Are the 1960s more nostalgic or historic?

[scotpens]

The hippy thing happened at at the end of the 60s.

To be precise, 1967 was the year of the so-called “Summer of Love” in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district, where the hippie thing started. And hippies were yesterday’s news by the early ’70s.

Nostalgia can be an awful thing. The 60s were a charnel house for America - three major political figures assassinated within three years . . .

JFK — Killed in 1963.
RFK and MLK — Both killed in 1968.

Am I missing something, or did you simply mean to write “five years”?

Yes, a lot of bad shit went down, in 1968 in particular. But that year ended on an optimistic note, with the Apollo 8 astronauts being the first humans to orbit the moon. Nixon was the president-elect, and we knew he had a plan for ending the war within a month or two after taking office. The economy was strong and the music was awesome.

 

[the G-man]

I'd suggest that as and when those responsible for financing and creating popular media become too old to do so anymore (either through retirement or death), the era they grew up in falls out the nostalgia envelope and drifts into the historial one.

I'm the G-man and I approve this message

 

[Star Wolf]

I'd suggest that as and when those responsible for financing and creating popular media become too old to do so anymore (either through retirement or death), the era they grew up in falls out the nostalgia envelope and drifts into the historial one.

I would suggest it is the audience not the creator which counts. Unless you are near 60 in age you probably don't remember the 60s that much except for watching shows from that period in syndication. Maybe I am just weird, but fond memories of the world outside of my family started at around 1971. I would think that the 1960s is a historical piece more then a fond memory piece for younger people. For what its worth I am 50 and my first Trek was the animated series, TOS was caught in syndication, thus not a "60s: nostalgic work for me.

 

[Venardhi]

the bad: popularization of drugs like LSD and heroin

Not even in the same ballpark.

 

[ToddPence]

As early as the mid-seventies, the sixties were already being treated as a distant and mythological era.

 

[scotpens]

As early as the mid-seventies, the sixties were already being treated as a distant and mythological era.

By whom?

 

[Lord Garth]

I wasn't around but wouldn't that be just a backlash against the '60s, if it happened, instead of people thinking of them as distant and mythological?

The same way the previous decade is always backlashed in the current one? The only exception to this practice in the last half century, from what I can tell, is that the '90s weren't backlashed in the '00s.

 

[TemporalFlux]

I'd suggest that as and when those responsible for financing and creating popular media become too old to do so anymore (either through retirement or death), the era they grew up in falls out the nostalgia envelope and drifts into the historial one.

This is what I believe to be truth. For instance, if someone was 15 years old in 1950, they would be 77 today. A significant portion of that demographic has succumbed to age in one form or another.

Pop culture tends to work on two focal points - the time people first fully establish themselves in a career between age 30 and 40 and the time people have accrued power and money near retirement age at 60. We've been seeing this the past few years with an 80's revival brought on by 30 to 40 year olds getting established (like Seth McFarlane). The 60 year olds with the money and power are likewise pushing the 60's right now.

 

[Eno]

The 60's are alive today if one is paying attention. Numerous samples of grooves from people such as James Brown, Aretha Franklin and others power many contemporary singles. TV shows turned into modern films. The Beatles being constantly called upon in the writing of pop music...

Of course many lessons handed down from the mistakes of 60's political policy have been forgotten. Unwinnable and costly wars, corporate greed, the degradation of the civil rights movement in today's world etc etc. The past never leaves us. Just look at the names of our months. August, Augustus. July, Julius. Religion etc.

 

[TemporalFlux]

There is one last thing to consider - television. Television did not hit its stride until 1960 (most notably the first ever televised presidential debate between Nixon / Kennedy). In my opinion, television has made a greater impression on the general public than any other medium before it; and that impression started in earnest in 1960 (going as far as affecting the outcome of the presidential election by many arguments).

I still believe the 60's influence will fade as the generation ages; we are in the last great surge of 60's influence. However , I believe the 60's influence has been more powerful because of television.

 

[Green Shirt]

I think the 60s are becoming more one of those ahistoric "periods" that are identified by most people with certain cliches of dress and behavior but very little popular understanding of or interest in the forces that actually drove the styles - rather like the 20s in the U.S.

Interesting, in that it does seem to me that the period from the 90s to the present is one loooonnngg decade.

 

[Lord Garth]

I don't agree that we've been in the same decade for the past 20 years. The changes haven't been as great and they don't happen as soon as the year ends in "0" but the changes are there.

I don't see a lot of curtain hair parted down the middle anymore. 10 years ago: you didn't see men in skinny jeans. Or hipsters (whereas they've been prominent from the mid-'00s on). I didn't see ugg boots in the '90s. Leggings were strictly associated with the '80s. People didn't wear bright neon colors 10 years ago either. Today's fashion might be similar to the early-'90s but that's about it. And those styles came back; they weren't around the whole time. Flannel shirts were also out of style for a while before making a comeback.

Musically, the '90s were about alternative rock, gangsta rap, and boy bands. Now it's indie rock, dance music, and ring-tune rap.

Financially, we're much worse off than in the '90s. That or the bad spending habits have finally caught up with us. Either way, we have a rut to get out of.

The technology is better. We've gone from VHS to DVD to streaming. Everyone uses the Internet now. As late as 1996; when I first went online, it was mostly geeks. The largest online debate seemed like it was Kirk vs. Picard.

It's just that the changes have been so gradual that it seems like it's been the same decade.

 

[Sci]

When I think of the 00s, I think of 9/11, the Afghan War, the Iraq War, heightened fears of terrorism, Hurricane Katrina, and the Crash of 2008 and the start of the Great Recession.

When I think of the 90s, I think of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of the Cold War, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Lewinsky scandal, major prosperity, and a United States mostly at peace.

I really can't imagine viewing the 90s and the 00s as being the same. 9/11 marked a fundamental change in history and culture.

 

[RJDiogenes]

For me, the 60s are nostalgia, of course, because I remember them. And I feel sorry for anyone who doesn't. It was a really great time to be alive, and an especially great time to be a kid-- the air was just crackling with color and creativity. Contemporary culture is leached and lifeless in comparison.

As for the 50s, I've always said it's the decade that everyone will always be nostalgic about even if they weren't there. The trappings of the 50s seem to have become synonymous with nostalgia.

But, inevitably, both of those decades will slip from nostalgia to history as more and more people who remember them die off. Even now, the WWII era is considered history and there are still plenty of people who remember those years. What the 50s and 60s still are, though, and will remain, is iconic. The poster upthread who said that they are becoming American Mythology along the lines of the Old West (as well as eras like Prohibition and WWII) was completely correct. They will become distilled down to their essence and remain alive in the arts in that form for decades and centuries to come (other eras that fall into that category are the Revolution and the Civil War, as well as Victorian England and the Middle Ages).

 

[RandyS]

When I think of the 00s, I think of 9/11, the Afghan War, the Iraq War, heightened fears of terrorism, Hurricane Katrina, and the Crash of 2008 and the start of the Great Recession.

When I think of the 90s, I think of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of the Cold War, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Lewinsky scandal, major prosperity, and a United States mostly at peace.

I really can't imagine viewing the 90s and the 00s as being the same. 9/11 marked a fundamental change in history and culture.

Agreed. Although It's not just 9/11 that changed things. Yes, that was a big thing, but not the ONLY thing. People's attitudes and the way we react to each other have changed, and not always for the better. And THAT started in the early 90's.

 

[Mojochi]

I think the main thing is that in order for a retrospective to occur, such that a historical perspective or even nostalgia is gained, there has to be a culture identity clash. For example, by the time of the 1970's the 1950's seemed like two worlds ago, for all that had happened to change the identity of the culture, thereby creating a perspective wherein a nostalgia developed naturally, in no small part due to George Lucas, who's "American Graffiti" was really the 1st to start the practice of using the 50's as a set for a period piece, spawning a decade of popularity for the genre, with Happy Days, Grease, American Hot Wax, Sha Na Na etc...

The period in which the 60's were used & looked upon similarly, but never as popularly, was during the 80's & 90's, when bands like Phish, Blues Traveler, & Spin Doctors were in a rift of Retro-Hippie, & during which the following for The Grateful Dead bloomed rather profoundly

That period is long gone, & therefore the 60's like the 50's is just another in the long history of periods in U.S. culture from which to ponder its distinctness, a distinction which is usually founded in how those who lived through the period look back on their youth, & how the younger generation begins identifying them with it

The reverence for the 70's has since passed as well, during the 90's, in the form of Neil Young sharing the stage with Eddie Vedder & Pearl Jam, & that whole grunge era being a somewhat retro movement. Finally, we are now still in a nostalgia for the 80's, with Gaga being our new Madonna, & a resurgence of popularity for the music of the late Michael Jackson, who in death has escaped the stigma of alleged pedophilia. Every Republican politician touting the historical greatness of the Reagan era, which actually managed to manifest itself into a 21st century Bush legacy

I now remain curious to see how this culture will ever manage to memorialize the 90's era, which was predominantly inhabited by Gen-X, known primarily for its lack of identity, & being consumed by frivolous nonsense like Lewinsky scandals & the O.J. trial

Sadly, I already have an idea of how history will view this current millennial era. A digital landscape of technological development, with social & cultural turmoil. An American populace so watered down & ignorant that the most news worthy social movement that occupies Wall Street, has absolutely no focus whatsoever, in a time where liberty is being stripped & trodden upon, for the sake of security, & people are either too stupid or hopeless to bother to do anything effective about it, & journalism has been replaced by reality tv

Make no mistake. We are shaping history right now, & it's shaping up like complete shit. Sorry to be such a downer/pessimist, but there you have it

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ I agree. Usually there's a cultural renaissance every forty years (e.g. the 20s, the 60s), but the last cycle never happened. It may have been the terrorist attacks that threw things off, or it may be that the addition of the Internet to our culture has disrupted things, I don't know; but I hope the next rebel generation arrives soon.

 

[Mojochi]

^^ I agree. Usually there's a cultural renaissance every forty years (e.g. the 20s, the 60s), but the last cycle never happened. It may have been the terrorist attacks that threw things off, or it may be that the addition of the Internet to our culture has disrupted things, I don't know; but I hope the next rebel generation arrives soon.

But maybe it did. What's different about the millennial culture? It's a culture of technological seclusion. We are a culture tucked safely away in our social media, to the point where the average citizen has it on their person at all times. Facebook, internet dating, youtube, netflix, etc...

I can't even get through an 8 hour shift without seeing at least 10 people pulling out their cell, complete with data plan, to do something, & I work at a hospital. That IS our renaissance, just as profound a cultural occurrence as the civil rights protests & drop out Hippie culture of the 60's or the anti-prohibition culture of the 20's were, & I can't even begin to fathom what the cultural reaction to it will be, decades down the line, but I expect it to be equally as profound, & reactionary.

Rest assured, before I die, some 30 to 50 years from now (Hopefully) I expect to see a BIG cultural change, that is a reaction to this current era & it may not be pretty

 

[Holdfast]

... it may be that the addition of the Internet to our culture has disrupted things, I don't know; but I hope the next rebel generation arrives soon.

But maybe it did. What's different about the millennial culture? It's a culture of technological seclusion...

I agree. The revolution of the 00s was that social revolution became unattractive because it seemed possible for everyone to simply create a new & individualised world with self-selected rules.

The reality of course is that only a very few can actually do this powerfully enough to maintain that world in the face of external pressure. Which is partly why the reaction by some of the masses is to externalise that individualised world again in an attempt to effect wider change (viz. the role of social media in the Arab Spring, Occupy movements, etc, etc).

(My personal opinion is that whatever the type of revolutionary fervour happens to the the mode du jour, the underlying power relationships within a society rarely change, to the point that most "revolutions" actually work to maintain a deeper, underlying status quo. But that's a whole other topic).

 

[Mojochi]

(My personal opinion is that whatever the type of revolutionary fervour happens to the the mode du jour, the underlying power relationships within a society rarely change, to the point that most "revolutions" actually work to maintain a deeper, underlying status quo. But that's a whole other topic).

That's really what the word means anyhow REvolution, change for the sake of returning back to the core human standard, for good or ill