Quotations and Literature Forum

It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:02 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The 60's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:32 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 2349
Those who experienced this turbulent decade, how would you compare with the present times?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 2:45 am 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 1217
Location: Australia
I adore the 60's because I was young and working in London and life was fantastic.

Coffee bars, jukeboxes, Jazz clubs, beehive hairdos and miniskirts -
marching to ban the bomb, Elvis, Sound of Music, Jerry Lee Lewis, but also Sinatra,The Pink Panther, Veal Schnitzel and Chicken Maryland with Fried Bananas the "in" things to eat, the Christine Keeler scandal rocking the staid old British Establishment, divorce a disgrace and single mothers were fallen women, wages less for women than men and very few married women worked, or were allowed to retain their jobs.........................

Can you pick some particular topics of interest Tommy, otherwise you could get my first novel!!

I'll be glad to comment, but will need a little time :)

_________________
The most wasted of all days is one without laughter.
e e cummings (1894 - 1962)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 5:21 am 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 4:16 am
Posts: 3140
Location: Melbourne, Australia
The Kray twins, Carry on movies, Proper music, Barbara Windsor, No bloody (c)rap, no 'big brother', no 'useless idol', no 'who told you you could dance', reality TV was the news. Political correctness was unheard of, shooting folk (other than US Presidents) was a soldiers job. Druggies were scarce. Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple were still performing in pubs. No one had heard of, let alone gave a toss about, Brad Pitt and his tart. Adopting babies was not a competition. Football players talked to fans.
Christiaan Barnard performed the 1st heart transplant.

End of episode 1.

_________________
السلام عليكم


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 7:40 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 2349
What originally sparked the question was the news. It's all bad news, no surprise. It just makes it seem like it can't get any worse, or rather - that it is not getting better.

If you were to compile headlines from the 60s, and headlines from now, would you say it was worse for us then, or worse for us now?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 7:58 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 4:16 am
Posts: 3140
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Young Mr Barnard wasn't bad news, nor was the non existence of (c)rap. Miss Windsor made Dolly Parton look like a 12 year old boy, which can't be bad. I think you seek an objective answer to a subjective question. For those of us who barely conceal our contempt of them, the absence of irubbish in all it's guises, idiot games, mobile phones and all the electronic mind numbing devices seen today as essential, boy the 60's were great. For the younger set, the absence of all these would be akin to the absence of limbs, so for them the 60's were atrocious and the 0 ies the dogs bollocks.

_________________
السلام عليكم


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The 60's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:08 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:43 pm
Posts: 251
Location: Trinidad
The music and poems was more sensible and sweet!!! :idea:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 9:10 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 2349
Good point, DSW.

Sometimes I am jealous of people who got to experience that generation, but when I think of the possibility of being drafted, or worse -- eating the brown acid ;) -- I think it's probably best I was born now.

I've been watching TCM a lot lately, and they've showing Poitier movies and Spencer Tracy movies, etc, and it just seems like movies had a lot more meaning, and were actually intended to convey something, as opposed to just entertain. And the music, for obvious reasons. A lot of good to be said about the 60s, I suppose. There's a good Hunter Thompson monologue in Fear and Loathing that I need to find for this thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 9:12 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 2349
The "Wave" Speech, it's known as.

Strange memories on this nervous night in Las Vegas. Five years later? Six? It seems like a lifetime, or at least a Main Era — the kind of peak that never comes again. San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special time and place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something. Maybe not, in the long run . . . but no explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world. Whatever it meant. . . .

History is hard to know, because of all the hired bullshit, but even without being sure of “history” it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head in a long fine flash, for reasons that nobody really understands at the time — and which never explain, in retrospect, what actually happened.

My central memory of that time seems to hang on one or five or maybe forty nights — or very early mornings — when I left the Fillmore half-crazy and, instead of going home, aimed the big 650 Lightning across the Bay Bridge at a hundred miles an hour wearing L. L. Bean shorts and a Butte sheepherder's jacket . . . booming through the Treasure Island tunnel at the lights of Oakland and Berkeley and Richmond, not quite sure which turn-off to take when I got to the other end (always stalling at the toll-gate, too twisted to find neutral while I fumbled for change) . . . but being absolutely certain that no matter which way I went I would come to a place where people were just as high and wild as I was: No doubt at all about that. . . .

There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda. . . . You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning. . . .

And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting — on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. . . .

So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark — that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:40 am 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 1217
Location: Australia
Tommy GS wrote:
What originally sparked the question was the news. It's all bad news, no surprise. It just makes it seem like it can't get any worse, or rather - that it is not getting better.

If you were to compile headlines from the 60s, and headlines from now, would you say it was worse for us then, or worse for us now?


Thanks for the “Wave Speech” Tommy, that is very evocative of the era and if only Peace and Love had really survived. :)

I fully agree with DSW that to compare the 60’s news with nowadays is very subjective.There are other factors to take into account as well if you want to compare both the format and the content of the news itself. Whilst I write from British viewpoint of that time, much will also be relevant to the US. Also this is all generalised comment and specific argument can be made against many of the points mentioned.................and my apologies in advance for the length of this reply.

Biggest difference:

In the news now you can expect on the spot, instant phone with built in camera and computer reporting, with less hidden and everything circulated worldwide instantly through computers and television by a generally freer press. Followed by endless discussion , analysis and opinions by experts and people who think they are, and vox populi interviews.

In the 60’s

Whilst television was available in the 60’s, it was not necessarily in every home. News on television was comparatively brief and to the point. Both TV and newspapers would report on major news -First Men in Space, national political happening s - Abolition of Capital Punishment, major national scandals - Profumo/Christine Keeler Affair and some very major crimes - Great Train Robbery , but not in the detail of today. Nor were there daily current affairs type programmes such as we have now that analyse and discuss the news with audiences, specialist guests etc.

Most people relied on their newspapers and, unlike the US, the major ones were national –Times, Telegraph, Daily Express , Daily Mail, Daily Mirror - either broadsheets (serious) or tabloids (“popular press”). Contents of these newspapers were almost exclusively decided by the current editor, but would also reflect the political leanings of the owners mainly Lord Beaverbrook, and Lord Thomson and later Rupert Murdoch.

The two former had ties with “The Establishment” and had been publishers throughout the wartime, so whilst there was no outright suppression of news the old wartime habits probably still held good and the press was “careful” of what it wrote and could be leaned on if need be. Also the British libel laws at that time were very strict, the type of language to be used respectable and clean, and the more conservative newspapers were far less willing to risk expensive court cases which would damage their reputation. Even the tabloids knew there were limits .

All newspapers were very insular – news related to the UK was by far the major content, whilst that from other countries accorded far less coverage . Although it was the era of “reds under the bed” paranoia and Britain (and the US?) was obsessed by the communist threat of the USSR and anything related, the older adult generation, those in charge, had been through the war and wanted at last to try and concentrate on the good life at home. The young adults had been brought up under austere rationing conditions and were enjoying the beginnings of a consumer society. People didn’t really care much what happened overseas unless it affected Britain, eg Eoka in Cyprus.

Huge difference in timeframes and methods for receiving as well as reporting news –communication by phone fax/tickertape from central agencies (Reuters) few o’seas reporters in residence telegraph or mail and phone calls from overseas countries very expensive and often unreliable or not available.

So, limited viewpoints, watered down, couched in gentler terms, far less specific and of narrower range, only comments by “Letters to the Editor” – all contribute to makes that news seem less ”bad” than now. Seem less bad , because so very much was unknown, covered up, kept hidden, unacknowledged.

The world is no better or worse in general, we are just far more aware of what goes on and although news nowadays is depressing that is far better than the previous ignorance.

GT

_________________
The most wasted of all days is one without laughter.
e e cummings (1894 - 1962)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:36 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 2349
Interesting, I never thought of it that way, really -- that the nature of the news hasn't changed, but how quickly we get it, and how much more it is analyzed and such, has.

I don't know if that is a better alternative, though, than not knowing at all. I find the news exhausting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:53 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 1217
Location: Australia
This came out today and may be of interest - yet another step towards full techno news and the demise of actual newspapers.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010 ... te=thedrum

_________________
The most wasted of all days is one without laughter.
e e cummings (1894 - 1962)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:17 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 4:51 pm
Posts: 3071
Location: University of New Hampshire
DSW wrote:
the absence of irubbish in all it's guises, idiot games, mobile phones and all the electronic mind numbing devices seen today as essential, boy the 60's were great


You know, I think I was born in the wrong decade. I would love to live in a time not dependent on being always connected. As it is I don't have a cell phone, and never have. I wish I could say that I never will, but with letter writing and land mail a dying art form I may not have a choice.

Part of the problem with our generation (being part of it I feel as though I can comment, if not objectively, then at least with a certain amount of bias), is that we don't know how to disconnect anymore. Think about it. When was the last time you saw someone in their late teens or early twenties (or that generation anyway) voluntarily put away the cell phone, computer, myriad of technological devices, and simply disappear off the face of the planet for an hour or two?

iRubbish is right. No one now even really knows what a land line phone is. Before break a girl in my dorm walked into my room, looked at my phone and said "What is that?" When I answered "A phone." Her response was "How does it work?" I was so surprised that I was only able to give the incredibly clear answer of "It plugs into the wall...like the internet." When I got over the shock I realized my answer was akin to answering the question "Where does money come from" with "Out of the wall." The girl who asked me is a freshman in college. What is our world coming to?

_________________
Sanctuary: a small safe place in a troubling world


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:22 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 1217
Location: Australia
Quote:
[quote="cdsg23"You know, I think I was born in the wrong decade. I would love to live in a time not dependent on being always connected. As it is I don't have a cell phone, and never have. I wish I could say that I never will, but with letter writing and land mail a dying art form I may not have a choice.

Part of the problem with our generation (being part of it I feel as though I can comment, if not objectively, then at least with a certain amount of bias), is that we don't know how to disconnect anymore. Think about it. When was the last time you saw someone in their late teens or early twenties (or that generation anyway) voluntarily put away the cell phone, computer, myriad of technological devices, and simply disappear off the face of the planet for an hour or two?



Perhaps they don't appreciate the sheer pleasure of being left alone in peace and quiet for a while? Or is that only an older person's pleasure?

I actually resent being available to anyone at any time and have an answering machine on my landline and turn off my mobile ie cellphone.

I do have a cell phone as, it is a good emergency safeguard , but it doesn't have TV, a camera, movies or games on it and if Rupert Murdoch ever puts the news there it would be far too small for me to read!!

It is so hard to compare generations or decades - for all the annoying things around there have been as many improvements. I guess we each have to try and pick out what we want from what is available and ignore the rest.

We also have to face the sad fact that if the majority did not want what we see as rubbish it wouldn't be so successful.

_________________
The most wasted of all days is one without laughter.
e e cummings (1894 - 1962)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:42 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 4:16 am
Posts: 3140
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I'm not so sure the majority actually want the things, it's the science of selling which has made them believe they are lessened without, and a reduced ability to retain independent thought rather than be a slave to each new trend. Mind you, I could just be we had less trends to be enslaved by. The cult of celebrity is no help, some semi retired whore shags an actor in an aircraft dunny and the magazines fall about themselves to get an 'in depth interview. As soon as there's the slightest showing in the media the advertising vultures want her face. yet from what I interpret, the message is, 'Want to look like some clapped out slapper, buy xxxx'.Apparently though, better to look like a clapped out slag who's known that be oneself.
Here endeth the rant.

_________________
السلام عليكم


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:41 pm 
Offline
QuoteMaster
QuoteMaster

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 1217
Location: Australia
Love the rant. :lol:

This was in today's quotes and may apply

Quote:
Maybe it's easier to like someone else's life, and live vicariously through it, than take some responsiblity to change our lives into lives we might like.
Tish Grier, love and hope and sex and dreams, 04-12-2006

_________________
The most wasted of all days is one without laughter.
e e cummings (1894 - 1962)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dorbweeds and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group