A103 INTRODUCTION TO HUMANITIES



THE SIXTIES

Question

Arthur Marwick argues that the sixties were characterised by counter-cultural movements across a number of areas. Do you think that this view is supported by the evidence?

History marks the changes in society, but as Arthur Marwick argues these are not neatly divided into segments but overlap each other during the course of events and even differ in the perspectives taken; in the context of music or art, of a counter-movement in history, but this depends on how the historian wants to convey his selected material from the sources available, that suit the needs of understanding a culture, during a time when people attitudes were so diverse in such a short historical period and the Sixties is a case in point.

The understanding of the Sixties period was, that of, a time of reflection regarding how life was to be lived, that is, to the full, as in its “optimism and genuine faith in the dawning of a better world”1 was seen a representing the economic prosperity; as to the ownership of consumer goods, such as cars, television sets, refrigerators and washing machines, and the opportunities due to the libertine climate in relationships, basically the Sixties emphasised the new and the modern in society as to the of changing, but not challenging, the culture that was occurring in Britain.

Therefore 1960’s was characterised by its social movements which also had an effect on how history was perceived and written about, that is, during this time period there developed new ways of thinking about the world, it wasn’t just good enough to learn about society but more emphasis was about experiencing society; as a primary source. And there were two historical cultural movements at that time, that is, the mainstream culture and the counter-culture and both played their part in the Sixties.

The ‘mainstream’ culture signified the maintaining of social norms from one time to another, which give the framework for society to function in a homogeneous way, that is, of a uniform nature. The counter-culture signified the reforming of social values which can give raise to convergence of ideologies for society to function in a heterogeneous way, that is, in diverse manner within society,

And it is this development of seeing society in a different light that was changing the view from, on one hand, the historical ‘mainstream’ where the type of communication given to selecting only the authoritative chronology events for other academics to make use of, called ‘The Scholarly Monograph’ meaning a published book drawn from specialised primary source research, then shifted to, a ‘counter-cultural’ of writing history for a wider audience called ‘Pop History’ meaning the popularity of mixing primary sources with invented dialogue, which was mainly achieved through the narrative of different mediums, such as books, television dramas and film movies2 to convey historical events in an educational but entertaining manner.

Arthur Marwick argument was that in history “…above all we have to look at the way in which particular circumstances accumulate or converge (that is to say all come together at once) — actual outcomes can often best be explained by the particular way in which events and circumstances accumulate and converge (I personally see this as central in explaining the Sixties)…”3 as the accumulation of events often converged into forming a counter-culture, which was opposite in values to the norms of mainstream culture, as these “…movements, which expand and interact with each other; [had a] tendency towards more and more ‘extremism’ in absence of traditional [mainstream] checks and balances…”4 and there were two counter-cultures which would support his argument; the music in the sixties, such as ‘progressive’ rock as artist Jimi Hendrix made to ‘folk’ rock music which were written by Simon and Garfunkel, happening simultaneously in society against the mainstream and the change of direction in how art was seen in its formulation from ‘high-art’ to ‘pop-art’ in this period of history.

The evidence for this was firstly in music of the sixties, which expressed a counter reaction to the mainstream canonized art form which represented itself in the delivery of its lyrics and performance; such as the ‘the Dangling Conversation’ written by Simon and Garfunkel.5 The singers, Paul Simon and Arthur ‘Art’ Garfunkel began writing songs in 1955, singing in close harmony; as part of the folk music lore but accompanied by acoustic guitar throughout the Sixties.

The music piece, ‘the Dangling Conversation’ was a track taken from the folk rock album ‘Parsley, Sage, Rosemary and Thyme’ produced in 1966, with mainly Paul Simon as lead vocal with guitar, Art Garfunkel as lead vocal on piano and Joe South on guitar accompanied by percussion, strings and harp instruments.6

This music, the ‘Dangling Conversation’, could be read as written poetry put to music, and this innovative technique brought together the two Art forms, which is a counter-culture, “…like the poem poorly written, / We are persons out of rhythm, / Couplets out of rhyme, / In syncopated time. / And the dangling conversation, / and the superficial sighs / Are the borders of our lives….” And what Simon and Garfunkel expressed in the lyrics is what Arthur Marwick has argued about in the existence of a counter-culture during the Sixties; “…And how the room is softly fading, / And I only kiss your shadow, / I cannot feel your hand, / You’re a stranger now unto me / Lost in the dangling conversation / And the superficial sighs / In the borders of our lives.” The written words were expressing that of mainstream tradition of folk music, yet co-existed alongside the new way of experiencing it and this is summarized in lyrics song written.7

This is evident that flow of change, a protest, which was happening at a pace similar to the lyrics in the song “…Like shells upon the shore, / You can hear the ocean roar / In the dangling conversation…” but it was a cultural revolution, as signified between two people in a room reading books of differing interest; who represent the mainstream, as opposed to someone else who was noticing what is going on around them by singing the solemn narrative of this song, and by how the music is played; which is representative by the counter-culture, giving a visual image of a scene; first set by the solo guitar then the words “…It’s a still life water colour, / of a now late afternoon / As the sun shines through the curtain lace / and shadows wash the room /…” are sang, but the boundary is set in traditional folk music, and the change, or turn, is marked in the line “….In syncopated time…” which is echoed exactly as a shorten rhythm by the second male singer, and its reframing the music at this point to ask questions, which is sung as “…Yes, we speak of things that matter / With words that must be said, / Can analysis be worthwhile?” sang in a forcefully way as folk rock music, and this is accompanied then by a drum, following the last lyrics of “…And how the room is softly fading, / And I only kiss your shadow, / I cannot feel your hand, / You’re a stranger now unto me…” and the solo drum beat ends the song abruptly. The imagery of the song started light; of picturing a recognisable view of one part of a room; by the window and ended on a dark scene; of suddenly finding the room empty and only one colour; its void of any subject matter.

The second evidence to support Arthur Marwick’s argument existed in Art history during the Sixties, that being, High-Art as the mainstream culture; defined as it was by conventions of understanding a picture in conveying social norms from a subject based in reality of the outside world, and Modern art came to represent a counter-culture in terms of expressed emotions; a spiritual a quest from within the individual depicted in the abstract art form on canvas.

A counter-culture artist during the Sixties was Mark Rothko (1903-1970)8, who was part of the ‘Abstract Expressionism’ movement, which emphasised painted works of art that were spontaneous subconscious emotions in a created form on canvas. Thus creating the effect of emotions by the use of colours and the large-scale canvas particularly seen with Rothko’s work9; as “…[r]ightly or wrongly, and all other things being equal, we tend to see brighter colours as more cheerful, and deeper and darker colours as more sombre and serious….”10 hence giving the mind more to think about in terms of the mood-enhancing qualities to convey a sense of self within the room looking at the painting as Rothko stated “…If I must place my trust somewhere, I would invest it in the psyche of sensitive observers who are free of the conventions of understanding. I would have no apprehensions about the use they would make of the pictures for needs of their own spirit. For if there is both need and spirit, there is bound to be a real transaction…”11 The transaction was losing one-self in the moment of expressed reactions to modern art, counter to what the traditional mainstream presented in high-art realities of the world.

Therefore during the Sixties abstract artwork was radically different as “…[w]e may know clearly enough that what we’re looking at is a work of modern art, but there is a continual uncertainty about just what it is that is being looked at and seen in the work. This is not a condition it is easy to describe or to communicate, nor is it quite the state of mind we normally associate with public spectacles, which are more often designed to celebrate shared values and to produce a sense certainty...”12 as expressionism what to be very intimate and personal with the spectator, for Rothko did state that was his intention as being “...precisely because I want to be very intimate and human. To paint a small picture is to place yourself outside your experience, to look upon an experience in a stereopticon view or with a reducing glass. However you paint the larger picture, you are in it. It isn’t something you command…”13 and in Rothko’s art-work the counter-culture in expressed to make this point against the mainstream culture of high-art.

In conclusion, looking at the evidence in terms of the music discipline; Simon and Garfunkel ‘the Dangling Conversation’ song and art history; Rothko’s ideology regarding ‘Expressionism’ artwork, during in the Sixties, Arthur Marwick’s argument that “…all of the different movements, forms of protest and expression which made up counter-culture were opposed to something, or several things, in mainstream culture; but they also had roots in, or connections with, established culture…”14 and I would state that they were life experiences characteristic of the Sixties, as in how the many counter-cultures existed during that period which is supported by the evidence that they were within the mainstream society regardless of the protest or expression used by the various cultural groups.

REFERENCES

1. Page 3, The Sixties: cultural revolution in Britain, France, Italy, and the United States, c.1958-c.1974, by Arthur Marwick, published by Oxford University Press, ISBN: 019210022X, copyright 1998.

2. Page 67-69, Introduction to History Part 2, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

3. Page 42, Introduction to History Part 2, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

4. Page 44, Introduction to History Part 2, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

5. Page 170, Section 2: Popular Music, Change and Continuity: Music in the 1960s, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

6. CDA5543, CD12: Music of the 60s, The Open University, copyright 2005.

7. Page 171, Section 2: Popular Music, Change and Continuity: Music in the 1960s, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

8. Page 213, Section 2: Two American Paintings, Rothko & Warhol, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

9. Colour Plates 71-Plate 80, Illustration Book, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 9662 3.

10. Page 237, Section 6: A Conflict of Values, Rothko & Warhol, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

11 Page 225, Section 5: ‘Making A Place’, Rothko & Warhol, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

12. Page 217, Section 2: Two American Paintings, Rothko & Warhol, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

13. Page 225, Section 5: ‘Making A Place’, Rothko & Warhol, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

14. Page 26, Section 3: Language: concepts, theory, Introduction to History Part 2, The Sixties: Mainstream Culture & Counter-culture, Block 6, A103 Introduction to the Humanities, The Open University, ISBN: 0 7492 96704, copyright 1998.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download