Hippie Documentry On The History Channel

And you would know because?? you are 43 years old wich means you were 3 in 67. not old enough to truley understand what was going on. hell i dont know what was going on then cos i'm only 20. the only people i have to learn from about then is s.h. and wlzev.

 

wow, i guess you told me..

 

oh,btw if ya dig deep into them old fart threads like to the first of last year(maybe end of 05) you will find a lot of spirited conversations about the reality of the 60's,it wernt all peacenicks all about peace an love, an yes SH was involved so then you can take it as fact if you wish to believe only her....

 

Well I knew it wasn't a giant picnic...I just didn't like the fact that they only focused on the bad.

 

have you ever considered that they may have devoted time to what was truly relevant to the period and thats why the bad far outweighed the good???

 

I saw it. It did show a lot of the negatives of the times. It did not go into the subject of what made the younger people band together for their cause. It pretty much said LSD started the hippie movement which is not true. In the 50's younger people were to be seen and not heard and in the 60's the hippies let the world know that the younger people had much to say and had new ideas and the "establishment" did not want this. Our nation had much turmoil in this era. Violence was everywhere with the civil right's movement and the Vietnam War. I was taught not to fight but to talk things out as a child and when the war started I asked my Dad why the adults didn't talk things out instead of fighting and he really couldn't answer me. It seems that the drugs of that time got the most attention instead of the movement itself. Drugs have been a part of our nation's society way before the 60's. They were very prevelant back in the 20 and 30's. I did enjoy the video from the show. I would have loved to have been a part of it all back then, but I was just a child. This era gave us so much. Especially the music and a voice.

 

just out of curiosity eli,what is it you wish they would have focused more on?

 

I guess the ideals of the Hippies...and maybe the music, which wasn't that relevant. All stuff may be true but the way they focused it was a let down.

 

well unfortunately from what ive learned over the years from my older siblings,elders etc. many of those labled "hippies" of the day, ideals were questionable at best.. really not much different than todays reality...

as hard as some try the truth is still there,the few big events that shaped the 60's in todays youths eyes were a little bitty piece of a much bigger reality..

even the summer of love has deep dark horrible tales of the harsh reality of san fran an berkley that fabled summer..

ya cant make it what it wasnt..

 

hey i dont have my eyes closed mate let me tell you. and no i dont just belive sh i just think she very knoledgeable. every one has their own view on the sixties just like every one has their own opinions on what it is to be a hippie. god yeah i know that the sixties was just like the eighties,the nineties, today, the 50's the 40's etc etc. but from what i can gather, back then in the hippie comunities,people were trying to change strait america. and are still doing their bit today. anyways i'm rambeling.. i just dont see why you are seeing the negitive side of things...

 

whatever you say.. its not worth the effort,, you go ahead and dwell on what was 5% of the true 60's ..


im sure the powers that be love it..

 

I watched it. I dunno though man out of the 2 hours i remember only saying charles manson for about 3 minutes, they focussed on good stuff too. i thought it was interesting.

 

i grew up as a 60s hippy....this presentation sux as as documentaries go.....this resembles something produced by fascist rupert murdoch's fox news....
this smacks totally of what an ann coulter-type fascist would submit to rudy giuliani's propaganda machine

 

This documentary was a vicious slur, and it abandoned the difference between obective and subjective truth. It really abused The History Channel's tautological position.

It shows pictures of hippies, but it doesn't show what hippies did. America promises freedom, and the hippies took it, freedoms of body, mind, consciousness, religion. The History Channel wants to punish them for it, by creating speculative conclusions.

A sick freak wrote this who thinks they can make things true when they say declarative sentences where they can't receive an immediate response. The president does that all the time and it upsets me, because sometimes it works when people aren't paying attention. The fact that you guys aren't livid means to me you weren't paying attention.

They tried to villify John Lennon. They brought up the time he said he was Jesus, whereas most people mainly recall how America has loved the Beatles for decades. The owner of the Republican-slanted Washington Times sas he's Jesus like he means it every day - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61932-2004Jun22.html but the History Channel doesn't seem to cover that too much. A few shots later, Ronald Reagan comes on screen, and they literaly played Yankee Doodle. That is nakedly biased.

The hippies gave themselves the freedoms that America promises, and if you don't like it or think that's dangerous that's your problem. My thumbnail analysis of this docmentary is they took a look at the freedoms of religion, consciousness, sexuality, from that decade and tried to imagine a dark side as a result of that. They didn't even seem to notice that these people owned their own bodies and their own souls as a movement that history would be hard put to shut down. This documentary did feelhe need to silence that for some reason.

The president did the same thing here, rewriting history where he tried to speculate about what should've happened if the US won the war --
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/23/3348/
as if we hadn't lost, as if some extra years and extra innings would have somehow materialized - meanwhile, whatever happened, twenty or thirty years ater Vietnam needed us for trade.

Anyway, this documentary really had nothing to do with teaching, and it made me feel scummy.

 

The second part of this article-
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976999930
was about the regret the hippies interviewed had for being involved in the project. One mentions they cut one of his answers off in mid thought and spliced it with new footage.

Who were the so-called experts they used on this show?
I think one of them was from "The National Review" or something like that - that's not somebody you go to get an analysis, that's somebody who comes to you to tell you why you whould be a hard line right winger.

 

I finally got to see most of it......I thought it was generic. It was so bad, I couldn't finish it!! It really seemed souless and just........awful (for lack of a better term). I agree that it had nothing to do with teaching. It seemed like it was more of a stereotyping slideshow.....

 

I cant put it quite so elegantly myself, but I agree!! It was lame and generic....

 

I already made this post haha. My brother and I watched it sunday and we both hated it. I almost didn't finish it. I felt that they only focused on the negative parts of the Hippie movement. I loved wavy gravy though and mountain girl. It was a big let down and very depressing. I hated how they acted like the hippies were gone after 68 that made no sense to me. I am not saying that there isn't truths in what they were saying but I feel that should have focused on the good aspects of the movement.

 

We saw it as a hostile report........Charlie Manson is not the face of the movement.

I dont know how anybody from, National Review could have anything constructive to say on the subject? Why were those clips even included?
The time given to NR colluminist: was it Richard Brookheiser? could have been given to filmclips and such. would have liked to see more about the music stars and concert promoters of the early era. The be-ins, the acid tests.

 

and this sunday on the history channel its a 2 hour special covering 1968.