TL;DR
Get art and craft supplies delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Hyperallergic editor-in-chief Hakim Bishara’s newsletter editorial, “Long Live Generation 6-7,” closes with a brief reflection that a new generation is remaking May 1968. The excerpt offers no definition of “Generation 6-7” or evidence for the claim, so its meaning and the scale of the movement remain unclear.
Hyperallergic editor-in-chief Hakim Bishara has published a newsletter editorial titled “Long Live Generation 6-7”, ending with the assertion that “generation 6-7 is remaking May 68.” The line links an unnamed contemporary generation to the student and social upheaval associated with 1968, but the excerpt does not explain who “Generation 6-7” refers to or identify a specific event behind the comparison.
The piece appears in a Hyperallergic weekly newsletter whose listed contents include Lucy Ives’s review of a Krasner-Pollock exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, an L train burlesque performance arriving in Manhattan, photographs of student protests in France, and an interview with outgoing Yaddo president Elaina Richardson. Bishara’s editorial is presented alongside those items, rather than as a reported account of a named protest or organized group.
In a series of first-person snapshots, Bishara describes hearing a New York Times podcast reporter criticize French pension and parental-leave benefits, abandoning a much-hyped novel for Marcel Proust, attending a gala, and interviewing Algerian-French artist Kader Attia about an exhibition he is curating in India. He also describes seeing doves on an eagle sculpture and hearing Nina Simone in his mind. These are the editorial’s personal observations, not independently documented reporting about the protests or the generation named in its title.
The closing comparison is the piece’s most direct political statement: Bishara writes that Generation 6-7 is “remaking May 68.” The supplied text does not define the label, name representatives, or detail what aspects of 1968 are being remade. The claim should therefore be read as the writer’s framing, not as a verified description of a movement’s size, goals or effects.
A Generational Claim Without Definition
The editorial places present-day youth politics beside the legacy of May 1968, a comparison that can suggest renewed challenges to political and social arrangements. That framing may interest readers following student protest in France, which is also mentioned in the newsletter’s contents. But the text does not establish that the protests are organized under the name Generation 6-7, or that participants themselves understand their actions through the history of 1968.
That distinction matters because the phrase carries more weight than a simple generational label: it implies a relationship between current events and a landmark period of protest. Without further explanation, readers cannot tell whether Bishara is describing a concrete movement, making a cultural observation, or using a deliberately compressed sign-off. The article provides a perspective worth noting, but not enough evidence to measure the reach of the claimed change.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Hyperallergic’s newsletter combines arts coverage, criticism, interviews and news briefs. In the source excerpt, its news list includes photographs of student protests in France and several developments in the arts world, while the featured editorial moves among personal memories and observations. This format helps explain why Bishara’s closing line sits beside, rather than functions as a detailed report on, protest activity.
The reference to May 1968 points to a history of student protest and wider social upheaval in France. Bishara gives no historical account, however, and does not specify which events, ideas or tactics he sees reappearing. The newsletter material also includes unrelated cultural and institutional updates, including a planned New Museum triennial in February 2027 and an agreement between the Whitney Museum and its union. Those items establish the newsletter’s broad arts coverage; they do not substantiate the editorial’s generational comparison.
““Meanwhile, generation 6-7 is remaking May 68.””
— Hakim Bishara, Hyperallergic editor-in-chief
1968 May protests documentary book
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Who Is Generation 6-7?
The source excerpt does not explain what “Generation 6-7” means, which people or age group it includes, or whether the phrase refers to a recognized movement. It also provides no direct statements from protesters, organizers or other participants confirming that they see a connection to May 1968.
The newsletter mentions student protests in France but gives no dates, locations, demands, participant numbers or account of their current status. It is consequently unclear whether Bishara’s closing line refers specifically to those protests or to a wider cultural trend. The material does not provide evidence to assess the scale or effects of the change implied by “remaking.”
art exhibition catalog Kader Attia
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Further Reporting Needed on the Label
The newsletter excerpt provides no follow-up reporting or announced next step for the editorial. Clarifying the claim would require a fuller explanation from Bishara of who Generation 6-7 describes and what he means by remaking May 1968, alongside reporting on the protests referenced in the newsletter.
Until that information is available, readers can confirm that Hyperallergic published the editorial and that its author made the comparison. Whether the phrase names an emerging movement, and how it relates to events in France or elsewhere, remains unresolved in the supplied material.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What is “Long Live Generation 6-7”?
It is a Hyperallergic newsletter editorial by editor-in-chief Hakim Bishara. The piece moves through personal observations and ends by connecting Generation 6-7 to May 1968.
Who does “Generation 6-7” refer to?
The source excerpt does not define the term or identify a specific age group, organization or set of people. Its meaning remains unclear from the published material provided.
Does the editorial report on the French student protests?
No. The newsletter lists photographs of student protests in France, but Bishara’s piece is a personal editorial, not a detailed report on protest events, organizers or demands.
What does the reference to May 1968 mean?
Bishara writes that Generation 6-7 is “remaking May 68,” invoking the period’s association with student protest and social upheaval. He does not specify which features of 1968 he believes are being repeated or changed.
Source: rss
Evergreen bestsellers Picks
bestsellers
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
