything? How would you see somebody wearing some gear and say, ‘Hey, that’s gotta be from 2014?’ There’s no music there, there’s no pop culture, there’s no fashion that defines the generation. I look at the Nineties like it’s the last truly great decade.”

Vanilla makes a good point—people love decades. They just do. “Life’s pretty cheap, it’s sold a decade at a time,” as the great Eighties punk band Flipper sang. They’re a handy way to process the past—the Roaring Twenties, the Depression Thirties, the WW2 Forties, the malt-shop Fifties, the swinging Sixties, the all-cocaine all-the-time Seventies, the big-hair Eighties, the grunge Nineties. You can go to Party City and shop for “Decades Costumes” from “Roaring 20s Gatsby Flapper Headband” to “90s Schoolgirl ‘As If’ Accessory Kit.” Somewhere in your town is a dance club with a “Battle of the Decades” night. No wonder we heart the Nineties: we don’t have a decade of our own. So whatever happened to the 20-teens?

The Seventies, Eighties and Nineties were all into mythologizing themselves—when Neil Young sang “Look at Mother Nature on the run in the 1970s,” he was only a few months past 1969. The Village People, who really were on the run in the 1970s, closed out the decade with their disco anthem “Ready for the ’80s.” Spin magazine waited all the way until March 1990 to proclaim, “The Eighties revival is officially underway,” in an Everything But The Girl review (which I admit I wrote). The Nineties ended in a panic over Y2K—“pre-millennial tension,” as Tricky put it. Pop stars scored hits about the millennium (Robbie Williams’ beat Will Smith’s); every magazine did special millennium issues (which sold big and made a fortune in ad pages, because that’s how magazines rolled then). The A&E Network did a countdown of the millennium’s most influential people (Number One: Gutenberg). On New Year’s Eve 1999, No Doubt played live on MTV — at the stroke of midnight, they did R.E.M.’s “It’s The End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine).”





But the zeroes never gelled into a decade, and — so far — neither have the teens. Ten years ago, a few late-to-the-game editors tried to get people to start calling it the “oughts,” but since nobody actually said that, it never caught on. Like the 1900s and the 1910s, these decades never got a name, because they didn’t end in that amiable suffix “–ies.” You can always start arguments in a bar over the best music or movies or TV of the 1980s or 1990s. It’s a lot harder to argue about the zeroes or teens. You could probably spout a few off-the-dome cliches about the 1890s (the Gay Nineties, twirly mustaches, robber barons) or even the 1880s (Oscar Wilde, gunfights at the O.K. Corral). But not the 1900s or 1910s. Gertrude Stein dismissed those eras as “a lost generation” — a century before Vanilla Ice.

People are still having trouble coping with the math, as witness the bizarre way some people keep saying “two thousand and eighteen,” as if they’re still in denial that we’re in a new century. (You might as well say “two thousand and ten and eight.”) No wonder we don’t want to say “twenty-eighteen”; that would mean conceding the teens are a thing, the 21st Century is a thing, and this decade is not a nightmare we’ll wake up from tomorrow morning.

This year’s Nineties trips got dark, from The Assassination of Gianni Versace to Jonah Hill’s semi-autographical film about troubled skater kids, Mid90s. The Netflix sitcom Everything Sucks masterfully used indie rock like the Softies to evoke a 1996 Oregon high school; it got instantly cancelled, a tres Nineties fate. Andrew Dice Clay showed up in an Oscar-contending movie, 25 years after his film career peaked with Brainsmasher: A Love Story. Hell, 2018 was the year a Roseanne revival blew out of nowhere to become America’s favorite TV show, and then (just as suddenly) crashed and burned. But that’s the crucial role decades play in our cultural memory — they reassure us even the bleakest eras eventually come to an end. These days, that’s a welcome reminder. Maybe we look back to the 1990s because we know we’ll never get nostalgic for 2018. We’re already planning to forget this year and the decade it rode in on. Bring on the Roaring Twenties.


Agree especially with this Vanilla Ice statement, "I call it the lost generation, because from 2000 to 2017, nothing really defines that whole generation in pop culture. Like, how would you look back at 2000 to 2017 and remember anything? How would you see somebody wearing some gear and say, ‘Hey, that’s gotta be from 2014?’ There’s no music there, there’s no pop culture, there’s no fashion that defines the generation. I look at the Nineties like it’s the last truly great decade."

What I have been saying on this forum for years.

Aka "An oldhead Journalist had a boring year and made an article about essentially nothing with empty arguments and hypocritical points".

This has to be one of the most perplexing level of "music journalism" I've read in a while. He basically praises "1999" which did extremely poorly in the charts, features two artists that were very young in said year (Troye was 2/3 in '99!) and is pretty vague and has references all over the place (in particular the clip), while vitriols "2002" which did commercially much better in comparison and actually has a performer which was decently aged by then. Sure, no bias going on here.

The whole article reads like a whiny child putting his fingers into his ears and going lalalalala
And using Vanilla Ice out of all people lmfao
Please!

No offence, but you really need to get over this ‘everything after 2000 is the same’ nonsense. It’s getting a little tedious now. You’d need to be wilfully ignorant to think 2001 and 2019 are even remotely the same. Even as someone who was only a kid at the time, I can listen to songs or watch TV shows from the early 2000s and immediately know it’s from then - be it cars, clothes or just the quality of the picture. Even comparing, say, 2003 to 2009 shows big differences - just like 1993 and 1999 are nothing alike pop culturally.

Which brings me to my next point - the early 90s were dark, cynical and dominated by grunge. The late 90s were bright, optimistic and dominated by teen pop. They were absolutely nothing alike in overall vibe and aesthetic. How can the 90s have a singular identity when the two ends of it were a total contrast? Someone who is 35 would be nostalgic for a completely different 90s to someone who is 45. 1999 is closer to 2001 than 1991.

It’s simple - nostalgia is cyclical. At the start of this decade, 80s nostalgia was still dominant. Right now, 90s nostalgia rules the roost and will do as we start the 2020s. 00s nostalgia is in its very early days but the decade is, by and large, too recent for any serious nostalgia movement. It will come though, eventually. All those emo and scene kids from 2007 will be on here raving about the good old days.

I will also say that nostalgia for certain time periods will depend on your age. My grandma is 79, and although she has happy memories from the 90s, she is definitely not nostalgic for the 90s from a culture perspective. She was too old in the 90s to care about popular culture. She couldn’t name a single song from the 90s if her life depended on it. 90s nostalgia is primarily catered to Generation X (and very early Millennials) - basically the teens and young adults of the 90s.

Aka "An oldhead Journalist had a boring year and made an article about essentially nothing with empty arguments and hypocritical points".

This has to be one of the most perplexing level of "music journalism" I've read in a while. He basically praises "1999" which did extremely poorly in the charts, features two artists that were very young in said year (Troye was 2/3 in '99!) and is pretty vague and has references all over the place (in particular the clip), while vitriols "2002" which did commercially much better in comparison and actually has a performer which was decently aged by then. Sure, no bias going on here.

The whole article reads like a whiny child putting his fingers into his ears and going lalalalala
And using Vanilla Ice out of all people lmfao
Please!


They’re getting old and don’t like it. :\'(

No offence, but you really need to get over this ‘everything after 2000 is the same’ nonsense. It’s getting a little tedious now.

It's not exactly the same but there's no denying there's been a huge slowdown in pop cultural change since the late 1990s and we have been relying on nostalgia to fill the lack of innovation.

The author of the rolling stone article is far from the only to notice this, Kurt Anderson noticed this same stagnation in his Vanity Fair article back in 2012 (and I posted it back then on this forum). Simon Reynolds wrote a whole book called Retro mania about the 2000s (and it applies to the blank, nondescript 2010s too).

It's not exactly the same but there's no denying there's been a huge slowdown in pop cultural change since the late 1990s and we have been relying on nostalgia to fill the lack of innovation.

The author of the rolling stone article is far from the only to notice this, Kurt Anderson noticed this same stagnation in his Vanity Fair article back in 2012 (and I posted it back then on this forum). Simon Reynolds wrote a whole book called Retro mania about the 2000s (and it applies to the blank, nondescript 2010s too).


I'm glad you mentioned that Kurt Anderson Vanity Fair article. I too posted it here somewhere at one point when a topic similar to this came up. He has since written a book "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire: A 500 Year History" which I found to be very interesting. I highly recommend it.

For those who want to know what we are referring to, here is the Vanity Fair article. Written in 2012, it basically still holds true. Which exactly proves the point of the article.

www.vanityfair.com/style/2012/01/prisoners-of-style-201201

It all comes down to people being out of touch.. there definitely is a lot of change/innovation in pop culture in the last two decades, it's just that y'all are not the target audience anymore so the change isn't as drastic to you. The 2000s and the 2010s both have clear, distinct identities. People say that the 2010s doesn't have an identity but they also say that all music now sounds the same which literally doesn't make sense? Like Trap and Dubstep are way more 2010s than grunge is 1990s.

It's not exactly the same but there's no denying there's been a huge slowdown in pop cultural change since the late 1990s and we have been relying on nostalgia to fill the lack of innovation.

The author of the rolling stone article is far from the only to notice this, Kurt Anderson noticed this same stagnation in his Vanity Fair article back in 2012 (and I posted it back then on this forum). Simon Reynolds wrote a whole book called Retro mania about the 2000s (and it applies to the blank, nondescript 2010s too).


That Vanity Fair article says the same thing about the 90s, that fashion and popular culture hardly changed at all between 1992 and 2012. That must mean the 90s were a decade of cultural stagnation too.  ::)

Oh, and they are also trying to argue that fashion in 1982 is basically the same as in 2012 and that you’d struggle to tell the difference. That’s the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard.  ;D

Nobody with a brain is going to look at a picture of 1992 and think it’s 2012, let alone 1982.

And ffs.. ‘this is how western society declines?’ Because of something as vapid as fashion? Good grief, what a load of dramatic guff. Where do people get this rubbish from?

If this is what happens when you get older - you become an out-of-touch relic who just whinges about how awful everything is - then just kill me now.

That Vanity Fair article says the same thing about the 90s, that fashion and popular culture hardly changed at all between 1992 and 2012. That must mean the 90s were a decade of cultural stagnation too.  ::)

I slightly disagree with his dating,(it's more the late 1990s) but his main point still holds, there's been no major pop cultural reinvention since the late 1990s.

What's even stranger than this phenomenon is the denial of it, I think the whole "they're older people out of touch argument" does not hold at all. No older person made these observations about the 1970s in relation to the 1950s or 1990s to the 1970s, it created pop cultural generation gaps.

The same does not hold true today, younger people(Millennials, "gen z") are straight up ripping off Gen x and Boomer styles, this was definitely not the case back then. Many Boomers were trying to differentiate themselves from their parents as much as possible back in the 1970s.

I slightly disagree with his dating,(it's more the late 1990s) but his main point still holds, there's been no major pop cultural reinvention since the late 1990s.

What's even stranger than this phenomenon is the denial of it, I think the whole "they're older people out of touch argument" does not hold at all. No older person made these observations about the 1970s in relation to the 1950s or 1990s to the 1970s, it created pop cultural generation gaps.

The same does not hold true today, younger people(Millennials, "gen z") are straight up ripping off Gen x and Boomer styles, this was definitely not the case back then. Many Boomers were trying to differentiate themselves from their parents as much as possible back in the 1970s.

Let’s entertain the idea that fashion and pop culture today is just a rehash of the 80s and 90s - so what? People my age weren’t around to experience either decade. When we get older, we’ll associate those styles with the 2010s, not the 1980s. Things like skinny jeans and flannel might have their roots in the 80s but I associate both with 2015, when hipster was arguably at its peak. You ask me to define the 2010s and those are the things I’ll mention. Whether those styles are original, rehashed or whatever else is irrelevant to that. They typify this decade in the way subcultures like emo did the 2000s.

I mean, do you really think people my age are just going to abandon nostalgia or something? That we won’t look back to the 2010s and reminisce about our youth? That we will associate the decade with nothing?

And you slightly disagree with his dating? He thinks fashion in 1982 is essentially the same as 2012! That’s not a ‘slight’ disagreement. In his mind, fashion has hardly evolved for almost 40 years, just because people wore jeans and sneakers to the mall 37 years ago. Using that article to back up your flimsy argument isn’t helping your cause at all.

As I said, nostalgia is cyclical. There absolutely was 70s nostalgia in the 90s. Fashion from prior decades had always re-emerged at some point.

https://www.superseventies.com/very70s.html

The 2020s will be the peak of 2000s nostalgia, and I look forward to people like you admitting you were wrong.

No offence, but you really need to get over this ‘everything after 2000 is the same’ nonsense. It’s getting a little tedious now. You’d need to be wilfully ignorant to think 2001 and 2019 are even remotely the same. Even as someone who was only a kid at the time, I can listen to songs or watch TV shows from the early 2000s and immediately know it’s from then - be it cars, clothes or just the quality of the picture. Even comparing, say, 2003 to 2009 shows big differences - just like 1993 and 1999 are nothing alike pop culturally.

Which brings me to my next point - the early 90s were dark, cynical and dominated by grunge. The late 90s were bright, optimistic and dominated by teen pop. They were absolutely nothing alike in overall vibe and aesthetic. How can the 90s have a singular identity when the two ends of it were a total contrast? Someone who is 35 would be nostalgic for a completely different 90s to someone who is 45. 1999 is closer to 2001 than 1991.

It’s simple - nostalgia is cyclical. At the start of this decade, 80s nostalgia was still dominant. Right now, 90s nostalgia rules the roost and will do as we start the 2020s. 00s nostalgia is in its very early days but the decade is, by and large, too recent for any serious nostalgia movement. It will come though, eventually. All those emo and scene kids from 2007 will be on here raving about the good old days.

I will also say that nostalgia for certain time periods will depend on your age. My grandma is 79, and although she has happy memories from the 90s, she is definitely not nostalgic for the 90s from a culture perspective. She was too old in the 90s to care about popular culture. She couldn’t name a single song from the 90s if her life depended on it. 90s nostalgia is primarily catered to Generation X (and very early Millennials) - basically the teens and young adults of the 90s.

so true

It all comes down to people being out of touch.. there definitely is a lot of change/innovation in pop culture in the last two decades, it's just that y'all are not the target audience anymore so the change isn't as drastic to you. The 2000s and the 2010s both have clear, distinct identities. People say that the 2010s doesn't have an identity but they also say that all music now sounds the same which literally doesn't make sense? Like Trap and Dubstep are way more 2010s than grunge is 1990s.

yeah lol, that guy Kurt Andersen doesnt exactly look like hes the main target of todays pop culture
https://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2017/12/17/5bd7bfdd-e238-4757-b504-02658d8feb7b/thumbnail/1200x630/8eee44bc065cc10df139a61ff1d975e2/1216-sunmo-kurtandersen-1463757-640x360.jpg

The 2000s and 2010s are seen by Older generations as Step-kids while they play favorites with The 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s & 90s. I've heard a few older people call the upcoming year "Thousand and twenty" which got me heated. Anyone who wants to call the next decades Thousand and ? is gonna get checked real fast by me.

That Vanity Fair article says the same thing about the 90s, that fashion and popular culture hardly changed at all between 1992 and 2012. That must mean the 90s were a decade of cultural stagnation too.  ::)

Oh, and they are also trying to argue that fashion in 1982 is basically the same as in 2012 and that you’d struggle to tell the difference. That’s the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard.  ;D

Nobody with a brain is going to look at a picture of 1992 and think it’s 2012, let alone 1982.

And ffs.. ‘this is how western society declines?’ Because of something as vapid as fashion? Good grief, what a load of dramatic guff. Where do people get this rubbish from?

If this is what happens when you get older - you become an out-of-touch relic who just whinges about how awful everything is - then just kill me now.


Don't know how old you are, but I'm 33 and feel very out of touch with pop culture today. Being ignored by marketers sucks....there's only so much old music, TV shows and movies that we can listen to and watch. Getting older does suck in our society. Very little is geared toward people over 30...especially when in comes to music, and more specifically Hip Hop, the most dominant genre. Where are the "Urban Hot AC" stype of stations for those of us who want newer, more mature content in our music?

*Oldhead rant over*

Don't know how old you are, but I'm 33 and feel very out of touch with pop culture today. Being ignored by marketers sucks....there's only so much old music, TV shows and movies that we can listen to and watch. Getting older does suck in our society. Very little is geared toward people over 30...especially when in comes to music, and more specifically Hip Hop, the most dominant genre. Where are the "Urban Hot AC" stype of stations for those of us who want newer, more mature content in our music?

*Oldhead rant over*


33 is still young, but I get your point. It’s usually your mid 20s when you start losing interest in pop culture. Most people I know in their late 20s feel the same way you do.

Pop culture has always been mostly aimed at middle school to college age kids. I’m 24 in 4 months but I consider the early 2010s to be my main era for music.

33 is still young, but I get your point. It’s usually your mid 20s when you start losing interest in pop culture. Most people I know in their late 20s feel the same way you do.

Pop culture has always been mostly aimed at middle school to college age kids. I’m 24 in 4 months but I consider the early 2010s to be my main era for music.


In Hip Hop years, I'm "old"  ;D

But even during my high school/college aged years (2000 until about 2008)  I was even more dissatisfied. I've been "bitter" over half of my life. Lol....I loved the late 90s and would do almost anything to relive them

Getting older does suck in our society. Very little is geared toward people over 30..


I remind you of the rallying cry of my Baby Boomer generation in the 1960s..."never trust anybody over 30".  ;)

I remind you of the rallying cry of my Baby Boomer generation in the 1960s..."never trust anybody over 30".  ;)


Funny that nobody says that anymore.

In fact, the Japanese used to compare marriage to Christmas.. it’s all over after the 25th. Basically if you were a woman over 25 and unmarried, you’ll probably never be married.

Our perspective on age has changed a lot over the past 40 years.

Let’s entertain the idea that fashion and pop culture today is just a rehash of the 80s and 90s - so what?

But isn't this stylistic stagnation disappointing, I personally crave novelty and creativity, it's like cultural time itself has flatten into a kind of horizontal post-modern wasteland. 

People my age weren’t around to experience either decade. When we get older, we’ll associate those styles with the 2010s, not the 1980s.

No they still won't be associated with the 2010s, the 2010s will become a "missing" decade besides contrived nostalgia attempts.

Things like skinny jeans and flannel might have their roots in the 80s but I associate both with 2015, when hipster was arguably at its peak.

Even the hipster thing dates to the 1990s(at the earliest) and hipsterism itself is retrogressive, it's a cultural dead end.

You ask me to define the 2010s and those are the things I’ll mention. Whether those styles are original, rehashed or whatever else is irrelevant to that. They typify this decade in the way subcultures like emo did the 2000s.


If those things "define" the 2010s then that proves my point even further, I never said nothing's changed, it's that those changes have been very incremental. It pales in comparison to the changes of all the 20th century decades and even the late 19th century.
People always bring up old styles like trap, I mean come on that stuff was becoming popular in the early 2000s(when I was in high school) and became mainstream in 2005.

That's almost 15 years, imagine a comparable 15 year gap between 1970 and 1955 or 1980 and 1965.

There's been no pop cultural reinvention since the 1990s and it's going to be harder to differentiate the past 20 years.

The 2020s will be the peak of 2000s nostalgia, and I look forward to people like you admitting you were wrong.


There probably will be an attempt at '00s nostalgia but it will be highly contrived, there's nothing distinct to compare '90s or '00s styles to in the first place. In the actual '90s while there was '70s nostalgia there was a cultural gap to compare, so a baggy jeans, timbalands wearing young hip-hop fan still saw '70s styles as ancient. 

At this point I think it’s pretty obvious that nothing I say will change your mind, and to be honest, I’m losing interest.

Have fun wallowing in ‘cultural stagnation’, I guess.  :)

Cultural stagnation? What about how internet culture became absolutely massive and changed ways of consumption in nearly every single way in the last decade, from tv losing its media holy grail to DIY influencers culture.

This thread is absolutely ridiculous

I remind you of the rallying cry of my Baby Boomer generation in the 1960s..."never trust anybody over 30".  ;)


Which never made sense to me because if you live long enough you would inevitably hit 30...

It's almost like ya'll planned to sell out hard later in life.




;) ;D

Which never made sense to me because if you live long enough you would inevitably hit 30...

It's almost like ya'll planned to sell out hard later in life.
;) ;D


A couple of reasons...when somebody is really young, being 30 or beyond seems almost impossibly in the future. It can't be related to. Pete Townsend wrote "hope I die before I get old" too, in the Who's anthemic "My Generation".  He is now still playing that song at age 73. And never mind that getting old arrives fast. It only SEEMS that way afterwards.

The other main reason was the fact that the "older set" were the ones sending the very young to wholesale slaughter in Vietnam, a war that seemed very questionable at the time and still does. That alone would be enough to distrust anybody.

A couple of reasons...when somebody is really young, being 30 or beyond seems almost impossibly in the future. It can't be related to. Pete Townsend wrote "hope I die before I get old" too, in the Who's anthemic "My Generation".  He is now still playing that song at age 73. And never mind that getting old arrives fast. It only SEEMS that way afterwards.

The other main reason was the fact that the "older set" were the ones sending the very young to wholesale slaughter in Vietnam, a war that seemed very questionable at the time and still does. That alone would be enough to distrust anybody.


As a person whose circle of friends are currently going through the late 20s- early 30s transition period, the consensus seems to be that 30 feels waaaay off until you actually hit 30 and then you go, "wtf, I'm 30! What am going to do now?!?!?!' lol

As a person whose circle of friends are currently going through the late 20s- early 30s transition period, the consensus seems to be that 30 feels waaaay off until you actually hit 30 and then you go, "wtf, I'm 30! What am going to do now?!?!?!' lol


In my experience, these round numbers like 30 that everybody makes such a big deal out of are meaningless. I didn't feel any different at 30 than I felt at 29, or 26 for that matter. It's at some later ages like 37 or some such off number that you might suddenly start to feel "things are different, I'm older now...". Likewise 40 and 50 were meaningless, I felt no changes. But suddenly at 53 or something one might feel different, something kicks in. Usually it's a good thing though. One feels more mentally in control at 37 or 53 when one realizes one is older, though at the same time lamenting one's lost youth, which seems only natural.  So it's all a bit of a balancing act.

No offence, but you really need to get over this ‘everything after 2000 is the same’ nonsense. It’s getting a little tedious now. You’d need to be wilfully ignorant to think 2001 and 2019 are even remotely the same. Even as someone who was only a kid at the time, I can listen to songs or watch TV shows from the early 2000s and immediately know it’s from then - be it cars, clothes or just the quality of the picture. Even comparing, say, 2003 to 2009 shows big differences - just like 1993 and 1999 are nothing alike pop culturally.

Which brings me to my next point - the early 90s were dark, cynical and dominated by grunge. The late 90s were bright, optimistic and dominated by teen pop. They were absolutely nothing alike in overall vibe and aesthetic. How can the 90s have a singular identity when the two ends of it were a total contrast? Someone who is 35 would be nostalgic for a completely different 90s to someone who is 45. 1999 is closer to 2001 than 1991.

It’s simple - nostalgia is cyclical. At the start of this decade, 80s nostalgia was still dominant. Right now, 90s nostalgia rules the roost and will do as we start the 2020s. 00s nostalgia is in its very early days but the decade is, by and large, too recent for any serious nostalgia movement. It will come though, eventually. All those emo and scene kids from 2007 will be on here raving about the good old days.

I will also say that nostalgia for certain time periods will depend on your age. My grandma is 79, and although she has happy memories from the 90s, she is definitely not nostalgic for the 90s from a culture perspective. She was too old in the 90s to care about popular culture. She couldn’t name a single song from the 90s if her life depended on it. 90s nostalgia is primarily catered to Generation X (and very early Millennials) - basically the teens and young adults of the 90s.



The 21st is just a never ending cycle of perennial trends my dude, don't tell me you haven't heard "it's 20** not the 90's" or "playing 80' 90s and now",. THE FINAL NAIL WAS on the 1st January 2000, the spirit of the 20th century died on that day, and ever since no one cares what decade were living in or finds it noteworthy, hence the loss of decade identity in the 21st century, tell me how how often in real life have you heard people say "the 2010's" or the "twenty tens",  can't answer why not?, because in the  in the 80s and 90's you could hear people outside making reference to the decade by it's actual name, and all the time even in print and in the media especially in newspapers "Michael Jackson "superstar of the 80's" on on the toy dolls, anyways I love Emman that Man and I are sick of re hashed crap and say this "decade" is different sure but is it distinct truly from the 2000's? f**k no, the 80's were distinct from the 70's, and the 70's from the 60's and etc, do you truly think the 10's are as distant as the 80's?, I would argue it's not even as distinct as the 90's and everyone would agree that  spirit of decade identity was waning even, the 90's was like the least distinct decade of the 20th century, yet it was more identifiable than the 10's, now let me taste those Gen Z tears :\'(

I remember people in the 2000s saying the 90s and 2000s were the same. This probably happens every decade. I bet in the 2020s people will say the 2010s and the 2020s are the same, even though 2019 is already drastically different from 2012/2013 and the decade isn't even over yet lol.

It all comes down to people being out of touch.. there definitely is a lot of change/innovation in pop culture in the last two decades, it's just that y'all are not the target audience anymore so the change isn't as drastic to you. The 2000s and the 2010s both have clear, distinct identities. People say that the 2010s doesn't have an identity but they also say that all music now sounds the same which literally doesn't make sense? Like Trap and Dubstep are way more 2010s than grunge is 1990s.


No I hated the twenty tens and I was only 17 1/2 when they started , infact I hate everything from 2007 onwards

I remember people in the 2000s saying the 90s and 2000s were the same. This probably happens every decade. I bet in the 2020s people will say the 2010s and the 2020s are the same, even though 2019 is already drastically different from 2012/2013 and the decade isn't even over yet lol.


That's completely different because people were likening the differences between the 2000's to the 1990's not  THE DIFFERENCES FROM THE 1980S TO THE 1990'S, this just reinforces the point that nothing has been distinct since the 1990's, the 2000's weren't different enough to make themselves DISTINCT from the 1990's, NOT THE CASE OF THE 1990'S NOT BEING DISTINCT ENOUGH, THE 1990S WERE PLENTY DISTINCT FROM THE 1980'S, THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE 21ST CENTURY NOT BEING DISTINCT, THE 20TH CENTURY WAS FROM DECADE TO DECADE

That's completely different because people were likening the differences between the 2000's to the 1990's not  THE DIFFERENCES FROM THE 1980S TO THE 1990'S, this just reinforces the point that nothing has been distinct since the 1990's, the 2000's weren't different enough to make themselves DISTINCT from the 1990's, NOT THE CASE OF THE 1990'S NOT BEING DISTINCT ENOUGH, THE 1990S WERE PLENTY DISTINCT FROM THE 1980'S, THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE 21ST CENTURY NOT BEING DISTINCT, THE 20TH CENTURY WAS FROM DECADE TO DECADE


Yeah, but if you believe those articles then nothing has changed since the 1990s. Do you really believe that?

I’m not going to discuss anything with someone who appears close to having an aneurism. Sheesh, it’s not that big of a deal.

At the end of the day people can think what they like, but I’ve said everything I have to say on this subject.

Yeah, but if you believe those articles then nothing has changed since the 1990s. Do you really believe that?


there is difference but is it really distinctly different?  the most original thing this decade was fashion wise with the longline jackets/t-shirts , and reinvention of the snapback with a flat bill in the 2000's flat bills were exclusively reserved for fitteds not snapbacks, but hey that man Emman was right so let's give him credit where credit is due I don't like people trying to misrepresent the facts. I was born in '92 so my youth was the 10's but original it ain't 

I’m not going to discuss anything with someone who appears close to having an aneurism. Sheesh, it’s not that big of a deal.

At the end of the day people can think what they like, but I’ve said everything I have to say in this subject.


Good your not even 20 the adults are speaking so shush.

there is difference but is it really distinctly different?  the most original thing this decade was fashion wise with the longline jackets/t-shirts , and reinvention of the snapback with a flat bill in the 2000's flat bills were exclusively reserved for fitteds not snapbacks, but hey that man Emman was right so let's give him credit where credit is due I don't like people trying to misrepresent the facts. I was born in '92 so my youth was the 10's but original it ain't


Bruh if you think the bill on a baseball hat is a notable change but everything else in fashion has remained the same then I don't know what to tell you. There's no way you could dress trendy by 2019 standards and head back to 2009 or 1999 and not look like an alien.

Bruh if you think the bill on a baseball hat is a notable change but everything else in fashion has remained the same then I don't know what to tell you. There's no way you could dress trendy by 2019 standards and head back to 2009 or 1999 and not look like an alien.


Fashion still has bohemian influences of the top of my head

Good your not even 20 the adults are speaking so shush.


He's 24 actually.


Fashion still has bohemian influences of the top of my head


For dudes, stereotypically, -

2019 - meet me at McDonald's hair, oversized sweat-shirt tucked in to low crop ripped jeans, prominent white athletic socks with white shoes.

2009 - long straight hair, deep v-neck t shirt, skinny jeans, high top sneakers.

1999 - spikey hair, oversized t shirt, baggy jeans, running shoes.

Honestly nothing alike.

Some of these people are actually idiots. Every single thing in the last 50 years has been cyclical, and almost every single thing in human history has been a copy, remake, innovation, or inspiration of something else, very few things have been completely original. If anything cultural trends are speeding up, not blending together, just because you can't keep up with the changes doesn't mean you get to lump it all together because you can't see the differences. A lot of the things that define the older decades actually come from even older times, the thick-rimmed hipster glasses that were so popular at the beginning of this decade and throughout the 70s and 80s were worn in the 40s and 50s as well. You associate flannel with the 90s, but people have worn flannel long before then. In fact, it isn't even accurate to say that most decades have a very uniform culture throughout the entire span of the decade. For many of the decades of the 20th century, the late and early parts are very different from each other, the 60s and 90s being good examples. So, lets all unanimously agree to stop with this B.S about how the last 2 decades have no cultural identity of their own. If anything the Nostalgia for recent decades will be even bigger in the future.

The originality of this decade doesn't extend much further then the tapered jeans and longline clothing, chuck in a few more bits and pieces like tattoo inspired design on clothing more artistic looking prints on fashion, . Bu just look here about all of the remakes that are set for this year films/tv series it's absurd and you know it there even talking about clueless and the craft last I checked, how about we create a tv series or film that captures the zeitgeist of the 10's and not the 90's?, those films were special because they captured a a window in time