There’s been a great deal written, said, portrayed, discussed and debated about the about the period we know as ‘the sixties’ which, for the purpose of this exercise we will define as the years 1958-1973. The very fact that this decade has left such an apparently indelible mark in the minds of so many does seem to suggest that something special or different happened at that time. But was Arthur Marwick’s statement that “the sixties was a period of exceptional social and cultural change”, justifiable? And we are faced with a fundamental problem. How exactly do we define exceptional without studying every other decade in history?
Putting this basic issue to the side for the moment we can still examine a selection of events from the sixties to determine their impact at that time and also their longer term influence. Here we will look at events from three perspectives; history, history of science and art history. The question is, were the events of the sixties a mere fad or do they influence society and its culture today?
History
There will inevitably be a number of historical events in every decade which influence society at that time and whose effects will continue to be felt either expressly or influentially for many years. Similarly there will be events which appear significant but later lose their importance. I have chosen two subjects which I think illustrate this point.
1 – Communication
Although the first BBC television broadcast was made in 1936, and television ownership had been widespread in the United States throughout the 1950s, it was not until the sixties that television made any great impression in UK homes. Foreign travel was still expensive and television was able to bring new ideas and cultures into British living rooms. It also brought news in a new format, in words and moving pictures. (Arguably this already existed through news films in cinemas but these were not up to date and smacked of propaganda.) Television brought comedy, drama, sport, music and a whole raft of entertainment, education and information into people’s homes in a way that had never been done before. In the sixties it brought people a new awareness of the world around them. Today communication and television are still an enormous and greater influence in every part of our lives and contribute a great deal to our social and cultural development.
2 – The Space Race
On 20 July 1969 Neil Armstrong, an American, became the first man to stand on the surface of the moon. The Apollo programme had been launched in 1963 with the singular aim of landing humans on the moon. The Russians had already sent the first man into orbit around the earth and it was felt important that America reach the moon before their rivals claimed it in the name of communism, which was at that time seen as a real threat to the American way of life. At the time of the lunar landing there was unprecedented media coverage of the event – by that time it was possible to broadcast live television across the globe. While landing on the moon remains one of man’s greatest achievements, its significance is debatable. Beyond being a major media event, we have learned little that can change our lives on earth. In the short term it brought about a great sense of pride in the Americans, which would in some way be an indication of cultural change. The country had been embroiled in the Vietnam war which was not universally popular among its citizens. But in the longer term its social and cultural impact is minimal.
History of Science
1 – The scientific counter culture
Here we will focus primarily on events in the United States since they are well documented and different from events in the UK. Different in the sense that science in America was significantly more involved in the development of military equipment. Since the end of World War 2 the country had involved itself in major conflicts in Korea and Vietnam. The development of weapons systems, and hence military superiority, was a priority for successive US governments facing increasing criticism over the loss of American lives in ‘foreign’ wars and the perceived threat from Russia. Even during World War 2 the Americans realised that science and technology could win wars with the development of the atomic bomb.
As a result of the US government’s substantial budgets and endless quest for superior weapons, the franchise of a number of academic scientific institutions was transformed. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology in particular benefited from government funding in return for undertaking weapons based research throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
In the late 1960s a scientific counter culture emerged when students and academics alike staged protests against what they saw as the overemphasis in the development of military technology at academic institutes. These protest, and ensuing debates, which involved universities across the US, did, to some degree, have their desired effect in that the close links between academic institutions and government weapons research was lessened – for a while at least.
The government realised that academics were unreliable as development partners. Instead they switched their allegiance and much of their funding to commercial organisations for whom the morality of weapons development plays a less significant role.
It may be correct to define the impact on these events on academic institutions as being exceptional as they helped define the relationship between government and academia. However, in terms of social and cultural impact, these events have had literally no lasting effect. Today there is a volume of evidence which supports close links at the highest levels between the US government and military developers and manufacturers. Military research, development and production continue apace.
2 – The contraceptive pill
“The Pill” is an oral contraceptive, for women, developed during the 1950s. It was first used in America in 1960 and in the UK the following year. On it first introduction its use was primarily by, and in some places restricted to, married women who wished to limit the size of their family. But it was possible for single women to be prescribed the pill and today its use in the UK is widespread being available without prescription via family planning clinics.
The pill is an example of a scientific development which has had a significant immediate and long lasting impact on our culture. It played a role in the sexual liberation of women in the sixties. It gave single and married women the power to enjoy a sexual relationship without the fear and responsibility of an unwanted pregnancy. Similarly, the pill has led to a reduction in the number of abortions. While these are no longer illegal there is still some slight stigma attached to abortion in the UK and it also raises other moral questions.
The pill continues to this day to be a popular form of contraception in the UK. The national Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles completed in 2000, found that around 80 per cent of British women use the pill at some time between the ages of 16 and 24.
It has not been without its detractors - principally the Catholic Church and some of the more extreme anti-abortion groups.
But overall it is reasonable to say that the pill is an example of a scientific development which has resulted in exceptional cultural (giving women a greater sense of sexual freedom) and social (impacting on population statistics) change.
Art History
Joseph Conrad once described art as “an assault on the senses”. Here he was describing art in its various forms – painting, music, sculpture, writing etc. Certainly this seems like a reasonable definition though perhaps “a planned and deliberate assault on the senses” would be better since it excludes, for example, a car crash.
Here though we will discuss only the art of painting and how, or if, its development during the sixties had any real impact.
By its very nature art is a challenging subject for the artist and the viewer. Throughout the long history of art there have been a number of movements – such as dada, expressionism and surrealism – which have challenged what has come before. But was the sixties any different and did the movements which came to prominence then have any wider social and cultural impact beyond the art establishment? The art establishment is arguably part of a culture itself but not necessary representative of wider public views and opinions, so lets conveniently wash over that point. But to answer the broader question, lets look at two artists who enjoyed some significant popularity, notoriety and commercial success during that period.
1 - Andy Warhol
Warhol is synonymous with the pop-art movement, using art to reflect popular culture in a manner which arguably mocked art itself.
Warhol’s most famous works took everyday objects such as a tin of soup or coke bottle, or iconic figures such as Che Guevara and Marilyn Monroe and repeated them on the canvas in a simple grid arrangement. While this was certainly a challenge to the art establishment it was an equal challenge to the non-expert in understanding why this would be classified as art – particularly when he had simply taken recognisable objects and duplicated them. However, in every sense, Warhol’s work, or at least his more famous works, did produce an assault on the senses.
His work also differed from mainstream art in his use of materials. Much of his work did not consist of paint on canvas but instead used a silkscreen printing process – in a sense, manufactured art. Warhol didn’t just influence the content of art, he influenced its production as well.
Warhol’s longer term influence on the world of art and artists can still be felt today. For example Tray Emin’s ‘My Bed’, which was a controversial winner of the 1999 Turner Prize, uses a collection of everyday objects.
It is hard though to relate the work of any pop artist of the sixties to any exceptional, or even unexceptional, social change. His ‘Red Race Riot’ of 1963 may have highlighted racial inequality but did not provoke a riot and nor did it become a symbol of any racial equality movement, though it’s unlikely that was ever Warhol’s intention.
Culturally though pop-art has helped to bring art closer to people who had previously associated the subject with older paintings. In some ways it made art more accessible to a wider audience by providing instantly recognisable objects and opened the door for mimicry of Warhol’s style – Warhol could have no qualms with this as he had simply and literally mimicked what he had seen to create his art.
2 – Mark Rothko
Mark Rothko was a proponent of the Abstract Expressionism school of art which began in America in the 1940’s before flourishing later in the 1950s and throughout the 1960s. Abstract Expressionism is characterised by the use of colour and brushstrokes on a large canvas to create an emotion rather than people and objects to create a ‘picture’.
Abstract Expressionism was never a popular movement in the way that pop-art grabbed the public’s attention. It expressed the introverted emotions of the artists, glorified its own creation and was generally inaccessible to the masses. It is difficult to see that it has led to any social or cultural change at the time – where it may have had some ‘in-thing’ value – and certainly its legacy is not significant today beyond cheap imitations on the walls of provincial coffee shops.
Conclusion
As indicated at the beginning, there will never be a clear answer to the question of whether or not the sixties was a period of exceptional social and cultural change. My own belief is that it was no more and no less exceptional than many other ‘decades’ which could be studied. It’s possible to pick any period in history and suggest that it had its own unique characteristics which brought about social and cultural change, for example, the industrial revolution in the late eighteenth century, Live Aid in 1985 and the Wall Street crash of 1929.
What is exceptional about the sixties though is that it signalled a sea change in attitudes towards the establishment and authority and ‘legitimised’ the moral right of every person to protest against the things they disagreed with. In this sense it was exceptional and its impact can be felt today when we see protests and marches against our own elected governments, consumer watchdogs telling people how to stand up for themselves against big organisations and the power of communication giving every man a voice that can be heard.
Putting this basic issue to the side for the moment we can still examine a selection of events from the sixties to determine their impact at that time and also their longer term influence. Here we will look at events from three perspectives; history, history of science and art history. The question is, were the events of the sixties a mere fad or do they influence society and its culture today?
History
There will inevitably be a number of historical events in every decade which influence society at that time and whose effects will continue to be felt either expressly or influentially for many years. Similarly there will be events which appear significant but later lose their importance. I have chosen two subjects which I think illustrate this point.
1 – Communication
Although the first BBC television broadcast was made in 1936, and television ownership had been widespread in the United States throughout the 1950s, it was not until the sixties that television made any great impression in UK homes. Foreign travel was still expensive and television was able to bring new ideas and cultures into British living rooms. It also brought news in a new format, in words and moving pictures. (Arguably this already existed through news films in cinemas but these were not up to date and smacked of propaganda.) Television brought comedy, drama, sport, music and a whole raft of entertainment, education and information into people’s homes in a way that had never been done before. In the sixties it brought people a new awareness of the world around them. Today communication and television are still an enormous and greater influence in every part of our lives and contribute a great deal to our social and cultural development.
2 – The Space Race
On 20 July 1969 Neil Armstrong, an American, became the first man to stand on the surface of the moon. The Apollo programme had been launched in 1963 with the singular aim of landing humans on the moon. The Russians had already sent the first man into orbit around the earth and it was felt important that America reach the moon before their rivals claimed it in the name of communism, which was at that time seen as a real threat to the American way of life. At the time of the lunar landing there was unprecedented media coverage of the event – by that time it was possible to broadcast live television across the globe. While landing on the moon remains one of man’s greatest achievements, its significance is debatable. Beyond being a major media event, we have learned little that can change our lives on earth. In the short term it brought about a great sense of pride in the Americans, which would in some way be an indication of cultural change. The country had been embroiled in the Vietnam war which was not universally popular among its citizens. But in the longer term its social and cultural impact is minimal.
History of Science
1 – The scientific counter culture
Here we will focus primarily on events in the United States since they are well documented and different from events in the UK. Different in the sense that science in America was significantly more involved in the development of military equipment. Since the end of World War 2 the country had involved itself in major conflicts in Korea and Vietnam. The development of weapons systems, and hence military superiority, was a priority for successive US governments facing increasing criticism over the loss of American lives in ‘foreign’ wars and the perceived threat from Russia. Even during World War 2 the Americans realised that science and technology could win wars with the development of the atomic bomb.
As a result of the US government’s substantial budgets and endless quest for superior weapons, the franchise of a number of academic scientific institutions was transformed. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology in particular benefited from government funding in return for undertaking weapons based research throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
In the late 1960s a scientific counter culture emerged when students and academics alike staged protests against what they saw as the overemphasis in the development of military technology at academic institutes. These protest, and ensuing debates, which involved universities across the US, did, to some degree, have their desired effect in that the close links between academic institutions and government weapons research was lessened – for a while at least.
The government realised that academics were unreliable as development partners. Instead they switched their allegiance and much of their funding to commercial organisations for whom the morality of weapons development plays a less significant role.
It may be correct to define the impact on these events on academic institutions as being exceptional as they helped define the relationship between government and academia. However, in terms of social and cultural impact, these events have had literally no lasting effect. Today there is a volume of evidence which supports close links at the highest levels between the US government and military developers and manufacturers. Military research, development and production continue apace.
2 – The contraceptive pill
“The Pill” is an oral contraceptive, for women, developed during the 1950s. It was first used in America in 1960 and in the UK the following year. On it first introduction its use was primarily by, and in some places restricted to, married women who wished to limit the size of their family. But it was possible for single women to be prescribed the pill and today its use in the UK is widespread being available without prescription via family planning clinics.
The pill is an example of a scientific development which has had a significant immediate and long lasting impact on our culture. It played a role in the sexual liberation of women in the sixties. It gave single and married women the power to enjoy a sexual relationship without the fear and responsibility of an unwanted pregnancy. Similarly, the pill has led to a reduction in the number of abortions. While these are no longer illegal there is still some slight stigma attached to abortion in the UK and it also raises other moral questions.
The pill continues to this day to be a popular form of contraception in the UK. The national Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles completed in 2000, found that around 80 per cent of British women use the pill at some time between the ages of 16 and 24.
It has not been without its detractors - principally the Catholic Church and some of the more extreme anti-abortion groups.
But overall it is reasonable to say that the pill is an example of a scientific development which has resulted in exceptional cultural (giving women a greater sense of sexual freedom) and social (impacting on population statistics) change.
Art History
Joseph Conrad once described art as “an assault on the senses”. Here he was describing art in its various forms – painting, music, sculpture, writing etc. Certainly this seems like a reasonable definition though perhaps “a planned and deliberate assault on the senses” would be better since it excludes, for example, a car crash.
Here though we will discuss only the art of painting and how, or if, its development during the sixties had any real impact.
By its very nature art is a challenging subject for the artist and the viewer. Throughout the long history of art there have been a number of movements – such as dada, expressionism and surrealism – which have challenged what has come before. But was the sixties any different and did the movements which came to prominence then have any wider social and cultural impact beyond the art establishment? The art establishment is arguably part of a culture itself but not necessary representative of wider public views and opinions, so lets conveniently wash over that point. But to answer the broader question, lets look at two artists who enjoyed some significant popularity, notoriety and commercial success during that period.
1 - Andy Warhol
Warhol is synonymous with the pop-art movement, using art to reflect popular culture in a manner which arguably mocked art itself.
Warhol’s most famous works took everyday objects such as a tin of soup or coke bottle, or iconic figures such as Che Guevara and Marilyn Monroe and repeated them on the canvas in a simple grid arrangement. While this was certainly a challenge to the art establishment it was an equal challenge to the non-expert in understanding why this would be classified as art – particularly when he had simply taken recognisable objects and duplicated them. However, in every sense, Warhol’s work, or at least his more famous works, did produce an assault on the senses.
His work also differed from mainstream art in his use of materials. Much of his work did not consist of paint on canvas but instead used a silkscreen printing process – in a sense, manufactured art. Warhol didn’t just influence the content of art, he influenced its production as well.
Warhol’s longer term influence on the world of art and artists can still be felt today. For example Tray Emin’s ‘My Bed’, which was a controversial winner of the 1999 Turner Prize, uses a collection of everyday objects.
It is hard though to relate the work of any pop artist of the sixties to any exceptional, or even unexceptional, social change. His ‘Red Race Riot’ of 1963 may have highlighted racial inequality but did not provoke a riot and nor did it become a symbol of any racial equality movement, though it’s unlikely that was ever Warhol’s intention.
Culturally though pop-art has helped to bring art closer to people who had previously associated the subject with older paintings. In some ways it made art more accessible to a wider audience by providing instantly recognisable objects and opened the door for mimicry of Warhol’s style – Warhol could have no qualms with this as he had simply and literally mimicked what he had seen to create his art.
2 – Mark Rothko
Mark Rothko was a proponent of the Abstract Expressionism school of art which began in America in the 1940’s before flourishing later in the 1950s and throughout the 1960s. Abstract Expressionism is characterised by the use of colour and brushstrokes on a large canvas to create an emotion rather than people and objects to create a ‘picture’.
Abstract Expressionism was never a popular movement in the way that pop-art grabbed the public’s attention. It expressed the introverted emotions of the artists, glorified its own creation and was generally inaccessible to the masses. It is difficult to see that it has led to any social or cultural change at the time – where it may have had some ‘in-thing’ value – and certainly its legacy is not significant today beyond cheap imitations on the walls of provincial coffee shops.
Conclusion
As indicated at the beginning, there will never be a clear answer to the question of whether or not the sixties was a period of exceptional social and cultural change. My own belief is that it was no more and no less exceptional than many other ‘decades’ which could be studied. It’s possible to pick any period in history and suggest that it had its own unique characteristics which brought about social and cultural change, for example, the industrial revolution in the late eighteenth century, Live Aid in 1985 and the Wall Street crash of 1929.
What is exceptional about the sixties though is that it signalled a sea change in attitudes towards the establishment and authority and ‘legitimised’ the moral right of every person to protest against the things they disagreed with. In this sense it was exceptional and its impact can be felt today when we see protests and marches against our own elected governments, consumer watchdogs telling people how to stand up for themselves against big organisations and the power of communication giving every man a voice that can be heard.
No comments:
Post a Comment