“The generation of young people who were born into the digital era may be more connected to each other, but less connected to their cultural heritage” warns sociologist De Haan. So, libraries, museums, archives and other institutions are digitizing the content that they have, and are hoping the digital generation will then come immediately.
But the way these kids use technology is completely different from the way an older generation uses it. Whereas we might be very functional in our usage, kids see technology much more as a means to communicate. “They are ‘chatting’ more but reading less; playing more, but researching and learning less than preceding generations,” according to De Haan.
I agree with De Haan that THEIR application of technology differs strongly from the way WE use for instance the internet. In his research he questions whether “the internet is a new rival to traditional culture or if it creates opportunities to bring the digital generation in contact with the cultural riches of the past.”
I think the latter is the case. Every generation has felt less connected with the heritage of its ancestors. So much is as valid for me as it was for my parents and my children. It is not the current generation or the internet that has created a new problem. It has been a problem of all ages. Now, for the first time we might have a big change to apply the communication technologies of our time to actually create interest in our heritage.
What do you think?
Image
Maybe there’s more to it than just a technological issue. True that we might now be able to package ‘boring’ content in much more interesting ways. I doubt whether we are able at all to do that for a younger generation. Their participation in determining what the right approach is, might be a necessity for that.
But besides that, maybe the younger generation feels less connected to their heritage because they view themselves as part of a completely different culture. They are no longer connected to their place of birth. Technology for instance has already made it possible for everyone to live in different places than we work. And with our current communication technologies we might feel more connected to someone with at different heritage on the other side of the world. I think their sense of identity is different….more global than it is local. Maybe that is the reason why they become detached from their own cultural heritage, they are simply creating a completely different one.
Are we in that sense on the brink of yet another cultural revolution? One that is not easily ’solved’ by technology?
i completely agree with your point that every young generation is ‘frowned upon’ by the generations that ‘created’ them. i also see the point jorgen makes about a ‘different culture’.
but why don’t we question the assumption itself? the assumption that ‘young people are not connected to their cultural heritage’. do we ask the right questions? do we have a limited perspective on cultural heritage, is jorgen right and do we need to expand the definition of ‘cultural heritage’?
i don’t have an answer to these questions. but accepting the basic premise (young people are not connected to their cultural heritage) is very dangerous. the logical consequence of this premise is that they don’t care. and, i think that is not the case at all. as our research also clearly shows.