As a result of scientific research in aid of war, the sixties saw the introduction of chemical warfare; biological weapons such as DDT were developed and used to kill vegetation and crops that the Vietcong were using as groundcover and as food sources. This was a huge revolution and advancement in scientific development but further fuelled the concerns of movements of two kinds, those that were anti-science, and those that were not against science; but the practices of scientists in the late sixties.
The revolution also affected the way in which scientists carried out their work, they had lost their intellectual freedom; the military governed what research they conducted and prohibited them from publishing their findings in journals and publications. These were definitely the results of a technological revolution. The irony is, that whilst the government and military funded expensive scientific research, putting not only finances but also great amounts of control and trust into the scientists, it was these scientists who had the most power over the country.
Opposition to military involvement wasn’t the only counter-movement regarding scientific research in the sixties; there was also huge objection in the roles of women in scientific study. The grievance was more than the issue that there were few women working in the science field, but also that the majority who had been successful in pursuing a career in science weren’t able to sustain their posts. A study by Rossi in 1965 showed that compared to males, more females across a range of occupations voluntarily left their posts, more so in the field of science. The study also showed that women counted for only 10% of individuals who worked in science. It was findings like this that began movements for the cause of ‘women’s liberation’ and were a sign of changing times and a revolution in the role of women who sought for the same rights to education and employment opportunities as men.
It was also two women in science who played a major role in revolutionizing ideas about the human embryo. Lenz and Kelsey’s research went against all that previously been believed about pregnant women and their unborn children. They’re research tackled and exposed the ignorance of traditional practices; primarily challenging the idea at the time, that what didn’t harm the pregnant mother, couldn’t harm her child. Through their insistence that babies react differently to drugs, nicotine, alcohol etc, they radically transformed neonatal studies.
When applied to the struggle for women to be acknowledged in the field of science, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is extremely useful, because movements in the sixties paved the way for more women into education. For example, the demand for advanced education to be more accessible to women saw the number of women graduate in primatology go from zero in the 1960’s to eight out of ten students in the 1990’s. This was clearly an outstanding achievement that shows the impact of the sixties.
Music was another field that underwent a radical transformation during the sixties. It wasn’t simply a case of new trends being introduced however. The sixties music scene was about existing trends, the revival of early music and the introduction of original sounds. In terms of music, the sixties could be seen as a cultural revolution. The variety of styles contributed to challenging existing ideas about music, and showed the importance for them to co-exist to establish a rich and lively music scene.
The sixties music scene is renowned for being associated with the Beatles and rebellious figures such as Jimi Hendrix and The Kinks, however, at the same time existing trends were still hugely popular as was the early music revival. It was the co-existence of the three that made the sixties revolutionary. Bands and artists embraced the rich and diversified music styles, and the sixties saw much experiment with lyrics and instruments. Not least, among these were The Beatles, their shift from usual music styles is evident in Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band. Heavily influenced from eastern styles, this was nothing innovative; however, it was a relatively unheard style among the British fans. It appealed to the sixties generation who sought alternative lifestyles and the blending of cultures set to challenge pre-conceived ideas of Brit-pop. Jimi Hendrix was also at the forefront of the sixties music revolution, with erotic and suggestive mannerisms he appealed to the generation who consumed sexual liberation. His rebellious and aggressive music was something that protesters and anarchists at the time could identify with, finding their own voice in this expressive form.
The early music revival, although established in the late fifties, was at its most prevalent in the sixties. This interest in a period of music that had previously been ‘forgotten’ demonstrated a transformation in the tastes of the sixties generation. Although classic composers such as Handel and Bach had been popular in earlier periods, there was one main difference in the appreciation of early music during the sixties. The emphasis of the early music revival was the desire for authenticity; the sixties saw a change to how these compositions were performed; which led to experimentation in tempo, instruments and styles of singing.
It is argued that the sixties were not an isolated period for cultural change; and that the sixties merely followed on from what had began in the late fifties. The changes that were seen to happen in the sixties could just as well be attributed to the upshot of the end of the war. Families had experienced a great disruption in their lives; many had been killed in the war and had left families shattered. The women’s liberation could be a reaction to women resenting their return to domestic duties and pre WWII lifestyle, after having filled the roles of men in the workplace when manpower was limited.
The seventies also played their part in this cultural change; despite the rise of feminism and gay rights initiating in the late sixties, they didn’t fully come into fruition until the seventies. However, in spite of the roles the fifties and seventies played in what is seen as a ‘cultural revolution’, the sixties is undoubtedly synonymous with all that was radical and new at that time.
In conclusion, having only looked at two disciplines, it leaves us limited to answer whether the sixties were indeed a ‘cultural revolution’. However, in regards to the examples we’ve seen in both the fields of music and science, there is certainly proof that the sixties were a significant time for change. Its impossible to know for certain whether these changes would have taken place if not for situations and circumstances that arose during the sixties, and whether they were in fact just a consequence of a nation recovering from war. Despite this, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is certainly useful when applied to the sixties in a number of examples; attitudes to authority were challenged, women gained greater access into education and music appeared to unite and give voice to rebellious protesters who sought a change in ideas and values.
Bibliography:
A103 Block 6 The Sixties: Mainstream Culture and Counter-culture The Open University
