| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS | MONDAY COLUMNS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« The result, of course, was disaster | Main | all the glass »

May 07, 2008

the sixties

51y9uq1suvl_sl500_sl150_

'You don't understand,' an American history professor once said to me of the 1960s, wagging an avuncular finger. 'You had to be there.' Coming from somebody who had spent his life studying the nineteenth century, it seemed a particularly silly thing to say. But then, as Gerard DeGroot points out in a thoughtful introduction to his new book, there are many people for whom the myth of the Sixties has become 'something sacred', a totem of high-minded idealism regularly invoked as a reprimand to our own supposedly cynical age. 'In no other period of history', he writes, 'has canon been allowed so freely to permeate analysis.'

Books celebrating the youthful idealism of the late Sixties are ten a penny, particularly across the Atlantic, so it is refreshing to read one that takes a mercifully clear-sighted view of the decade. DeGroot does remember the period, but only just: his earliest childhood memory is of the morning after Kennedy beat Nixon in the 1960 presidential election, when he peered up into the California sky, hoping to see Yuri Gagarin's capsule over San Diego. Surely too young to have been caught up in the hedonism of the Summer of Love, he has set himself a deceptively simple task. He has no overarching thesis, no axe to grind: instead, he simply gives us sixty-seven independent essays, rich in anecdote and character, many of them elegantly ripping apart the stereotypes of popular mythology.

more from Literary Review here.

Posted by Morgan Meis at 01:46 PM | Permalink

Comments

I think it would be hard to find anyone today who still lays claim to the cultural shifts of the sixties as having been entirely unproblematic, and certainly nobody would deny that they were often self-indulgent. On that point, this review is simply uninteresting.

However, when it asks questions like "who cares about all those whingeing students at Berkeley and Columbia?", it seems more than a little disingenuous. Americans in the sixties were living in an apartheid state that was drafting young men and sending thousands upon thousands of them to kill civilians and to be killed themselves in an unpopular and pointless war. You don't have to believe in Flower Power to realize that the protests of the 1960s were reacting to something very real and very toxic, and that they made enormous strides for non-whites, for women, for gays, and for basic civil liberties like freedom of expression.

I'm not exactly sure why 3QD has recently seen fit to start linking to these reactionary pieces in the Literary Review, but it's really diluting the quality of the site. If I wanted to look over garbage like this I'd be reading Little Green Footballs.

Posted by: Picador | May 7, 2008 3:50:44 PM

Yes, it is rather reactionary nonsense, this article; *of course* "the 60s" weren't a perfect decade of Instant Utopia.... they were populated with humans and the deeply-flawed doings of same, after all. On the other hand, if the period wasn't a social leap forward in many ways, why did the Old Guard spend much of the 1980s, 1990s, and the first decade of the 21st century working rather hard to turn the clock back to 1957 (enroute to the 19th century)?

This "the '60s were just about irresponsible hippies being self-indulgent until the money ran out" propaganda first started soon after Reagan's inauguration, which tells you everything you need to know about the meme. Yeah, and we've been hearing about how Nixon wasn't really all bad, either, haven't we?

Bull.

Posted by: Steven Augustine | May 7, 2008 5:48:44 PM

The more the reaction and re writing of the 60's the more it becomes evident that something happened that makes everyone uncomfortable who was not imbedded in the times.
As Dylan so clearly stated "You know something is happening , but you don't know what it is, do you mister Jones'

Posted by: Dave Ranning | May 7, 2008 8:18:13 PM

Please don't quote me. I had nothing to do with the 60's.

Thank you.

Posted by: Bob Dylan | May 8, 2008 9:36:36 AM

Thanks Bobby!
Didn't think so----
I never saw you there.
Dave

Posted by: Dave Ranning | May 8, 2008 12:33:44 PM

The social upheavals of the 60s were a response to the absurdly oppressive culture that existed before. Ask someone who was alive before the 60s and isn't a white male whether things aren't at least a little better now. You'll get a hearty, "Hell, yeah!"

Posted by: Guy | May 8, 2008 3:05:20 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed

Help 3 Quarks Daily

Bookmark This Page

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

3QD ADVERTISING



Please Visit Wikio

  • Wikio
  • Wikio Shopping
  • LCD Monitor
  • LCD TV
  • Recent Comments

    Z-lot on Are Saint-Simonians Responsible for Modernity

    Winfield J. Abbe on The Effects of the Religious Right on Politics and on Religion

    Jesse on literary science?

    chris on Elise & Me: A Tale of Extreme Optical Seduction

    yaqoob pasha on Burqa ban!

    Elatia Harris on literary science?

    OT on Elise & Me: A Tale of Extreme Optical Seduction

    fgh on Physicists could soon be creating black holes in the laboratory

    Philip Graham on literary science?

    Ulle V. Holt on Elise & Me: A Tale of Extreme Optical Seduction

    Felix E F Larocca MD on Are Black Holes Two-Way Streets?

    Felix E F Larocca MD on After Guantánamo

    Felix E F Larocca MD on Hauser and Morris on Science and Morality

    Pete Chapman on Are Black Holes Two-Way Streets?

    Felix E F Larocca MD on Are Saint-Simonians Responsible for Modernity

    J on Are Black Holes Two-Way Streets?

    Felix E F Larocca MD on Jennifer Ouellete's Top Ten at the World Science Festival

    JonJ on Are Black Holes Two-Way Streets?

    C. M. R. on literary science?

    Jared on literary science?

    Bilal on Friday Poem

    Transleitor on literary science?

    Mike on literary science?

    Chris Schoen on literary science?

    Mike on literary science?

    Acclaim For 3QD

    Best Non-European Weblog Winner


    Best Group Blog and Blog Most Deserving of Wider Attention Finalist


    "I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

    "I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

    "Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

    Subscribe to this blog's feed