It shows a MOD making up an excuse about why she cant go out that evening, that is ironical (or was viewed to be) because it was common opinion that MODs were out at all hours and never wanted to stay in. This was written with the intention of getting a laugh. It is Primary (written in 1963) and useful in showing us what the general public’s perception of it was. I don’t however think that it is a very reliable source. As we can see perceptions are not always correct and I have my doubts as to whether every single MOD was out all the time this is merely the way that things were perceived.
The final primary source I interview was my great aunt Stella Caffrey; she was born in England and was 33 at the start of the sixties. At the beginning of the sixties she lived in Germany and after 1963 she moved to Huntsville, Alabama. She had slightly different views than the other two and talked in more detail about them. Here is what she thought.
She was very informed about Vietnam. She said that feelings were very mixed. She was shocked at the assassination of Kennedy but she did say afterward that she didn’t think that he was as great a president as he was made out to be and that his assassination did his memory many favours. She also said that to her fashion wasn’t a big deal either and that she wouldn’t have described the sixties as swinging, especially not for her. This again contrasts with another source, which was written in the daily mail, September 9th 1968. This is a primary source, which I would say is reliable but sensationalist. It is about Minister’s wife Marjorie Janney wearing a micro skirt to church, this emphasizes how crazy the sixties were in some cases but this is an anomaly, an extreme case, and a story, which you would expect a paper like the daily mail to pick up on. This source is useful in conveying the particular event but does not prove that this type of behaviour was endemic of people in the sixties. It was written to interest a tabloid audience.
Another source that I looked at which contrasts the three of my interviewees experience is a woman, born in 1948 speaking about the sixties in the 80‘s. She was saying that Fashion was a very big deal. We do not now why she is giving the source but I would guess that it was for some sort of history book. It is useful in helping us to better understand the fashion of the period, which, despite my interviewees I believe was an important part of life in the sixties.
(Full transcripts of these three interviews can be found in the appendix)
So we have heard from the people who were there at the time, now we will look at the perceptions of the sixties through the eyes of someone who was not there.
Firstly I talked to Alice Fixsen, she is 16. When I asked her what she thought the sixties were she said ‘flower power’, now according to the primary sources I interviewed flower power didn’t play a very important part in most peoples lives, only those who were involved. She next said ‘the Beatles’ it is true that the Beatles where a big musical influence during the period but they obviously weren’t for everyone as none of my interviewees even mentioned them in the musical section. This may be because my primary source interviewees were a little older than the Beatles target audience but still they had very little effect on a lot of people.
She didn’t even mention Vietnam or Martin Luther King or the Cuban missile crisis. This shows how for her at least her perception of the sixties was very far from the reality of it. It seems that in one sense at least she did get things right. She mentioned the Beatles who were a very prominent feature of the sixties and this can be backed up by an external source, which I have analysed. It was an interview with Paul McCartney in 1984. This is a secondary source and might not be very reliable because this was him, speaking after his band’s glory days and he probably wanted to exaggerate the madness to make his band sound more popular and friendly than they maybe actually were. The source describes the madness of the gigs that they played and the friendliness of the fans and also about how he treated his fans well. This interview was probably given because Paul McCartney maybe wanted to boost the Beatles’ career. It was probably written for the fans too. It isn’t really of much use to us because it is obviously biased and also a secondary source but it is interesting to contrast it with the perception of my younger interviewees.
Next interviewee who wasn’t around at the time was Sam Wain he is 17. The first thing he mentioned was Martin Luther King, he is a great admirer of his work. The second thing he mentioned was the World Cup Victory of 1966. He didn’t even mention the Beatles. But he did mention Wood stock ’69. A rock concert, which really was a historic event. It was arguably the greatest music festival of all time and many careers were born out of it. This event paved the way for the music festivals of today such as Glastonbury and Reading festivals. He then mentioned the outrageous fashions in the sixties. Which from sources previously studied, we know to be true in some cases.
We can see from Sam’s response that his perception also differs from reality although not as much as Alice’s.
The last person who I interviewed was Jason Maude age 19, the first thing he talked about was Vietnam and then the assassination of president Kennedy. He then talked about the Cuban missile crisis. The last thing that he thought of was England’s world cup victory of 1966.
As we can see from looking at the results of these three interviews in relation to the three primary source interviews Jason was probably the closest to the reality of the sixties, and Alice farthest from it. These results however may not be accurate because the three primary sources I interviewed may not all be typical men and women of the sixties. In fact judging from some of the sources, which I have analysed, they were almost certainly not completely typical of the period because they all were undergoing major changes in their lives at the time. They could have been typical of the time but I doubt they were.
But the real truth is that the perception of the sixties, even for the people who were there, depends very much on the person themselves. What you were listening to, reading or watching would affect very much the outcome of your opinion of the period.
It was the decade of youth and young adult culture; it was the time when youth culture was accepted. Nobody really knows why it came about but a reason could have been because between 1955 and 1960 average weekly earnings rose 34% while average prices only rose 15%. This trend continued throughout the sixties so people had more money to spend on things they wanted. By 1969 weekly earnings had risen 130% but prices only 63%. This could explain widespread fashion and youth culture.
During the sixties though there was a lot of international mistrust, it was the era of the cold war. Many incidents occurred, such as the Cuban missile crisis, and Vietnam. The memories of these events still leave their mark today. The space race was also a key point for international mistrust there was great sadness during the sixties, the death of president Kennedy and the persecution of black Americans. But also times of joy like when England won the world cup.
No one can deny that the 1960’s were definitely a time of change. A change in the fashion world, the musical world. The sixties produced some of the best musicians ever to be seen, such as Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton. A change in the way black people were treated in America and a change in attitude towards young people all over the world. In these respects it could be called ‘the swinging sixties’ but in others maybe not. Things such as Vietnam I don’t think could be considered ‘swinging’.
So in conclusion I would say that the sixties was a mixed decade with its ups and down but from what I have read and seen I wouldn’t say that everything about it was as swinging as some people make it out to be.
Payam Gammage