Lately, due to Leo DiCaprio's Gatsby, there has been an influx of 1920's stuff around. Recently ANOTHER 1920's-style club opened, and, of course, it fits the glitz & glamor mold of the previous clubs/lounges.
But, is this "New York/Chicago" style truly indicative of the real 1920's?
I'm wondering if the 1920's have become the quintessential example of "print the legend." My 21 year old cousin says that she truly believes she was made to be born in the that time period. But, is that thinking all based on myth? Wouldn't she be horrified at what 99% of the country was experiencing in the 1920's?
So, reddit historians, what is the truth on this decade? Is it all rowdy burlesque halls, and shimmery dresses? Or, have we created an over-idealized vision of a very small part of life in that period?
So, I'm coming at this story from a literature specialist's perspective, so take this with a grain of salt. I wrote up something about a similar question a while back.
There are three very popular works from the period (give or take a few years) that all directly address the idea that the "golden age," so to speak, was fabled yesteryear, giving the distinct impression, in my mind, that these massively popular writers of the time did not view the "roaring" twenties as the constant revelry it is often depicted as being in modern Hollywood; there was a thread through much of the period's literature expressing a feeling that society was deteriorating.
The first, and probably most accessible work, is O'Neil's "long day's journey into night." The work itself doesn't beat your over the head with the theme of deterioration, but O'Neil spares no time in letting the audience know what's coming. The father of the protagonist berates and belittles the reading material of his son (Nietzsche, Darwin, countless others) while reckoning back to older literary works, demanding that his son should be reading Shakespeare instead, that more modern works are inferior.
The next piece I would discuss is Faulkner's "the sound and the fury." The work as a whole radiates the theme of things falling apart. The work ruminates on the failure of the Compson family, noting the failing wealth, reputation, and moral fiber of the family. Further, there is room for discussion concerning the inability of the family to renew it's strength- the patriarchal line cut down.
Finally, Eliot's "the wasteland". Where do I even start? you could fill a library with the literary discourse on the nature of this work and how it tears down the world. One particularly interesting aspect is how it is set up to parallel the Arthurian grail quest, the Fisher king, and the failure of the land. The main difference is that Eliot leads the audience to question if the grail even exists- can the Fisher king recover, or has the age of prosperity ended for good?
To be sure, a sizable chunk of the literary community was busy calling back to better days, So they, at least, didn't see it as so golden age.
I think you should take a couple things in mind.
The roaring 20s was coming off of WWI, the war that end all wars, and was followed by the great depression. It would be seen as a golden age from either side.
All the stories you hear are usually from high society and they don't live normal lives like us heathens. This is the case throughout history.
Your 21 year old cousin is not made to be born in any other time period but now. Take away her internet access(phone/computer) and see how long she lasts.