Goodbye to the 00’s, or whatever they’re called

Over a decade ago, back around 1998 and 1999, I remember having a series of conversations with my father on a topic that seemed vitally important at the time. The new millennium was approaching. The 90’s were almost over. The long-awaited year 2000 was almost upon us. Remember that? Remember the “Y2K” scare, which caused some people to go out and buy generators and extra water for when the clock would strike midnight and all the computer networks and national infrastructure would come to a screeching halt, setting off all sorts of chaos and mayhem?

The question that my father and I wrestled with was a simple one. What would people call the next decade? We had the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s, but what would we call the decade from 2000 to 2009? My father asserted that the corresponding years of the previous century—1900 to 1909—were dubbed the “aughts.” “Aught” is an old-fashioned term for zero, thus the years “nineteen aught one, nineteen aught two,” etc. I thought the term might be updated to something like “the zero’s,” or the “double-O’s.” Whatever term was to be used, we agreed that the media would define it. After all, in television, radio, and newspaper reporting, there is an obvious recurring need to refer to time, including decades.

What has surprised me is that since the turn of the millennium, this seemingly simple question has not really been answered. I have waited for “us” (the country and culture in general) to arrive at an accepted and universally used term for this decade. For me, the first sign of trouble was a radio station jingle that I heard circa 2001/2002 that said, “We play the greatest hits from the 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, and today.” Today? I screamed at the radio, “Today? But what’s today? It doesn’t have a name yet!”

Over the years I have heard similar statements on TV, radio, movies, the internet, and newspapers. It seems like people in general have sidestepped the issue, either inserting an awkward phrase for the current time, or ignoring reference to it altogether.

In the past ten years, I can only remember two times when I heard the issue addressed directly. In one of those instances, Jerry Seinfeld jokingly called this decade “the double-O’s” during a Tonight Show appearance. The other instance was when one of my seminary professors called this decade the “aughts,” the term to which my father had previously alluded.

So, as we slip into 2010 in the next few days, the question remains in my mind: What is the name of this decade? Again, as far as I can tell, we have not answered the question.

I’ll finish with two quick observations. First, the problem is not going to go away. As we start the next decade, the need to refer to this decade will not cease. At some point, we will have to come to grips with this question. (On the other hand, you might argue, maybe we don’t. We’ve gone on this way for ten years and we’ve all survived just fine.)

The second observation is that we need a name for the next decade. What will it be? I’m thinking “the teens” is as good as any. I know that this has the obvious drawback of not adequately describing the years 2010 through 2012, but overall, I think it could work. We could call the next few years “the pre-teens,” and see if it catches on.

I welcome your observations and suggestions.