about their idols. Sources A and B are both written by fans who reinforce the dramatic effect pop music was having on people in the sixties. It is obvious that the fans had a suffocating commitment that turned them into screaming mobs. This obviously had a terrifying impact on some performing groups and artists. Joanna Lumley, the writer of Source A liked the Beatles whereas Source B preferred the tones. Paul McCartney, one quarter of the Beatles, wrote Source C that this manic behaviour was not that crazy. He says that the fans could easily by restrained by understanding and knowing how to treat them. McCartney suggests that sources not written in the sixties, like A and B, may not be entirely accurate as the writers may remember the past how they wanted it to be and how others had convinced them that it was like. The other similarity between the sources is the dedication that is portrayed for their favourite bands. Joanna Lumley is running home to see them on the television, the audience at the 'Mad Mod Ball' just wanted to get really close to their idols. The co-operating pop star could offer the fans described in Source C an autograph or photo, whereas a cooperating one a bit of the clothes they were wearing. The youth of the sixties wanted to be as close to the stars as possible so they began to dress like them, act like them and talk like them using slang. Source C however is an opposed opinion as it is from Paul McCartney, a performer where A and B was from the fan’s viewpoint.
(775 words)
How helpful are Sources D and E in helping you to understand why many young people believed that the 1960’s gave them opportunities that had never had before?
Sources D and E describe the radio and television of the 1960’s. Source D explains a television schedule, that is very different from what we know of now. It does not describe the various programmes because there was only one. It simply says that “Cathy McGowan invites you to meet a galaxy of stars.” I think that this is a lot more direct and that it targets the audience personally more than the “TV times” of nowadays. This is a possible reason that the younger generation in the 1960’s felt more opportunistic. The way in which it boldly states “The weekend starts here” is very clever in drawing in the audience, it is a phrase and method that is still used a lot today, hearing it one “Top of the Pops” every Friday. Source E is description of the radio in the 1960’s. The source clearly states that the radio stations did not target the teenage audience which “was clearly the way of the future.” So when pop song playing, radio Luxembourg came on to the radio, the teenagers were able to hear all the pop songs that they had dreamed of: “in those rock famished days and hearing all the pop songs we had ever desired?” I think that source E is good in explaining how not only the teenage generation felt about the boring BBC radio show but how they overcame it and made good of whatever they could. “Even if the reception was lousy, the songs were faded out after a second or so.” Comparing the two is interesting as it shows how television clearly progressed faster and before radio.
(386 words)
Use Sources F and G and your own knowledge, to explain why some people came to see the 1960’s as a period of bad influences in British people.
The sixties were a time when Britain's morale climate made a dramatic shift. Mary Whitehouse started campaigning for a cleaner Britain as is shown in Source F. She was disgusted by the levels of openness of the BBC over things which were not traditional or clean. Mrs Whitehouse was shocked by the effected of popular culture; this view is confirmed by the bitterness she demonstrates in the source that more traditional, religious and ethical people were being ignored. Sources F and G are statements about from a singer, Janis Joplin and an extract from the daily mail on the subject of the clean up TV campaign. Source F, the extract, describes a campaign that was in action at the time, “The women of Britain clean up TV campaign.” This campaign was a religiously motivated campaign that tried to “clean up TV” because many women of the Christian faith felt that TV was no longer supporting Christianity and that it no longer inspired “purpose or hope.” Mrs Whitehouse, the campaign organiser obviously felt that music was not as important as most people did and for that fact felt that music was not as suitable any more. Music probably could be construed as a bad influence for obvious reasons as bad lyrics or “unruly actions.” A brilliant example of these thoughts and feelings is when Elvis performed a “sexually provoked dance” while performing on stage on a television programme. This eventually ended in him being filmed from the waist upwards from then on. I think that the campaign was probably over the top with what they thought were bad influences but I can also see how many things may have been construed as bad influences. For example, although not a sixties band, the sex pistols were extremely frowned upon when on television. The main “Clean up TV” points being made were that the BBC, generally an “on the level” television channel was becoming too slack with the content that it broadcast. Mary Whitehouse, the campaign leader felt that Christian people writing for the BBC were not getting their work shown as the BBC were no longer as supportive of the Christian faith as they used to be. Whether this is a truth, it is not know, but it was certainly a widespread thought that television and pop culture was a “bad influence mixture.” I think that simply people who did feel this way were simply not moving as fast with the times as youth, television and radio. They simply did not understand that times were drastically changing and that no longer would television or society is a prayer saying, carol singing community anymore. Pop culture was taking over and changing society.
Source G describes Janis Joplin, a singer that was deemed a bad influence sometimes. The source describes Janis as “a rebellious teenager” who in the end “died of a drugs overdose in 1970.” Anything involving drugs was obviously a bad influence and when in the media as much as a singer, even more so. The 1960’s was probably seen as an era of bad influence because in some ways it was, e.g. Drugs and Alcohol became a lot more commonly used. The big problem will probably always have been drugs. Although I think overall the 60’s was a bad influence many aspects of it were strong and inspiring.
(732 words)
Study all sources and using your own knowledge and agree or disagree with the statement “Popular culture in the 1960’s did more harm than good.”
All of the sources suggest different things, whether “popular culture in the 1960’s did more harm than good” is not a fact that is known and calculable, but from the sources given a good estimate can be made. Sources A and B say that the fans of bands were maniacs and crazy. The 1960s was an introduction to drugs with music and film being based around them, an example of this is Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds which was a song based on LSD. Easy Rider was a film glamorising the taking of drugs and the clash of the older generation and the younger. However a cross section of people who were teenagers or young people in the sixties stated that they had seen very little of the drug taking craze that was encompassing the globe. Violence became more common especially between two rivalling groups the Mods and Rockers, a popular time to do this was bank holiday Mondays. Sex outside the martial bed became accepted in the 1960s however this new open-minded approach, of course, had consequences. This bought more independence when choosing a partner and the pill had also been invented which allowed women to limit their family size and decide when to have the children. The number of sexually transmitted diseases increased people started to have more than one partner.
Source C is a slight contradiction to the above and is a different viewpoint, a performer’s, not a fan’s. Sources D, E, F and G describe the media at the time and the older generation’s opinions of the youth culture of music and society. Source H is a look at the financial situation of the youth of the 60’s. Source I compares the numbers of students in full education from 1961 compared to 1969. I think that although all of the sources do not directly support or oppose, and in some cases even relate, they all give a sense of the feeling and atmosphere of the time. I think that all together the sources portray the 60’s as being an era of change, in society, music and culture. From sources A, B and C I can tell that music was a huge influence and part of people’s lives. I also think that although probably influencing some people to take drugs and do similar activities to the bands, but I also think that the music of the era inspired many people to follow dreams and access the non-conformist side of their personalities. I think the rebellious attitudes actually did more good for people as it showed them not only a different way of life but also that “No,” they don’t have to follow rules that were laid down upon them. I think that Paul McCartney’s views on the 60’s are probably a little more realistic than that of Joanna Lumley. I think that Joanna may have slightly exaggerated and because she was looking back a long time her memories may have become more than they were. I believe that the 60’s were a “mad” time of life and that the influence of music and culture had taken over but I wouldn’t go as far to say that they did more harm than good. As I said, I think that they inspired people to do good more than they influenced them in a bad way.