Sunday, November 18, 2007

The 1960s Are Not What You Think


Quote of the day:
“Contrary to the usual understanding, the baby boomers didn’t create the culture of the sixties; they didn’t even inspire it. They consumed it. In 1968, the climax of the decade politically, the oldest baby boomer in America was just turning twenty-two. To the extent that baby boomers participated in protests, took drugs, and practiced ‘free love,’ they were responding to slogans, tastes, and fads dreamed up and promulgated by people much older than they were.”

--Louis Menand

It is common wisdom that the 1960s was a decade of revolution in many ways, including in movies and music. Neither were the same afterward.

Sometimes so much emphasis is put on the 1960s that we forget that what happened then didn’t just drop from the sky.

The amazing change in music and movies also was not the pure result of political rebellion. The much more vital factor in this was the rise, undetected by all except practitioners, of other creative forms.

For example, blues came to prominence in the 20s and 30s. Musicians growing up in the 40s and 50s were invariably exposed to it. And many incorporated it in very creative ways. Some of those efforts became rock and roll.

Experimental film grew into a serious movement in Europe and elsewhere in the 40s and 50s. Great filmmakers coming to maturity in the 1960s were heavily influenced by this.

So most of what we see as a cultural overthrow, a disrespect of authority and established forms, and a general rise in bad behavior caused by long hair and “liberalism,” is really simply the creative combination and alteration of forms that already existed.

No comments: