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.