That 60s Blog

I recently finished reading a book, part of which talked about the differences between the educational system today and that of the '60s.  Although I was familiar with topics such as anti-bullying and "character development"--  topics which should be taught in the home, taking valuable time away from academics--  there was a topic I was not familiar with:  the educational system in recent decades placing a strong emphasis on "self-esteem."  As someone who was an elementary school student during part of the '60s, I really believe we were better off.

The first point of this issue:  in the 1960s school environment I experienced, "self-esteem" was something one earned.  While kids who were treated well in general "felt good about themselves," self-esteem was heightened by accomplishments.  A kid who did well in his schoolwork, in sports, or with some kind of talent, was able to feel a well-deserved sense of pride in his abilities and accomplishments.  From academics to sports, changing the focus to "no child can be a winner without others being losers" does not equip kids for the real world. 

Second, kids did not need to be "bribed" to do things they should do anyway.  One example of how this has changed is the "Book It" program.  This program has been going on for decades--  elementary school children being given certificates for free Pizza Hut pizzas when they read.  This kind of thing does not equip youngsters for the real world, either. 

A third point:  too many adults have such little faith in kids that these ridiculous changes in schools are almost necessary.  One individual summed up a popular viewpoint by commenting:  "Kids today are fat, lazy, and stupid."  If this is how today's parents look at kids, no wonder kids need to learn "self-esteem" in the classroom.

However, I still believe we were better off.  Whether the topic was a good grade in a class, recognition for participating in a sport or other activity, or simply being held in high regard by others, one only received these perks if they earned them.  If we did not do homework, or messed up a test, we could not expect a good grade.  If we had no athletic ability or other talent, we would not receive a reward for "participating."  Equally important, I cannot think of one single kid in my old elementary school who had "self-esteem issues."  We were in school to do what we were supposed to do;  and only excelling at something resulted in special recognition. 

There are two things that are often said about styles and fashions.  One is whenever something popular goes out of style, in approximately twenty years it will be back.  The other is if you wore a style the first time around, it is probably not appropriate for you when it does become popular again.  While the first is accurate, fewer people these days agree with the second part. 

Tie-dye is one example.  When tie-dye was fashionable the first time around, I was a young child.  As it did not seem to be widely available in my local area, I simply made it myself.  All you needed to do to make your own tie-dyed shirts, socks, and other clothing items, was to literally tie knots in the fabric.  You would then "cook" your clothing in a large pot filled with "RIT" dye, on the top of the stove.  I was doing this before kids were shown in school how to make tie-dye by applying wax to the fabric. 

These days, I often see Baby Boomers who were teenagers in those days wearing tie-dye.  Many seem to believe it is still 1968, as they love their youthful favorites.

A second fashion to reappear was the mini-skirt.  The mini-skirts that showed up in the mid-'80s were nothing like we wore in the late '60s.  They had weird shapes, and were not "mini" by any stretch of the imagination. 

I am one of those people who will not buy clothes if I hate the style.  Currently, this means a style known as "tunics."  From the caftan-style tunics of the '60s to tank tops that are nearly a foot too long, tunics abound in department stores and online stores.  It kind of creeps me out to find the only styles I like are sold in "retro" shops.  However, "to each their own" means wearing what you like, and dismissing others simply because they are "in style."

Pop-art, op-art, underground comix, black-light posters... and psychedelic art. If you were alive in the '60s, you were probably familiar with Peter Max's own original styles of the latter. If you were an adult in the '60s, you probably hated it as much as the younger generation loved it.

Art, artists, and their popularity come and go, but Peter Max is still here today. At 74 years of age, one of his current works is "44 Obamas"-- 15-foot-wide set of portraits of the President. However, his poster art during the 1960s is the way most of us remember him.

While much of Peter Max's art was simply enjoyable, it also had a purpose. Some consisted of themes about the era in which we lived. The Different Drummer, Moon Landing, Be In, and Lady Liberty were two examples. He also produced rock concert posters.

One may wonder how an artist can continue his life's work and hold onto his popularity for a half-century. It seems to have been a combination of talent, determination, and keeping his eye on his ever-changing audience. Peter Max's art is still being sold, show in galleries, and taught about in schools. As is the case with much about the '60s that was different from generations before, his art is likely to live on forever. When it came to everything that was meaningful about this particular time in history, Peter Max did a great job of representing it with his bold, colorful art.

When I was a child in the '60s, all I knew about "hippies" was when related stories were sometimes on the news.  As no one in our area had that lifestyle, no one wore the "hippie styles" we often hear about these days.  Instead, the many fun styles we had were colorful, bright, and fun.  When I looked it up years ago, I found many of the styles had originated in London.  As the British Invasion of music had become very popular in our area, it was only fitting that the styles came along with it.

One cool item was go-go boots.  The go-go boots we liked in the '60s are nothing like the ones advertised these days.  They were calf-high, wide on the tops, and always white.  After they became popular on music shows like Hullaballoo, most young girls wanted a pair.  They were the perfect accessory with miniskirts and fishnets in all colors. 

While miniskirts, jumpers, and shifts were the usual attire for school, another fashion was around for awhile:  paper dresses.  As I recall, the best thing about paper dresses was not needing to hem a dress if it was too long--  all one had to do was trim it with a pair of regular scissors.

In our area, hippie hair was not seen, either.  In fact, a guy could get expelled from high school if his hair was longer than his shirt collar.  Rebelliousness generally went no further than wearing sneakers outside of gym class. 

I read that a person can be defined by his or her choices in clothing styles.  Thinking about the fashions we loved in the '60s, I think that is an accurate assessment.  There was not really anything to rebel against, and nothing to prove.  Similar to our choices in music, fashion was just another aspect of who we were:  the kids of the '60s, different from the generation before us, but not very different at all.