1. I was not thrilled with their fashion sense. Not much fun to be thirteen and dress like your great, great, grandma. Hated tie-dye. Hated muddy colors. Nothing on god's earth is that ugly. Not even mud.
2. I appreciated their counter culture thing -- getting away from conspicuous consumption and getting "closer to the earth" -- but this seemed to go hand in hand with great naivete and plain old ignorance. ...Captured in "Easy Rider" by the hippie commune sowing seeds in bare, arid ground.
3. The sexual mores were revolting -- a puritanism about sensuality heaped together with a kind of sexual indifference masquerading as "openness."
4. The food puritanism sucked too. I mean organic is ok and veggies are ok, but they seemed to go to great lengths to make everything taste awful.
5. But I liked the easy going anti-work stuff.
These are the barest memories and impressions, and I'm not claiming any great truths or interpretations here. Just how I bounced against all that as an immigrant teen.
Joanna
info at pulpculture.org wrote:
> At 07:15 PM 8/29/2006, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>> John, do you have any anthropological hypothesis to explain the
>> excessive concern on this list with that mostly mythological category of
>> "Hippies"? Or is the question one of psychopathology rather than of
>> anthropology?
>>
>> Carrol
>
>
>
> speaking of which. I wanted to ask. Doug posted that Time article
> about the hippies, written in 1967 as I recall.
>
> I was wondering about it. In the article, they talk about how hippies
> were a departure from the earlier work of the new left.
>
> For those of you around at the time, part of the New Left, what did
> you think about what was going on? Did you feel the hippies were a
> problem? Join on board?
>
> Just curious.
>
>
>
>
> Bitch | Lab
> http://blog.pulpculture.org
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>