A fine piece. Chronologically, I'm a boomer but I'm really an early Gen-X. It is surely baffling the way so many of the icons seem to have lost their way. In many ways the early/mid-boomers were the beneficiaries of an historical economic boom. They got comfortable, rich even in many cases and had things/life to lose. There seems to be some truth in the 'easy times make soft men' meme, too. Thank you.
"It is surely baffling the way so many of the icons seem to have lost their way. In many ways the early/mid-boomers were the beneficiaries of an historical economic boom."
You ask and answer the question we all have asked ourselves, Mark, with two insightful sentences.
Follow the money and consider the accrual of influence.
The so-called "rebels" of our youth were outraged, but only because their moral calculus was that inculcated by the very generation they despised.
Like their parents, they managed to obtain a measure of wealth, that they naturally wished to conserve.
As youthful rebels, they decried what they saw as "selling out" (I was there, and no wiser than they.) What their parents and the "sellouts" all 'round them were becoming was "invested."
All revolutions reflect the self-interest of the revolutionaries.
Who were the "dissidents?" They were largely the privileged children of the petit bourgeoisie and higher-earning proletariat, university students.
What we have witnessed with our countercultural icons is nothing more than the eternal investiture, the arc of everyday conservatism that has been the hallmark of maturation throughout history.
This is not to say that overmuch of the core message was spurious or amoral, but the only reason for its putative novelty was the correlation with accelerated rates of technological change. Even so, the fly in the ointment was the embrace of a Utopian view of perfectibility.
That notion of perfectibility manifested itself in a notable absence of compassion. The result of our generation's hedonic diaspora within the bureaucratic mechanisms of corporation and state, has been a reinforcement of empathy as a foundational principle. We're watching our society fragment as a consequence of this. Empathy requires shared experience to activate an association with sympathy and compassion. In other words, the "dissidence" of yesteryear was little more than a reversion to tribalism.
Emerson says it best, in his essay on Self-Reliance.
I have a vinyl collection consisting of some seven thousand records, and the entire CSNY canon, along with their solo works, is contained within it. Watching the members embrace a murderous ideology that tramples individual rights and freedoms underfoot, has been a poignant reminder to separate the art from the artist.
I did not burn the CSNY canon portion of my collection, only because artists are flawed creatures, however sublime the results of their artistic endeavors. In time, I may be able to listen to their music once again, after the memory of the musicians' perfidy fades.
Only greedy ideologues and cultists engage in the removal and destruction of works of art.
That said, Mr. Marks' eulogy of the troubled troubadour is a fine piece of writing.
Rest in peace, David, and thanks for all the music.
This is an excellent essay. I read it after long predawn hours writing my own long winding post inspired by David Crosby. The question you pose in the first paragraph took a wildly different form in my own post.
I ended up explaining our whole generation as trauma survivors trapped within this warrior culture dominated by the military industrial complex. Born from fire - incendiary.
Good article. Shame they took the bait...line hook and sinker
A fine piece. Chronologically, I'm a boomer but I'm really an early Gen-X. It is surely baffling the way so many of the icons seem to have lost their way. In many ways the early/mid-boomers were the beneficiaries of an historical economic boom. They got comfortable, rich even in many cases and had things/life to lose. There seems to be some truth in the 'easy times make soft men' meme, too. Thank you.
"It is surely baffling the way so many of the icons seem to have lost their way. In many ways the early/mid-boomers were the beneficiaries of an historical economic boom."
You ask and answer the question we all have asked ourselves, Mark, with two insightful sentences.
Follow the money and consider the accrual of influence.
The so-called "rebels" of our youth were outraged, but only because their moral calculus was that inculcated by the very generation they despised.
Like their parents, they managed to obtain a measure of wealth, that they naturally wished to conserve.
As youthful rebels, they decried what they saw as "selling out" (I was there, and no wiser than they.) What their parents and the "sellouts" all 'round them were becoming was "invested."
All revolutions reflect the self-interest of the revolutionaries.
Who were the "dissidents?" They were largely the privileged children of the petit bourgeoisie and higher-earning proletariat, university students.
What we have witnessed with our countercultural icons is nothing more than the eternal investiture, the arc of everyday conservatism that has been the hallmark of maturation throughout history.
This is not to say that overmuch of the core message was spurious or amoral, but the only reason for its putative novelty was the correlation with accelerated rates of technological change. Even so, the fly in the ointment was the embrace of a Utopian view of perfectibility.
That notion of perfectibility manifested itself in a notable absence of compassion. The result of our generation's hedonic diaspora within the bureaucratic mechanisms of corporation and state, has been a reinforcement of empathy as a foundational principle. We're watching our society fragment as a consequence of this. Empathy requires shared experience to activate an association with sympathy and compassion. In other words, the "dissidence" of yesteryear was little more than a reversion to tribalism.
Emerson says it best, in his essay on Self-Reliance.
I have a vinyl collection consisting of some seven thousand records, and the entire CSNY canon, along with their solo works, is contained within it. Watching the members embrace a murderous ideology that tramples individual rights and freedoms underfoot, has been a poignant reminder to separate the art from the artist.
I did not burn the CSNY canon portion of my collection, only because artists are flawed creatures, however sublime the results of their artistic endeavors. In time, I may be able to listen to their music once again, after the memory of the musicians' perfidy fades.
Only greedy ideologues and cultists engage in the removal and destruction of works of art.
That said, Mr. Marks' eulogy of the troubled troubadour is a fine piece of writing.
Rest in peace, David, and thanks for all the music.
You are such a great writer! Thank you for sharing your ponderings with me!
How many more? Indeed.
At this point I am so disappointed in my generation I can’t find forgiveness or understanding yet. Someday...
This is an excellent essay. I read it after long predawn hours writing my own long winding post inspired by David Crosby. The question you pose in the first paragraph took a wildly different form in my own post.
I ended up explaining our whole generation as trauma survivors trapped within this warrior culture dominated by the military industrial complex. Born from fire - incendiary.