Steeler Fan Nightmare

Tom Perkins is at home with labor conspiracies

By Hooker, By Crook - The Early Girls

Fun-A-Day 30 & 31: Puritan Generation

Well, this is my final entry for the Fun-A-Day Pittsburgh project. This entails the Puritan Generation (born 1584 - 1612), list some of the other entries, this is of important historical figures from Colonial America with a international figures (mostly English).

Oxford College in the early 17th Century

This is the generation of the first pilgrims and puritans that left Europe for religious freedom in the New World. There was also a colony started in Bermuda that is not well remembered by American Historians.

They founded colonies in New England like Salem and Plymouth.

John Cotton 1584 - 1652: Puritan Radical in England, arrived in Boston in 1633 and served as Congregationalist Minister there.

Myles Standish 1584 - 1656: Military Adviser on the Mayflower. A fictional story about him being shy romantic, written over a century later popularized the holiday Thanksgiving. He was not a Pilgrim himself.

John Rolf 1585 - 1622 and Pocahontas c1595 - 1617

Thomas Hobbes 1588 - 1679; Political Philosopher, wrote The Leviathan - he was an empiricist, and was interested in the great "social contracts" of societies.

John Winthorp 1588 - 1649; Puritan Minister and former lawyer who gave famous "Shining City upon a Hill" sermon during the voyage to the New World.

John Endecott 1589 - 1665; classic jerk Puritan.

William Bradford 1590 - 1657; came to the New World on the Mayflower, governor of Plymouth colony for 26 years.

William Pynchon 1590 - 1662; founder of Springfield Massachusetts, a fur trader and encouraged peace with the American Indians. Much more business minded than his contemporaries.

Anne Hutchinson 1591 - 1643; founded Rhode Island after exiled from Salem.

Peter Stuyvesant 1592 - 1672; director of New Amsterdam until it was ceded to England in 1664. Built a protective wall there that was the wall Wall street was named after. Had a peg leg.

Richard Mather - puritan clergyman

Rene Descartes 1596 - 1650: Father of Modern Philosophy, a Rationalist

John Davenport 1597 - 1670; founder of New Haven colony.

Oliver Cromwell 1599 - 1658; leader of the round-heads during the English Civil War and after the execution of Charles I of England.

King Charles I of England 1600 - 1649; The English King executed during the English Civil War.

Roger Williams 1605 - 1685; founded Rhode Island with Anne Hutchinson

Simon Bradstreet 1603 - 1697; one of the first Puritans to arrive and found Salem. Married to Anne Bradstreet.

John Eliot 1604 - 1690; apostle to the American Indians of the New England.

Sir William Berkeley 1605 - 1677; appointed in charge of Virginia Colony by Charles II of England. He was opposed during Bacon's Rebellion.

John Winthorp the Younger 1606 - 1676; son of John Winthrop, missed the boat his father was on to the New World and never got to hear the famous sermon.

John Harvard 1607 - 1638; died shortly after arriving in New England, he left a collection of books and money to start a school that would go on to be Harvard University.

John Milton 1608 - 1674: wrote Paradise Lost

Henry Dunster 1609 - 1659; first president of Harvard College in 1640.

Anne Bradstreet 1612 - 1672; was the most celebrated female writer in America until the early 19th century. She wrote The 10th Muse Lately Sprung Up in America, just rolls off the tongue doesn't it?

Fun-A-Day 29: Strauss-Howe Generational Theory

Today I wanted to write a little bit about the Strauss-Howe generation theory which has inspired some of the work that I posted this month. I originally heard about the book The Forth Turning from my father when I was fourteen and read their book Generations around seventeen. The cyclical history theory always stuck with me, the Jungian archetypes applied to American History that interpret spans of history into a repeating pattern of zeitgeist/social moods. Regardless of whether the theory is true or not their books were helpful in my understanding of mapping out historical periods and figures and their context into a great historical narrative.

I have always been interested in sociology, history and stories with no central protagonist but rather a long series of imperfect characters where the narrative's scope is beyond one lifetime. The book of Judges from the Bible, Herodotus's Histories were some of the readings that have held my interest.

As my knowledge of world history has expanded I have also developed skeptical eye of their books and publications. First of all it is a very American perspective, one argued in their book The Forth Turning as a uniquely American phenomenon, perhaps rooted in some sort of American Exceptionalist attitude . Also in keeping with an American style, the theory isn't anymore complicated than the rules to American football. Their books also take an American self-help or advice style tone of not just speculating on the past but also attempting to predict the future for the benefit of the readers to prepare for upcoming cultural and economic shifts.

As the Wikipedia article explains in the critical reception section, the authors are accused for "cherry picking", as in selecting convenient facts and antidotes while there is not attempt to look at the long term trends of empirical data. I did find one article on the internet that did look at their theory through long term economic data. Their books, as far as all of the charts it provides, doesn't provide any separate data that covers long term economic or demographic activity. Perhaps involving this would be too confusing and suddenly trying to explain the theory would be mired into something much more complex than the rules of American Football.

Also, reading the generational archetypes is like reading a horoscope, as in they will describe something that can be perceived in a number of ways and frame its meaning to adjust to their theory. Below is an example:
Laura Bush (of a prophet generation) idealistically pursued adult literacy initiatives while in the white house toward Generation X (nomad generation) as the bare minimum prerogative for this destitute generation.
Laura Bush (of a nomad generation) pragmatically pursued adult literacy initiatives while in the white house toward the Generation X (hero generation) to ensure that no one in this generation is left behind.
Laura Bush (of a hero generation) pursued reshaping the institutions of adult literacy while in the White House to ensure that Generation X (an Artist generation).
Laura Bush (artist generation) perused adult literacy while in the white house, serving the low income and poorly educated of Generation X (prophet generation) to accommodate an indulged generation who educational advancements beyond their youth while ignoring the younger nomad generation still in childhood.

This example illustrates how someone can take one action but interpret it to suite the mood they are trying to frame the actions. In all fairness though, this is how historian tells history as no one can fully explain the past (or even the present) fully. Historians synthesize a time period or group of people into something unique and distinguishable and with that comes generalizations. If one does not write in this way they my find their work directionless or too obtuse to draw anything meaningful.

I did look into seeing if there was any empirical data that might prove or disprove the theory. There have been some works that compare the theory with Russian Economist Nikolai Kondratiev's K-Cycle theory on economics.

The Strauss-Howe books helped me mentally map historical figures by age location into the greater context of the different periods of modern history and that is probably why I keep going back to looking into their work. I also find it interesting how ancient cultures saw history/time as a cyclical process, something much more in tune with the Strauss-Howe framing of history than the modern linear perspective.

illustration of the Egyptian Calendar

One thing I would like to note is that from listening to history podcasts there are times described as major crisis, winner-take-all/decisive moments, that follow with a new generation born after that period who seem to reject the values of the older generation that lived through the crisis period. Most recently we can not the gap between "The Greatest Generation" and the Baby Boomers, but (at least from my own understanding) has happened before, such as described in Dan Carlin's Hardcore History, where he describes the generation of Romans after the rein of Sulla who Carlin described as Roman Beat-nicks (Show 39). Or in David Crowther's History of England, a period called The Anarchy (a crisis period for medieval England) was proceeded by Richard the Lionheart's generation that embraced the ideas of courtly love and the emergence of the troubadours. Is is all more complicated than the brief explanations I have heard? yes. Is there any truth to this pattern that relates to the shared experience of a generation? possibly.

I am not a historian or an economist or hoping to be the know-it-all who knew what was going to happen 20 years before it happens. I am an artist who acceptances the uncertainty of all things. The patterns of the world and humanity are a complicated and ephemeral nature that is beyond the scope of a single individual's understanding and that's something I accept but also explore. I'm not interested in pinning down the truth but rather investigate possible truths for a deeper understanding that I know I will never fully grasp.