You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Adulthood has lost its allure.
From the 1930s through the early 1950s, Hollywood, in particular, tended to showcase adults, like Cary Grant, Humphrey Bogart, Barbara Stanwyck and Bette Davis, who embodied sophistication, maturity, style, elegance, urbanity and worldly wisdom. But beginning with Marlon Brando, James Dean and Elvis Presley, popular culture tended instead to celebrate youthful rebelliousness and associate adulthood with complacent conformity.
Increasingly, adulthood was conflated with marital discord, existential ennui and angst, and the erosion of youthful dreams. Adult characters may start a film or drama or novel full of ideals and aspirations, only to have those dreams eroded by the realities of daily life and everyday responsibilities. At the same time, television sitcoms tended to depict adults as cultural laggards, out of touch and behind the times, struggling to keep up with cultural trends, slang, styles and new technologies, and striving and failing to sustain illusions of youth.
The shift in popular culture from privileging the sophistication and maturity of adults to idolizing the rebelliousness and vibrancy of youth is often attributed to:
- The post-World War II Baby Boom that gave the young significant cultural and economic sway.
- Post-war economic prosperity which transformed young people into a vital target market for music, fashion and consumer goods.
- The 1960s counterculture, which emphasized youthful rebellion against traditional norms and the establishment.
- The prolongation of youth as a distinctive life stage between childhood dependence and adulthood responsibility, with its own rites, rituals, style, music, dress and freedoms.
But, of course, American culture’s preference for youth and novelty over age and experience is nothing new. During the early 19th century, a number of derogatory terms entered the American vocabulary to describe the old, like geezer and old fogy. And, certainly, silent films of the 1920s, like Flaming Youth and Our Dancing Daughters, celebrated young people who broke free from the constraints of genteel culture.
These, however, were only more recent manifestations of a much broader cultural transformation that had begun in the late 18th century, when a new, idealized Romantic view of youth began to emerge. The young came to be depicted as agents of change and as cultural avant-garde who were responsible for ushering in new styles and sensibilities. The young were also romanticized as bearers of new, radical ideas about freedom and justice. Generational conflict came to be regarded, more and more, as the driving force behind cultural transformation.
This idea persists today, encapsulated in the acid phrase that science (or scholarship more generally) advances one funeral at a time.
Earlier in time, the young, who were often regarded as reckless, impulsive and irresponsible, were seen as a population requiring restraint and oversight. Youth needed to undergo an apprenticeship, learning, maturing and only gradually and taking on adult responsibilities under a master’s tutelage. Youth was a preparatory stage, a time for training to prepare for adult duties and responsibilities. Young people were expected to be deferential to their elders—children to bow before their parents and college students before their professors. Young people were only slowly integrated into society through structured stages, such as apprenticeships in trades or formal coming-of-age ceremonies.
But toward the end of the 18th century, a new view emerged that depicted youth as a time of profound growth, generational conflict, existential questioning, and the pursuit of authenticity. Philosophers, poets and novelists played a pivotal role in celebrating youth as a symbol of rebellion, emotional intensity and moral righteousness.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe occupied a central role in shaping and popularizing the Romantic image of youth as a time of Sturm und Drang. In novels like The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774) and Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship (1795–96) he contributed to the modern conception of youth as a period of psychological, moral and intellectual development and self-discovery, a quest for identity and purpose, and a time for bold experimentation, moral and ethical reflection, and individualistic self-expression.
This Romantic view of youth emerged as a counterpoint to the Enlightenment, which emphasized reason, order and restraint. Romanticism, in contrast, celebrated emotion, nature and individualism. Youth, with its inherent passion, untamed emotions, inner turmoil, rebellion against bourgeois norms and potential for growth, became a natural symbol for these Romantic values.
Youth, for writers from Goethe to Jane Austin, the Brontë sisters, and beyond, was life’s great drama: a period of transformation and confrontation with the self and society that had a formative impact on an individual’s lifelong journey. Romantic and platonic relationships were central to their Bildungsromans, or coming-of-age narratives, serving as catalysts for emotional development and self-awareness.
Shifting gears, but only slightly, I have been struck by the narrowness of the reporting on the recent student protests. I have seen no serious attempts to survey student opinion, either nationally or on individual campuses. Why, I ask myself, haven’t pollsters or sociologists measured the share of students who have taken part in demonstrations or who sympathize with the protests’ goals or simply ask systematically about their priorities? An opt-in poll like You Gov’s is no substitute for systematic sampling.
I don’t think this lacuna is accidental. When adult observers reflect on campus activism today, they are not only reacting to the events themselves but are also engaging with deep-seated cultural narratives about the nature of youth. These narratives, rooted in Romantic ideals, frame youth as a transformative stage marked by idealism, struggle and a quest for identity through rebellion and experimentation.
The Romantic movement celebrated the youthful spirit as inherently rebellious and critical of authority. This was seen as a natural expression of the young’s drive to assert their individuality and challenge outdated or unjust societal structures. Such views were famously personified by figures like Lord Byron and Percy Shelley, who not only wrote about rebellious youth but lived lives that embodied these ideals.
Romanticism posited that the tumult of youth was essential for personal growth and the development of a distinctive identity. This period of life was seen as a unique opportunity for self-exploration, often through challenging existing beliefs and engaging in new experiences, including political and social activism.
For many pundits, student activism is viewed through the lens of these Romantic ideals—as a natural, even necessary, phase of youth. Protests and campus activism are often seen as rites of passage where young individuals test societal boundaries and shape their moral and ideological views. This can lead to a romanticization of these activities, seen as courageous or as integral steps in the maturation process.
Of course, adults’ responses to the current wave of student activism varies widely, influenced by their own experiences and cultural context. Some view these actions positively, as vital expressions of engagement and responsibility. Others may see them negatively, as disruptive or misguided.
For some older adults, current student activism may evoke nostalgia for their own youth’s rebellious phase, resulting in a more sympathetic or supportive stance. Conversely, if their own youth did not include similar experiences, or if they now hold values that prioritize order and stability, they might view current activism with skepticism or disapproval.
A Romantic view of youth is deeply embedded in American culture. I think it’s fair to say that most upper-middle-class American parents believe that young people need to engage in a process of experimentation, rebellion, identity exploration and self-reflection if they are to become mature adults. But it’s also the case that these adults worry that young lives might go off the rails if they are given too excessive freedom.
What, we might ask, can colleges do to better help their traditional-I aged students develop meaningful and respectful intimate relationships, become self-reflective morally and ethically, and channel their youthful idealism in productive ways? How, in short, can we make college more than an academic experience and more of a growth experience without inhibiting student freedom but also mitigate the bad things that can and do happen on college campuses, from hazing and drug and alcohol abuse to unplanned pregnancies and sexual abuse?
Currently, the answer consists of a mishmash of “life skills” workshops, support and counseling services, and access to student organizations and community engagement opportunities that relatively few students take advantage of. To a very limited extent, colleges monitor student behavior, but only intervene when issues get out of hand and bad publicity results.
I doubt that anyone would seriously insist that these current initiatives do an adequate job of helping students achieve the social and psychological development that Arthur Chickering and Linda Reisser called for three decades ago: Defining their identity, managing their emotions, forging mature interpersonal relationships, and developing integrity and a sense of purpose and social responsibility.
You might well respond that students need to accomplish those goals on their own, and perhaps you are right. But I beg to differ: I think we need to do more to make college a more developmental and maturational experience.
Transforming the educational experience to focus more on developmental and maturational growth involves embedding these goals into every aspect of the college experience—from the curriculum and teaching to campus life. Only in this way can we not only enrich the individual student’s experience but cultivate a campus culture that values and promotes holistic development. Here’s a five-point plan of action:
- Integrate developmental goals into the curriculum. Design and implement core courses that focus on identity formation, emotional intelligence, ethics and civic engagement. These courses should be experiential, involving practical exercises, reflective assignments, and discussions that encourage personal insight.
- Incorporate service-learning across the undergraduate experience. Ensure that every student has the opportunity to engage in community service as part of their academic coursework, linking theoretical knowledge with practical social impact.
- Offer course credit or certificates or diploma notations to students who complete a series of developmental activities. Formally recognize participation in workshops on managing independence, conflict resolution, and preparing for life after college or engaging in service activities.
- Foster deeper student-faculty relations. Place as many students as possible in thematically oriented learning communities. Establish formal mentorship programs where faculty members serve as mentors to students, guiding them not only academically but also in personal development. Train faculty to recognize their role in student development, equipping them with the skills to support students’ emotional and social growth as well as their intellectual development.
- Facilitate discussions and activities on hot topics. Treat these as opportunities to expose students to different cultures, beliefs and perspectives, enhancing social responsibility and reducing prejudice.
In my view, we need to broaden the scope of what a college education can and should do. We need to rethink our campus’s role: from providing academic knowledge to facilitating comprehensive development. We need to recognize an essential truth: The college years are not only about academic but also about profound personal and social development.
Higher education should empower growth beyond the cognitive. It should aim to develop all facets of a student—intellectual, emotional, social and ethical.
College should also cultivate capable and caring adults who have a sense of social responsibility and a commitment to contributing positively to society.
In addition, colleges should focus on ethical reasoning and integrity, developing curricula that challenge students to consider the moral implications of their actions and the impact they have on others and the environment.
To this list, I’d add one more objective: Colleges should promote intrapersonal development. This includes self-awareness, self-regulation and the ability to recognize and manage one’s emotions. These skills underpin critical aspects such as executive functioning, emotional control, grit and resilience.
Only by prioritizing ethical, emotional, social and intrapersonal development can we equip students not only with academic knowledge but also with the essential skills, wisdom and character needed to navigate life’s challenges effectively.
