I recently traveled to the Big Apple, where I saw an off-Broadway production of the musical Avenue Q. For those of you who are unfamiliar with this show, it's a (very raunchy) adult parody of Sesame Street - puppets and everything. After discussing Jeffrey Arnett's theory of "Emerging Adulthood" in class, I found that Avenue Q's subject matter mirrored Arnett's ideas almost exactly. However, the theorist says that the state of the economy is only one small reason for the appearance of this new life stage, while the musical seems to suggest otherwise. While Arnett proposes several non-economic causes for the “Emerging Adulthood” phenomenon, Avenue Q demonstrates that it is, in fact, an ultimate product of the economic downturn.
Arnett's central idea is that there is now a transitional stage of life between adolescence and adulthood (specifically in a person's mid-twenties) that hasn't existed before. According to him, this is a time of unprecedented experimentation and instability. His discussion of the importance of friends during this time is reflected in Avenue Q; a group of young adults are neighbors and help one another cope with their responsibilities and personal issues. This friend group does not exist in terms of couples - as several of the characters are without a significant other - but in terms of a community of interconnected individuals.
Another interesting correlation between these works is the idea of romantic/sexual experimentation and difficulty with commitment. Arnett argues that this is a result of changing values in society. The two main characters in Avenue Q represent this phenomenon when they have sex (Yes, the puppets have sex. On stage.) and one will not commit to the other. Another character also struggles with homosexuality and begins experimentation in that respect.
The changing scopes of friendship, romance and sexuality, as presented by Arnett and the play, are indicative of a change in social values about relationships. But what has caused this change in values? It seems to me that the poor economy has made it difficult for young people to commit to one another and marry. People want companionship either way, so it would make sense that they’d look to friends to fill the void in their mid-twenties. This demonstrates an economic driving force beyond Arnett’s assessment of changing social values.
The ideas of educational returns and entitlement touched on in class and further discussed by Arnett are also explored in the musical. In the attached video (which happens to be the opening scene from the show), the characters lament their inabilities to put their college degrees to use and/or snag their dream jobs. In an earlier song, the main character, Princeton, asks (in an earlier song), "What do you do with a B.A. in English?" Right afterward (in the "It Sucks To Be Me" song attached), Brian's wife says she has two master's degrees in social work, but no clients (sorry, couldn't find a high-quality version of both songs together). Brian also explains that he pursued a career in comedy, but now finds himself unsuccessful and unemployed. He does not begin searching for another job, and he never ends up succeeding as a comedian. This professional insecurity and instability characteristic of emerging adults is a main theme of Arnett's theory.
While the theorist claims that this struggle is a result of the overwhelming number of options available to emerging adults, I think he is underestimating the economy as a driving social force. The virtual impossibility of getting a high-paying job without a college degree drives more people to pursue higher education, which in turn drives colleges to offer more varied options for study. All of this is ultimately a result of the state of the economy, which has influenced the necessity of the college degree in the job market. Given the underlying economic causes of this mid-twenties struggle period and its characteristically overwhelming number of options, Arnett’s claim that the economy doesn’t completely influence the “Emerging Adulthood” phenomenon is somewhat flawed.
But ultimately, I could be wrong. What do you guys think? Is it too much of a stretch to claim that the economy drives pretty much all social phenomena? Is it too skeptical?
No comments:
Post a Comment