Bridging The Gap Will Teens And Adults Ever Understand Each Other?

These days, it’s not hard to see the stark difference and gap in communication between teenagers and the adults who are running this country. Communication is nil, projection is prominent, stereotyping is rampant.

Our parents’ generation, for all of their noted good intentions and love, seems quite out of touch with the problems and realities of today’s young generation.

There is much talk these days about what can be done to help us, with as many valid concerns as misinformed solutions. The question is, how can our parents help us without knowing what we face?

Our reality is bleak compared to the relative safety of their childhoods. We face harsh realities and dangers unknown to teenagers even a decade ago. How can these two generations come together?

Maybe by seeing something that is darker and more dangerous than both parent and child’s reality, such as the film “Kids,” and then discussing what has been seen. In essence, dissolving boundaries through common sharing and relating of experience.

“Kids” is the controversial debut film by Larry Clark, an awardwinning still photographer known for his alarming and disconcerting shots of teen violence, drug abuse and sexuality. The story, written by a talented 22-year-old Manhattan skateboarder named Harmony Korine, follows the exploits of a group of teenage skaters through a “normal” 24 hours filled with drug use, unprotected sex and violence.

The story’s protagonist, Telly, the self-proclaimed “virgin surgeon,” seduces young virgins into unsafe sex with sweet talk and manipulation. His best friend, Casper, drinks, does drugs and nearly beats another skateboarder to death, all the while detached and unconcerned.

The females in the film find themselves victims to Telly’s manipulation, becoming desensitized themselves to the point where there is little distinction between making love and having sex in the hurt minds of these girls.

This is especially tragic for one girl in particular, Jenny, who has just tested positive for HIV and has slept only with Telly. She spends the course of the film trying to find Telly before he seduces another girl.

Obviously, the scenario spelled out in this film may not fit detail to detail with the realities of Spokane’s teens. Still, as a moralistic tale of the consequences of dangerous actions, it has meaning and inflection to teenagers in Spokane.

I personally know people who are greatly disguised, inconspicuous Tellys and Caspers. I know girls who have been terrorized by the possibility of being HIV-positive until their blood tests luckily (and I stress luckily) came back negative.

Here in Spokane, a shockingly large number of teens find solace in substance abuse, be it marijuana or alcohol or amphetamines. We are not isolated from these problems of society, as many news shows or articles will show you.

These problems are not waning. In fact, they are growing and widening the gap of fear and misconception between my generation and those who came before.

Since I couldn’t see the movie, I read many reviews and commentaries from newspapers around the country. I found reactions to the raw depiction of my generation varied and troublesome. All the reviewers seemed to agree on one point (though they split on “Kids”’ overall artistic worth) - this film has a level of truth which is simultaneously shocking and enlightening.

There seemed to be consensus that many of the touchy issues addressed in the film are worth parent/child discussion, with or without the inspiration of the film.

I feel that a movie such as “Kids” could help inspire communication between the generations. For one thing, after having watched such a movie together, teens and their parents could have poignant and important discussions about things in the film that made them uncomfortable or angry or sad.

Teens could talk about elements of the film they have personally experienced, bringing understanding and closeness to the often divided age groups.

There’s one problem with this scenario, though. Act III Theatres (which has some autonomy on deciding how to deal with “Kids” since its makers went without a rating rather than the deadly NC-17 rating) has decided no one under 18 can see “Kids,” even if accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. By going with no rating, the movie now has more strict limitations that it would have had with an NC-17. It’s the same as if “Kids” was rated X.

There is something strangely ironic about this situation. The movie was made to illuminate the tragic subjects shown, not glamorize them for a quick buck (as MPAA Chairman Jack Valenti suggested when he said “Parents in America should be grateful for this decision”).

It seems as if the Motion Picture Association of America (which gave “Kids” an NC-17 rating) and Act III Theatres (which largely handles the film on the West Coast) feel that they have the “moral duty” to decide what a teenager can and cannot see, even if their parents will go with them.

To me, this over-extended, quasi-parental move by these organizations is both nonsensical and absurd. While I do not flat out disagree with limiting who can see a film that explicitly shows such touchy subjects as teen sexuality in the AIDS era and drug use, I think that taking away parents’ authority is explicitly overbearing and unneeded.

The kind of free-thinking, open-minded sharing approach I mentioned earlier is neither encouraged nor allowed by the very people who could be endorsing such an exchange by how they rate films.

This kind of unsuccessful solution to “The Youth Problem” does nothing but divide and put up restrictive boundaries. Parents, not corporations or isolated, faceless associations, should be in charge.

It is vital that the older generation comes to know and understand the generation of today without idealization or naivete. My generation is a troubled one. Raised in a tumultuous era, we have grown up with the specter of AIDS looming over our developing and raging libidos and have been faced with an alarming increase in violence and decay of the social structure of society. We are perceived as being consumed with apathy and disaffection; an age stricken with frustration, anger and depression.

My generation has seen walls come tumbling down and society swing toward liberalism only to slide back in dramatic fashion toward reactionary conservatism. My generation is one of confusion and depression but also of strength and spontaneity.

As the brilliantly iconoclastic musician David Bowie relates in the cover story of the recent issue of Interview: “What we see as (Generation X’s) indifference … is, in fact, a position where they’re learning to adapt to a new kind of society.”

Perhaps my generation, composed of disaffected youth and the occasional dreamer, could teach the older generation a thing or two while at the same time listening and learning. A reciprocal communication between the older generation and the teens and children of today would greatly reduce the contrived iron curtain between the ages so we could all come together to give thought-out answers and solutions, not greater frustration, to society.