I had to read this short story a few times, and after all of that re-reading, I'm still not sure what I think of it is what the author was really going for.
My perspective on this "Police Band" is the writer realized how influential the music of the 1960s was over the population. He also acknowledged that police officers were seen as the bad guys against the counter cultural movement that had music at its core.
I think it's rather humorous that Barthelme would think of a police unit being a band to calm and inspire rowdy or frightened crowds of people. One gets the image of SWAT units, hostage negotiating teams, riot units... but nothing that would positively calm the situation in such a way that the people were receptive to.
I wonder why Barthelme had the members of this band undercover as mail carriers and then to say something about how the narrator couldn't understand the black members not wanting to do that forever.
All in all this was a rather interesting piece to read but interesting in the fact that it promotes how music had an effect over large groups of people. It can make them happy and compliant.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Gordon and Pynchon
Having only two selections to read and write about this week, and not finding anything to comment on with the first poetry selection, I am left to write on Andrew Gordon's text, "Smoking Dope with Thomas Pynchon: A Sixties Memoir."
While this was an entertaining piece to read, I was not influenced with much in the way of response or commentary, but I will give it a shot.
Gordon wrote that "they were no joke, they really happened to us, and they really happened to me" in response to America in the 1960s. I think that that idea might get lost on us as modern students in this class. We study the 1960s as something that has happened, can be analyzed and commented on. However, it might serve us to be constantly reminded that this actually happened to real people who are among us today. We read and watch footage of sit ins, 1960s drug culture, Woodstock and other concerts, but I think we fail to associate them with the humanity they touched and affected. The 1960s gets lost into the pop culture image of a "hippie" or the black and white text that is in our book for us to read as part of a mandated assignment.
Gordon went on to write that "if somebody told you the history of the decade as a story, you wouldn't believe it. You'd wonder: is this for real? Is it some kind of joke?" To elaborate on what i mentioned before, I think Gordon is wrong. I think that now as students we see it more as a story of the times. We don't know what the culture was like, at least not first hand, and things have changed so much we see it as history. History that is being presented to us in a story form. These are the people, so different and unique you can see them as characters. These are the things they did which is so far from your own reality, they can be seen as events in a long running plot. Here is Altamont and the end to the sixties, the resolution to that plot that was 10-15 years in the making. I ultimately disagree with Gordon, I think we see the 60s as some type of idolized and unfathomable story sometimes that, no matter how much research and information we gather, can only be understood and described by someone who was actually there and had the 60s happen TO them.
While this was an entertaining piece to read, I was not influenced with much in the way of response or commentary, but I will give it a shot.
Gordon wrote that "they were no joke, they really happened to us, and they really happened to me" in response to America in the 1960s. I think that that idea might get lost on us as modern students in this class. We study the 1960s as something that has happened, can be analyzed and commented on. However, it might serve us to be constantly reminded that this actually happened to real people who are among us today. We read and watch footage of sit ins, 1960s drug culture, Woodstock and other concerts, but I think we fail to associate them with the humanity they touched and affected. The 1960s gets lost into the pop culture image of a "hippie" or the black and white text that is in our book for us to read as part of a mandated assignment.
Gordon went on to write that "if somebody told you the history of the decade as a story, you wouldn't believe it. You'd wonder: is this for real? Is it some kind of joke?" To elaborate on what i mentioned before, I think Gordon is wrong. I think that now as students we see it more as a story of the times. We don't know what the culture was like, at least not first hand, and things have changed so much we see it as history. History that is being presented to us in a story form. These are the people, so different and unique you can see them as characters. These are the things they did which is so far from your own reality, they can be seen as events in a long running plot. Here is Altamont and the end to the sixties, the resolution to that plot that was 10-15 years in the making. I ultimately disagree with Gordon, I think we see the 60s as some type of idolized and unfathomable story sometimes that, no matter how much research and information we gather, can only be understood and described by someone who was actually there and had the 60s happen TO them.
Altamont
I had always heard about Altamont but never really delve into what it really was and how it fit into the 60s culture. I knew it was supposed to be a recreation of Woodstock but the extent to which it failed was a mystery.
I had a few questions come to mind when I read Michael Lydon's account of his experiences as an Altamont concert goer. Who in their right mind would think that the Hells Angels were a good idea to allow to have that kind of power? Especially since they were being paid with $500 worth of beer... one can only assume as their consumption of their profits increases so will their violent and unpeaceful tendencies. I also think it was an interesting choice by Lydon to refer to them simply as the "Angels" throughout the text. I know it was the shorthand way to refer to the Hell's Angels, but its a bit ironic that the violent driving force for most of what went so horribly wrong at Altamont was referred to as Angels. A term that typically is referred for a biblical reference or someone who is good and well-intentioned.
I also liked that Lydon makes the distinction early in his article that Woodstock was an event because it was made into one. Altamont was an event because it was produced as an event. Reading this account of Altamont makes it clear that if the concert-goers had not tried to recreate a "Woodstock" of their own, it might not have turned out as bad as it did. They simply were trying to hard. I am sure I am not the only one to make the point that something like Woodstock will never happen again. It was unique to that one point in history where the right location, people, music and atmosphere combined to create something great and noteworthy. If you try to recreate that you will inevitably get a mixture of elements and people who are there to recreate something they never knew or could really understand in the first place.
I had a few questions come to mind when I read Michael Lydon's account of his experiences as an Altamont concert goer. Who in their right mind would think that the Hells Angels were a good idea to allow to have that kind of power? Especially since they were being paid with $500 worth of beer... one can only assume as their consumption of their profits increases so will their violent and unpeaceful tendencies. I also think it was an interesting choice by Lydon to refer to them simply as the "Angels" throughout the text. I know it was the shorthand way to refer to the Hell's Angels, but its a bit ironic that the violent driving force for most of what went so horribly wrong at Altamont was referred to as Angels. A term that typically is referred for a biblical reference or someone who is good and well-intentioned.
I also liked that Lydon makes the distinction early in his article that Woodstock was an event because it was made into one. Altamont was an event because it was produced as an event. Reading this account of Altamont makes it clear that if the concert-goers had not tried to recreate a "Woodstock" of their own, it might not have turned out as bad as it did. They simply were trying to hard. I am sure I am not the only one to make the point that something like Woodstock will never happen again. It was unique to that one point in history where the right location, people, music and atmosphere combined to create something great and noteworthy. If you try to recreate that you will inevitably get a mixture of elements and people who are there to recreate something they never knew or could really understand in the first place.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Psychedelic Rock Posters
After reading Sally Tomlinson's essay about the Psychedelic rock posters, I began questioning why the posters were such a giant focal point for the era. Yes, at the time they served an important purpose. That purpose was to advertise and inform hippies about events such as the concert dances. Almost all of the posters shared some similar characteristics, which we talked about in class when discussing the advertisement for the festival in New York this summer. Intricate lettering and bright, vibrant colors were some of the elements that made these posters different from those that had come before and after. Tomlinson touched on a point that I had never thought of when she wrote that, "deciphering the posters required concentration, which dovetailed handily with 'the state of mind which occurs when high'" (302-3). So much of the hippie culture we are learning about had to do with knowing the 'in' things. They dressed a certain way, dressed a certain way, had certain phrases and language they used to identify them as part of the counterculture. I guess I had never considered that the ability to read and interpret these posters were also a way of identifying one's presence in the counterculture.
I had also questioned why posters would be something that warranted such high regard so many years later. Yes they may have been great representations of culturally relevant art, but so many things are that get neglected. After talking about this essay with some friends I had one person ask me if I ever heard news stories that referenced controversy coming from a Blog. My answer was yes. They then asked me if the news stories surrounding email misuse (like the Philadelphia news anchors) had gained a lot of local attention. Of course, the answer to that is yes. This followed by references to the cultural impacts of Myspace pages, Facebook profiles and other electronic forums/media content that influence our current culture.
All in all, my friend was pointing out to me that the posters of the 1960s would have been equivalent to an event invitation to certain people on Facebook or a band's profile on Myspace. The concept of attracting the type of people you want to attend certain events has not changed, the method however has evolved.
I had also questioned why posters would be something that warranted such high regard so many years later. Yes they may have been great representations of culturally relevant art, but so many things are that get neglected. After talking about this essay with some friends I had one person ask me if I ever heard news stories that referenced controversy coming from a Blog. My answer was yes. They then asked me if the news stories surrounding email misuse (like the Philadelphia news anchors) had gained a lot of local attention. Of course, the answer to that is yes. This followed by references to the cultural impacts of Myspace pages, Facebook profiles and other electronic forums/media content that influence our current culture.
All in all, my friend was pointing out to me that the posters of the 1960s would have been equivalent to an event invitation to certain people on Facebook or a band's profile on Myspace. The concept of attracting the type of people you want to attend certain events has not changed, the method however has evolved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)