Childhood as Generation or Life Phase?

Abstract

During the last few decades a view of childhood as a generation has been introduced within what is called ‘new childhood studies’. Childhood as a structural and structuring concept, with methodological emphasis on studies on the aggregated level, is proposed by one of the main proponents of this view, Jens Qvortrup, while another perspective, here represented by Leena Alanen, takes Mannheim’s theoretical work on generations as a point of departure. These two points of view have had an impact on the new childhood studies, but at the same time they have not been made subject to critical discussion and are, thus, uncontested. There are, however, several conceptual as well as methodological issues and problems that should be discussed with regard to both perspectives. Issues raised in this article are, for example, the multiple meanings of the term ‘generation’ and the inherent problems in Mannheim’s conceptualization and its proposed use in childhood studies. Finally we discuss whether concepts like ‘life phase’ within life course research, and ‘age category’would be more clear and applicable than the proposed uses of ‘generation’, considering the theoretical interests behind this research.

Being a Young Citizen in Estonia: An Exploration of Young People’s Civic and Media Experiences

“…Youth, and its liminal character, are imagined as a threat to established values, rules and norms. Furthermore, youth cultures have been analysed in terms 13 For a general discussion of the generation and life-phase paradigms see Närvänen and Näsman (2004). of their impact concerning civic competencies. Youth culture might actually serve as an agent for socialisation of political views and may potentially contribute to knowledge about, and confidence to participate in, current political debates (Pfaff;.…”

Generational Differences in Relation to Ethnic Diversity: The Attitudes of Croatian Secondary School Pupils and Their Parents

“…Zbog ishodišta u empirijskom istraživanju etničkih predrasuda i stavova prema etničkoj različitosti hrvatskih srednjoškolaca i njihovih roditelja, govori se o pripadnicima tzv. obiteljskih generacija (Närvänen i Näsman, 2004;usp. Attias-Donfut i Arber, 2000), tj.…”

“…u društvenoj konstrukciji stvarnosti što kasnije detaljno razrađuju Berger i Luckmann (1992[1966). Pojedinci, tvrdi Mannheim, rano u djetinjstvu stječu elemente svoga svjetonazora, a značenje dječjih i adolescentskih 6 iskustava leži u činjenici da se odraz s važnim zajedničkim kulturnim i/ili društveno-povijesnim iskustvima (Devriese, 1989;Attias-Donfut i Arber, 2000;Attias-Donfut i Daveau, 2004;Närvänen i Näsman, 2004). 4 Neki autori definiraju generacije kao skupine osoba u srodničkome nizu (v. npr.…”

“…4 Neki autori definiraju generacije kao skupine osoba u srodničkome nizu (v. npr. Alanen, 2001;Qvortrup, 2009) dok drugi smatraju da je u tom smislu uputnije govoriti o »obiteljskim generacijama« ili o »životnim fazama« (v. Närvänen i Näsman, 2004). Govori se o dvjema, o djeci i odraslima (Alanen, 2001), ili trima (ponekad i četirima) generacijama, o djeci, odraslima i starijim osobama, odnosno o djeci, roditeljima i djedovima i bakama (Qvortrup, prema Närvänen i Näsman, 2004) ili pak mladima (ponajprije radno neaktivnima), odraslima (radno aktivnima) i umirovljenima (v. npr.…”

“…Attias-Donfut i Arber, 2000). Predložene podjele po mnogočemu su neadekvatne jer su neprecizne, a sadržaj pojmova se preklapa (o tome više u Närvänen i Näsman, 2004). 5 Da generaciju treba razumjeti kao društvenu pojavu, smatra i Bourdieu: »Želim podsjetiti jednostavno na to da mladost i starost nisu datosti, nego se društveno konstruiraju u borbi između mladih i starih… Svako polje… ima svoje vlastite zakone starenja: da bi se znalo kako se u njemu razgraničavaju generacije, treba poznavati posebne zakone funkcioniranja polja, ulôge u borbi i podjele koje ta borba proizvodi« (Bourdieu, 1984: 144).…”