Latest Entries »

The hippie movement creates changes for the world

Post Magazine: “There once was a Guru from Rishnikesh” (Pg 23) By: Lewis Lapham

The New York Times: “Phantoms Will Not Bring Peace” October 1, 1969

The Austin-American Statesmen: “Narcotics Conference Will Meet” (pg 2) May 17, 1969

 

By Kelsey Daubner

The 1960’s were a pivotal time in United States history. This era produced a new attitude towards life. One in which drugs, peace, and new fashion was on the rise. The counterculture hippies rose in an attempt to prevent war and promote peace. Their care-free, love-all outlook towards life was something the world had never seen before, and completely rebelled against the straight-laced America before. To some this adjustment to these new “people” was a difficult one. The media did not hesitate to report about these counterculture hippies.

 Drug Use

When it comes to researching the hippie era, there was an abundance of material regarding the abuse of drugs. Before this time period, America had not really seen coverage on drug use. In looking through the university archives, there were several reports of drug busts in dormitories on the South West Texas campus. The most reports were about students smoking marijuana and taking LSD. A few articles were written about taking “bennies” to help with studying for exams. The effects of these Bennies were so strong that they were causing students to make stupid mistakes on tests. A writer of the University Star wrote about a federal drug abuse aid visiting the campus. In the article the writer said, “In the case of LSD, the user may find that his pupils are so widely dilated that the user may protect himself against the light with dark glasses, even at night.” I noticed that the coverage on drug use was not dramatic and almost seemed like a normal part of life. A 1968 article in Post Magazine about an Indian guru named Maharishi and his transcendental meditation referred to drug use as a casual, part of life kind of act. An example would be a snippet in the same article from your stereotypical hippie of the generation, Kip Cohen. The article says Cohen was part of the zen thing and experimented with various drugs. He regarded the drug scene as necessary, but an intermediate stage in the expansion of the mind. Also, when browsing through The Austin Statesmen, I found the law trying in many issues to put a stop to the immense drug use. They did this by holding conferences to bring awareness to the damaging effects that people would face after doing drugs. Today we have classes in school for that, but these new products in the sixties were sold with no warnings or previous knowledge behind them. This is why an abundance of conferences were held. One article in particular stood out from the Austin Statesman. This article, “Narcotic Conference Will Meet”, was to promote the crisis conference on Drugs and Narcotics with a handful of speakers. The speakers spoke about the medical aspects, political situation regarding the problem, and the psychology behind taking drugs. I was most surprised to find a small article in the Austin Statesmen about the finding of thousands of people abusing codeine-based cough syrups in which hundreds of cough syrups were being sold by the carton.

 The Anti-War/Peace Movement     

Hippies were known to be peace-makers. There was plenty of material on this subject, and I think that is because there had been so much violence up to the 60’s. A revolution began in the sense that people were more humane and civil than ever before. Post magazine makes a good point in one of their issues when stating that the parents of the hippie generation grew up during a rough time for America, The Depression. Therefore, they know you have to work hard to succeed in order to make it. Their children grow up having the things they want due to their parent’s success and they no longer believe in working hard for money. To them it is not about the best paying job, it’s about doing the right thing. People began accepting others for their differences. A huge part of the peace movement was protesting against the war in Vietnam, but at the same token I was surprised to find that protests and movements were happening all over the world. The fight between races was dissipating slowly. There was an article in the

 

peace demonstrators

AP Images- Associated Press. Peace demonstrators fill Fulton Street in San Francisco April 15, 1967 during their five-mile march through the city.


Fashion

University Star following Martin Luther King   Jr.’s death, in which a select group of students were mourning in the quad on a Friday afternoon to bring light to his death. This time there was a still a bad taste in some American’s mouths when it came to the fair treatment of all races, such as some of the professors. As anyone would suspect, Texas had a hard time adjusting to the acceptance of other ethnicities into society. There was also a strong urge for hippies to protest against the Vietnam War, which the media covered quite frequently. An article in the University Star states, “Approximately 12 men and women from the Austin school arrived on motorcycle and in cars around 2 p.m. to find out why the students of SWTexas could not protest the U.S. policy in Viet Nam.” I found an article in the New York Times about an anti-war demonstration in Rockefeller plaza where six women scattered secret service documents across the ground. This demonstration in particular was popular among the press, probably because it was woman and especially because the women ended up standing in front of a judge in court. I read a few articles in the New York Times about foreign countries facing issues mainly about religion, but the peace demonstration were gaining the most press. One of these issues in the same newspaper quoted Albert Einstein during an article about the Arabs wanting a just settlement with the United States. Einstein says, “Peace cannot be achieved by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.” This simple quote really sums up the peace movement during the 1960’s.

The counterculture hippies started transforming their looks. Short bobs transformed into long tresses. Fringe, flower headbands, long dresses, and psychedelic looking clothing became popular. One University Star article was about the invention of the bikini. This look was new to people of this generation and caught on mostly with hippies, who had no shame showing skin. Post magazine makes a short mention that during the Guru’s meditation session the women would come wearing flowers in their hair.

 

“People wanted to be different and daring. People started wearing loud, vibrant colors.”

 

  

fashion

AP Images- fashion designer Mary Quant, right, waves as she poses with models wearing her Mod creations Oct. 25, 1968.

 

 

 

Kelsey Daubner is a journalism junior at Texas State University. She can be reached by  email at Kdaubner1@aol.com

Peace, Love, Revolution

Source: wikipedia

Source: wikipedia

By Francisco Lugo

About the movement

America’s golden age is typically imagined as the classical 1950’s lifestyle of the nuclear family, the suburban home, and the traditional roles of men and women to conform to this ideal. With the development of baby boomers into teenagers during the 1960’s however, the status quo came to be challenged by those people we call hippies who had had enough of the conservative traditional values they felt were being pushed onto them.

Hippies were all about breaking down societal norms and establishing their own ideas of what culture and living should be. They were very much antiestablishment and felt that corporate businesses and government created many of the problems that society faced such as war and living for money.

They dabbled in drugs, they wore flowers in their hair, the men grew out their beards, and women were encouraged to express their sexuality freely. They protested war and lived in communes, which were basically villages or compounds where people would divide tasks and live self-sustaining lifestyles.

I had never asked anybody that had lived through that time period what they thought of the hippie movement and so I talked to my grandparents about it. Although they had lived in Mexico during the time, they had heard much about the movement through media such as television and newspapers.

“All I know is that they seemed like a bunch of wanderers; vagabonds I guess you would say,” said my grandmother.

“Hippies just wanted to smoke weed and be left alone,” said my grandfather.

After this brief yet insightful mini interview, I had quickly learned that not everyone was exactly supportive of the movement. Politicians feared that hippies  Though it is true that drugs and homelessness were a large part of being a hippie, there was much more to their ideas and dreams.

 

Important places, events and figures of the movement

Of course with the rise of a major movement, comes the rise of important voices and faces along with it. As I briefly mentioned before, a big part of hippie culture was drugs. They would often go to concerts and festivals where they would take multitudes of drugs and explore their consciousness and sexuality. Another big aspect of the counterculture also involved  the idea of “free love”, which encouraged people to be with whoever they want whenever they want, a major change from the traditions of past America.

Big names such as Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane and Carlos Santana mesmerized the crowds of LSD tripping hippies with their music at various festivals, often under the influence of LSD and other drugs themselves.

In 1967, the Human Be-In at San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park was the first large scale concert of the hippie movement where hundreds of people were high on drugs, with many of the aforementioned artists participating in the festivities. Because of the success of this concert, it laid down the foundation for arguably the most famous event of the entire movement; Woodstock. Held in Bethel, New York, Woodstock was a massive musical event. An estimated 500,000 people attended the concert which spanned four days.

For more details you can look at my sources here and here as well as the archives of the NY Times and Time Magazine.

Francisco Lugo is a Journalism Major at Texas State University. 

New York Times poorly covered historic Woodstock Music Festival

By Joe Teagle

New York Times August 12, 1969 edition
New York Times August 13, 1969 edition
New York Times August 14, 1969 edition
New York Times August 15, 1969 edition
New York Times August 16, 1969 edition
New York Times August 17, 1969 edition
New York Times August 18, 1969 edition

Historic Music Festival poorly covered by New York Times

Woodstock is one of the most memorable and important concerts in U.S. history, although you wouldn’t be able to tell by New York Times’ original coverage.

There was little to no mention of the massive festival in the week leading up to the concert. Most news coverage during the week leading up to Woodstock focused on the Vietnam War, President Richard M. Nixon, and the astronauts returning home from the moon.

The first article I found on Woodstock was in the August 15 edition of the New York Times – the first day of the festival. It mentions that 346 policemen who were contracted to usher the event walked off their jobs. It also mentioned the overcrowding at bus terminals and the enormous lines to get to the concert. Most of the coverage on this day had an aura of unease.

“There was little to no mention of the massive festival
in the week leading up to the concert.”

 

New York Times fails to grasp significance of Woodstock Music Festival

On August 16, the second day of the concert, the coverage was mostly about jammed roads. Excessive numbers of people led to completely backed up roads for the entire weekend. The number of arrests, and ways to control the crowds were also discussed heavily. The significance of the event still wasn’t understood, and the primary discussion centered on the inconvenience of Woodstock.

 

New York Times shows up late to massive Woodstock Music Festival

“the young people came in droves, camping in the woods, romping in the mud,
talking, smoking and listening to the wailing music.”

On August 17, Woodstock drew front-page coverage. Again, the music festival was mostly portrayed in a negative light. According to the New York Times, what drove people to the event was “the prospect of drugs and the excitement of making the scene.” A report by the Times described the scene:“the young people came in droves, camping in the woods, romping in the mud, talking, smoking and listening to the wailing music.” The Times also described the unsanitary living conditions during the festival days, the mud-covered teenagers, the badly-manufactured drugs and the lack of food at the event. Youth was portrayed negatively once again on the 17th, with reports describing youths on the road who were “panhandling for narcotics.”

Many attendees left early, so there were several interviews in the the Times on Aug. 17th. One girl remarked “we’re vestiges of our former selves.”

“My husband and I just wanted to see what it was.”

The Times did a good job of showing both sides of the story on Aug. 17, offering both positive and negative aspects of the event. One woman who was quoted remarked, “My husband and I just wanted to see what it was. We thought it would be pretty music and pretty land to camp on. But it’s terrible. I wish we could get out.”

The New York Times should have strived for more evenhanded coverage of this event. It was only on the last day of the event that “the other side of the story” was told. Throughout the event, reporters should have gathered more interviews and investigation. Perhaps interviewing youth in the week leading up to Woodstock, as well as getting negative reactions from policemen and parents would have produced more informative stories.

Click here for a collection of Woodstock movie clips, covering several of the famous musicians.

Swami Satchidananda giving the opening speech. The crowd at Woodstock was massive. Photo credited to Mike Goff.

Swami Satchidananda giving the opening speech. The crowd at Woodstock was massive. Photo credited to Mike Goff.

 

Swami Satchidananda giving the opening speech. The crowd at Woodstock was massive. Photo credited to Mike Goff

Joe Teagle is a senior at Texas State University. Email him or follow him on Twitter.

Twiggy: Androgyny, and the Face of an Era

By: Jacqueline Lege’

London, UK, The Sunday Times April 2, 1967  p.51

The Sunday Times, March 26, 1967 p. 33

The New York Times, April 4, 1967 p. 44

Seventeen Magazine, November 1967: Twiggy Lashes by Yardley, p. 32

Seventeen Magazine, September 1967: H.I.S. for Her, p. 35

 

twiggy by yardley

1 Photography by Seventeen Magazine p. 32

What does “Twiggy” mean?

Ask an American newspaper in the Sixties, and the answer is a description of her frail body. Ask Seventeen magazine advertisers, and it’s a description of her eyelashes. In virtually every magazine and newspaper ad directed to youth fashions, there was a girl with at least Twiggy’s eyelashes, if not her mop-top as well. Now, in 2014, Twiggy is defined as any frail, heavily made-up young girl. Her style and image was pervasive in the fashion world, and even when she moved on from the world of modeling, those images stuck with the rest of the world.

 

The Swinging ‘60s

Culture grows, matures and changes despite a nation’s economic, political, and sociologic status. In the 60’s, Americans were buffeted by the Vietnam War and the death of a President John F. Kennedy, as well as complex social problems arising from racism. People were eagerly consuming culture, and part of that culture was fashion.

Fashion has been important to humanity for centuries. It reflects cultural standards and provides an avenue for self-expression. Fashion requires disposable income in American culture as well as others, and thus can be used as an emblem of status. Fashion in the 60s reflected the complexity of its era: different hairstyles; revolutionary cuts and lines of clothing and fabric; make-up; pop-art prints. The conflicting ideologies in the Sixties created completely new styles. The fashionable use of androgyny, a theme epitomized by the popularity of Twiggy, is an example of a new style. Twiggy was often characterized as waifish and elfin, not only due to her thin physique but also because of her pixie haircut. This combination made her resemble a young boy, and because she was popular and accepted, this provided an avenue for others to experiment with dressing in-between genders.

Twiggy was named the “Face of ‘66” by The London Daily Express at the beginning of her career, and her popularity exploded in London. Within a year, London newspapers could be seen casually referring to her style as a basis of comparison, while America called her the fist “child star of high fashion.”

 

h.i.s.

2 Photography by Seventeen Magazine p. 35

 Androgyny as a Fashionable Choice

By 1967, it was known Twiggy had a certain charm to her: in a The Sunday Times article about fashion’s latest “in” being girls wearing feminized versions of masculine party dress, Twiggy was referenced as the “why” by anthropologist James Laver. It was game-over for the hearts of fashion conscious consumers. Twiggy had left England, crossed the pond, and started modeling in America, and appeared on things from Newsweek to Seventeen Magazine. America was transitioning from the 50s era of “set” hairstyles, curlers, rollers, and long skirts to the 60s short shorts, minidresses, and pixie cuts.

Newsweek, April 10, 1967: “Her figure belongs to the youngest of Venus’ handmaidens, not to Venus herself: four straight limbs in search of a woman’s body, a mini-bosom trapped in perpetual puberty, the frail torso of the teen-age choirboy…”

Another example of androgyny’s effect was that of the “shift dress.” This dress was short, often with a print or a collar, and no discernable shape of the body because it hung from the shoulders. This is in stark contrast to the two-piece top and tight-waisted skirts of the 50s, which would show at least the width of one’s hips, a classic sign of fertility.

Jacqueline Lege’ is a junior journalism student who was raised by parents born in the 60s and who infused their tastes into one little human.

The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy

By Caelan Bernal

New York Times, June 6 1968, front page

AP Photo by Charlie Tasnadi

AP Photo by Charlie Tasnadi

The assassination of Robert F. Kennedy on June 6, 1968, was national news, so it should be reported in every news outlet that is planning commemorative coverage of the 1960s. I looked at the coverage of The New York Times from Thursday, June 6, 1968: the day of the assassination.

Page 1 of the New York Times is mostly dedicated to the assassination. Two separate images on the front page depict Kennedy; one from right after Kennedy was assassinated, lying on the floor, dead or dying and the other a headshot of Kennedy. The images are in black and white. Besides those two pictures there aren’t any other graphics on the page.

Front page of the New York Times

Several columns of stories riddle the front page, making it look very busy, graphically seaking, the layout doesn’t attract the eye to any one story in particular. The focus seems to be on the actual news, running several stories in narrow columns. By contrast, The New York Times’ front page from the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, is much more orderly, and the pictures take up more space. The order of the newspaper makes it easier to read as opposed to the fragmented stories of the 1969 edition. The differing styles of the newspapers from the two time periods are not only obvious, but interesting. Newspapers today are friendlier, aimed at trying to grab the viewer’s eye and keeping it. The older issue of the New York Times from 1968 doesn’t look as reader-friendly, and the layout isn’t as well-organized.

Headline from 1968

The headline is different from the ones found today in both content and size. It is lengthy and packed with as much information that the editors could fit into it. It reads: “KENNEDY IS DEAD, VICTIM OF ASSASSIN; SUSPECT, ARAB IMMIGRANT, ARRAIGNED; JOHNSON APPOINTS PANNEL ON VIOLENCE”. This headline seems longer than most and full of information. The part about Johnson appointing the panel on violence doesn’t seem as pertinent to the rest of the story. If the headline were written today, it wouldn’t be as long and would only include the most important parts of the information. Also The Times describes the assassin as an “Arab”. I don’t know if the paper was aware of the specific country of origin, but it is now known he is Palestinian, of Jordanian citizenship. After searching the AP Stylebook, I am still unsure if Arab is the correct term or even politically correct.

The lead and story

The dateline and lead read as follows: “Los Angeles, Thursday, June 6–Senator Robert F. Kennedy, the brother of a murdered President, died at 1:44 A.M. today of an assassin’s shots.” His brother, John F. Kennedy, was assassinated only 5 years prior. Robert is named only in reference to “murdered president” which gives it a different context or feeling than merely “assassinated president”. Also, dying from the “assassin’s shot” is an interesting way to word this. Again I looked it up in the AP stylebook but I couldn’t find any more information. It is strange to see wording like this. The rest of the story seems to be standard news writing.

New York Times, June 6, 1968, from the Alkek Microfilm Collection

New York Times, June 6, 1968, from the Alkek Microfilm Collection

Swingers in the ’60s

Swingers in the Sixties

By Michelle Collums

In the later 1960s “Make Love Not War,” was at the center of anti-war slogans used by Vietnam War protesters. The public’s disapproval of America’s war efforts caused a multitude of protests and culture shifts. Among these shifts was the “free love” movement adopted by the youth culture that pbs.org describes as, “the ultimate rejection of capitalist culture,” on their American Experience documentary page.

What’s a swinger?

I asked Kelly Collums what exactly a swinger is, she replied that, “They were people who had open relationships… some swingers would even be bisexual in their swing. But it’s basically a person who’s very free with their sexuality which is a part of the free love mentality… they believed it was natural to have these sexual desires, and it was an expression of your primal self.”

“They” were a part of the younger generation in the late ‘60s, tending to coincide with the hippie culture. In The New York Times they were talked about as if they were just another subculture of America. “Swingers Act Like Squares,” was just one of the nonchalant headlines where it seemed that they were a fact of life.

“Even when I was growing up, having casual sex was not as big of a deal, because there were no indications of any diseases that could threaten your life like there are today,” Collums said.

The Swinger Reputation

“Free Love” was the freedom for men and women alike to be able to act upon the sexual desires that humans had repressed for generations.

In The New York Times Aug. 2 1967 one of the headlines read, “For Swingers and Their Grandmothers, Body Paint Is In,” The way the writers address the hippies and swingers seems to be almost nonchalant, as if they are truly trying to keep an objective viewpoint.

“Body painting is a free service for patrons of the Electric Circus, a psychedelic discotheque at 23 St. Mark’s Place in East Village… When Miss Phillips is painted however, she usually has the designs put on the top of her feet so they’re visible through her leather sandals. ‘What chic, terrific, ankle ornaments!’” wrote Judy Klemesrud.

Here, Judy Smith participates in “The Summer of Love” where thousands gathered at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco on June 21, 1967.

Here, Judy Smith participates in “The Summer of Love” where thousands gathered at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco on June 21, 1967.

(AP Photo by Robert W. Klein)

 

Writing Isn’t So Different After All

The difference between writing styles now and 50 years ago is not that different, aside from the trendy words like “psychedelic,” the newspaper seemed a little jumbled in general and didn’t flow well. Ads took up the majority of the pages while the tiny font squeezed into the extra spaces left behind in The New York Times.

Some suggestions for other publications would be for them to interview some people who participated in the free love movement and how they feel about their decisions now. Did they contract any lifelong diseases? Were there any long-term effects from having a lot of casual sex, especially for women? How were their lives changed from the Free Love movement?

Possible headlines could read, “Free Love: Was it Worth the Cost?”, or “Sixties Swingers Speak Out”.

 

 

Analyzing Tragedy: Coverage of Lee Harvey Oswald in November 1963

Analyzing Tragedy: Coverage of Lee Harvey Oswald in November 1963

By James Palmer

This article contains content from newspapers printed in the days following President John F. Kennedy’s assassination on Nov. 22, 1963.

Lee Harvey Oswald

"Oswald, Lee Harvey: holding a Russian newspaper and a rifle"

“Oswald, Lee Harvey: holding a Russian newspaper and a rifle”

“Oswald, Lee Harvey: holding a Russian newspaper and a rifle”. Photo by Donald Uhrbrock—Time Life Pictures/Getty Images

http://www.britannica.com/media/full/129259

Sources:

Last-Minute News: York City and County, Pa., Nov. 24, 1963

Austin American-Statesman: Austin, Texas, Nov. 23, 1963

Dallas Morning News: Dallas, Texas, Nov. 23, 1963

New York Times: New York, New York, Nov. 23, Nov. 24, 1963

On Nov. 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald changed the course of history when he aimed his single-shot rifle at President John F. Kennedy’s motorcade and assassinated him from the fifth floor of the Texas Textbook Depository in Dallas. (This theory on the assassination has not been proven, but it is the most common theory regarding Kennedy’s death.) Oswald became a household name overnight, and profiles of him were printed in newspapers across the country. After searching through vintage newspapers, microfilms, and PDF files, I became interested in comparing the coverage of Lee Harvey Oswald’s personal profile in the days after Kennedy’s assassination.

Last-Minute News

The Sunday edition of the York, Pa. Last-Minute News profiled Oswald with this headline on Page 3: “LEE HARVEY OSWALD . . . . A Loner…Held Radical Views…Not A Troublemaker.” While the paper was sure to make clear Oswald’s leftist sympathies and affiliations — calling him both “a Communist” and “a Marxist” and noting that his wife was Russian — the article also described him as tidy and “not a nut” (as indicated by the story’s subheads).

The paper also included a quote from Oswald’s mother, who said that she was, “. . .broken hearted about this. He is really a good boy.”

Austin American-Statesman

The Statesman focused primarily on Oswald’s Russian and Cuban affiliations in the article, “Pro-Castroite Seized As Suspect in Killing.” Writer Merriman Smith of UPI offers a physical description of Oswald and describes him as “chairman of a local ‘Fair Play for Cuba’ committee.”

After Oswald’s physical description, the article mentioned no other details about him other than his failed defection from America to Russia in 1959.

The Dallas Morning News

Francis Raffetto of the Dallas Morning News attempted to distance the city of Dallas from the tragedy with the story and its headline, “‘Act of Maniac’ Not Tied to City: Cabell.” In the story, Raffetto quotes Mayor Earle Cabell on the situation.

“There are maniacs all over the world and in every city of the world. This was a maniac. It could have happened in Podunk as well as in Dallas,” Cabell said. “I challenge anybody who said this reflects the character of the people of Dallas, he continued, “‘This was the horrible action of a mentally deranged person.’”

The New York Times

The lengthy New York Times article gets the highest marks for its profile of Oswald. In Gladwin Hill’s article, “Leftist Accused,” Hill actually has quotes from Oswald, wherein Oswald explains that he “. . .became interested about the age of 15. An old lady handed [him] a pamphlet about saving the Rosenbergs,” and that was where his interest in Marxism began. The article also includes quotes from family members, including the bewildered quote from Oswald’s mother (mentioned in the Last-Minute News article). This issue (and others associate with the Kennedy assassination) can be viewed in PDF form on their website.

Analysis

During my research, I noticed a spectrum of favor toward Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mayor Cabell’s statement differs drastically from the Last-Minute News article, in which it was reported that Oswald was lucid and coherent during questioning after Kennedy’s assassination. The New York Times article varies greatly from the Austin American-Statesman article in the amount of detail spent characterizing Oswald. Starting from the most and ending in the least favorable: the spectrum of favor proceeds as follows:

  1. Last-Minute News Nov. 24, 1963: “LEE HARVEY OSWALD . . . . A Loner…Held Radical Views…Not A Troublemaker”This article appeared to be the most sympathetic to Oswald of any that I studied. The testimonies the writer used favored the notion that Oswald was just an average, quiet young man; not a dangerous assassin.
  2. New York Times Nov. 23, 1963: “Leftist Accused”Hill’s article seemed to be the most neutral of the stories featuring Oswald. The article discussed his past, got first-hand quotes, and consulted numerous outside sources to corroborate Oswald’s character. Overall, the Times article best explained the many facets of this tragic event in history.
  3. Austin American-Statesman Nov. 23, 1963: “Pro-Castroite Seized As Suspect in Killing”The goal of this article seemed to be to create as strong an association as possible between Oswald and Communism. The Statesman focused mainly on Oswald’s Marxist ideas and his defecting to Russia in 1959. It did not quote family members in any story I came across.
  4. Dallas Morning News Nov. 23, 1963: “‘Act of Maniac’ Not Tied to City: Cabell”This article was clearly meant to be a soapbox for the Dallas mayor to attack and dissociate from Oswald. The article features several quotes from Mayor Cabell, mainly vocalizing his criticism of Oswald’s Communist associations and beliefs. The article appears to be meant as a blanket attack not just on Oswald’s actions, but on Communism as a whole. This is why I viewed this article as least favorable toward Oswald.

Author Credit

Last-Minute News: The article printed in the Sunday edition of the Last-Minute news was a syndicated story done by the Associated Press. No byline was provided for this article.

The New York Times: Gladwin Hill was a writer for the New York Times from 1946 to 1968. The article mentioned in this one was among his most noteworthy pieces.

Austin American-Statesman: Merriman Smith was a UPI reporter during the 1960s. His most famous work was during the Kennedy assassination.

The Dallas Morning News: Francis Raffetto was a writer for the Dallas Morning News in the 1960s.

Did Art really Pop?

By Justus Scarver

 

Oh, the sixties. “Rebellion” often comes to mind, when that period of history is brought up. Quite frankly, there might not be a more fitting name to describe the happenings of the 1960s in the United States of America. As the mindsets of younger generations distanced themselves from those of their conservative parents, a creative explosion took place in the arts. What defined the “value” of art became marred and very objective, as the spirit of New York’s youth propelled pop art into the lime light. However, there’s an obviously over-critical tone to a majority of the articles written – by the New York Times, at least – that denies the reader a more open, natural introduction to the subject matter.

 

Beginnings
In its early-American beginnings, pop artists set out to bring attention to symbols, and images, that were very much commonplace in the mid-20th century. At first, critics(specifically here) interpreted it as placing a necessary spotlight on symbols who have lost their meaning; in hopes to encourage viewers to reflect on aspects of society. At face value, the art showcased pictures that the average American would immediately recognize – which led to popularity coupled with criticism. The upper echelon of art was very hesitant to respect pop art due to the simplicity of printing images. However, after seeing them in person and further inspection, many opinions were swayed. They discovered the meaning didn’t lie in the print, but in what was printed.

 

Dorothy Lichtenstein, widow of artist Roy Lichtenstein, poses beside her husband's artwork, a 1963 oil and magna on canvas, Whaam! during the preview of  his first major exhibition since his death, Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2012, at the National Gallery of Art in Washington.  (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Dorothy Lichtenstein, widow of artist Roy Lichtenstein, poses beside her husband’s artwork, a 1963 oil and magna on canvas, Whaam! during the preview of his first major exhibition since his death, Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2012, at the National Gallery of Art in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

 

Reflection
From my examination of a variety of New York Times articles – New York being a hub for the pop art movement – I found that few artistic styles have been more left to open interpretation of the viewer. The works of Lichtenstein and Warhol were especially interesting to research. They were, without a doubt, the most popular “pop artists” of the 1960s. In the same article I mentioned earlier, Preston brought to attention a very good point. To summarize, he questioned if art has a true definition or if it was more about the attitude being portrayed by the piece. He says, “It ‘connects.’” The use of visuals that American society would describe as commonplace, but portraying them in a purposeful, defiant manner gave the pop art movement the youthful energy that drove its early success. However, the use of popular imagery ultimately de-valued pop art amongst the higher class art critics; mostly European. They saw Warhol and Lichtenstein prints, and simply didn’t understand what made an image of Campbell’s soup iconic. Cultural background has everything to do with whether or not art is described as “meaningful”.

 
Findings
After discussing the pop art movement with my grandmother Eva Slaughter, who was a lifelong resident of New York until about six years ago, I’ve found that it wasn’t as well understood by society as research suggests. She specifically remembers being exposed to Warhol’s art many times, and overall she was “unimpressed”. Finally, she explicitly told me, “A art exhibit wasn’t no place for a young group of n—– back then, anyway.”

 

All information was gathered from the New York Times, AP images, and my grandmother.

Justus Scarver is a journalism junior. He can be reached at jds244@txstate.edu.

Cuban missile crisis 52 years later

The Cuban missile crisis
By: Jacob Goodman

The New York Times, October 22, 1962, page 1

The New York Times, October 24, 1962, page 1

The New York Times, October 25, 1962, page 1

The New York Times, October 26, 1962, page 1

The New York Times, October 26, 1962, page 4

The New York Times, October 26, 1962, page 5

The New York Times, October 26, 1962, page 6

The New York Times, October 28, 1962, page 1

The New York Times, October 30, 1962, page 1

San Marcos Record, November 1, 1962, page 1

The London Times, October 24, 1961, page 1

The London Times, October 24, 1961, page 13

The London Times, October 26, 1961, page 10

Summary of Findings

The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the world ever came to a nuclear exchange. It was a standoff between East and West, Capitalism and Communism, the Soviet Union and the United States.  If missiles had been fired millions would have died, but for the average person it was an atmosphere of uncertainty.

“I remember Linda Canion (cousin) crying that we were going to die.  We didn’t know if we were going to wake up in the morning or not,” said Rick Goodman of Victoria, Texas, 64, about his experience during the crisis.

The Cuban missile crisis was different for the average person but a full summary of the Cuban Missile Crisis can be found here.

Television

The “New York Times” front page for October 22 featured a teaser titled, “Capital’s Crisis Air Hints At Development on Cuba; Kennedy TV Talk is Likely.”  This should be covered because today a political leader going on television is normal, but in 1960 it was still a new medium.  The New York Times prediction proved correct and Kennedy addressed the nation on October 24.

The Blockade

The October 25 front page featured a story titled “Big Force Masses to Blockade Cuba.”  The story, by Seymour Topping, then enumerates the severity of the crisis by saying, “(the force) had instructions to use force if necessary, including sinking of ships, to carry out Kennedy’s orders for a blockade of Cuba.”  The story then provides a statement about the situation saying, “…United States military units throughout the world, including the garrison in Berlin and the nuclear-armed Strategic Air Command, had been placed on Alert.”.

U.S. Planes and Destroyer escort the Soviet Cruiser “Anatanov”, suspected of carrying nuclear weapons, out of Cuban waters. Photo by Associated Press via the Library of Congress http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2001696171/

U.S. Planes and Destroyer escort the Soviet Cruiser “Anatanov”, suspected of carrying nuclear weapons out of Cuban waters. Photo by Associated Press via the Library of Congress

The next day the New York Times ran a story featuring the reply from the Soviet Government.  Seymour Topping reported that the Soviet Union had told the Kennedy administration that if the blockade did not move, it would create nuclear war.  This happened after John F. Kennedy had ordered 25 Russian ships to be intercepted on their way to Cuba.

The next day the crisis cooled when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev suggested a summit meeting and a two-week pause in the standoff.

A Soviet ship moves towards the  American blockade of Cuba http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2001696198/

A Soviet ship moves towards the
American blockade of Cuba. Photo Credit: Department of Defense via United Press International and the Library of Congress

 

The Falling Action

The Bucharest, which was the first Soviet ship to be intercepted, was allowed to continue to Cuba after it was revealed that the ship did not contain weapons.  Jack Raymond on page 1 of the New York Times for October 26, 1962 Raymond wrote, “Other Soviet Ships are still headed for Cuba, it was said, although 12 have altered their course, presumably because of illegal weapons.

It would also be worth mentioning the exchange in the United Nations that promoted Peace.  In a story by Arnold Lubasch, Lubasch described the exchange between United States Ambassador to the U.N. Adalai Stevenson and his Soviet counterpart Valerian A. Zorin.  Lubasch describes the Soviet denial of the missiles in Cuba being discredited by Stevenson’s display of the U-2 photographs.  The story goes on to describe a confrontation between Zorin and Stevenson to which Zorin.

U-2 Reconnaissance Photos shown by Stevenson to the U.N.  Photo from Department of Defense via Library of Congress http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2001696173/

U-2 Reconnaissance Photos shown by Stevenson to the U.N. Photo from Department of Defense via Library of Congress

On October 26 a story titled “Pentagon Issues Shelter Report” is featured.  In this story the Defense Department claims that there are fallout shelters in the United States for 60 million people.  The story also describes these shelters as, “giving a protection factor of 100”.  This phrase is meaningless and seems to have been an attempt to keep people calm, there really was not anything people could do if nuclear war occurred.

“I went to bed early because I had to work cattle at four in the morning.  There just wasn’t any sense of staying up and worrying about it,” said Goodman.

Solution

October 28, 1962 the crisis began to settle when the Soviet Union offered to remove Soviet Missiles from Cuba if the United States removed missiles from Turkey.  Seymour Topping read this in a letter Khrushchev sent the White House.  This should be featured because this was the solution that ended the crisis and the New York Times published it the day it was sent.

Jake Goodman is a Journalism and Mass Communication Student at Texas State University with a minor in history. Contact via email jgoodman53stj@gmail.com, or Twitter @jgoodman53stj.

The Beatles come to America

Beatles come to America

By Kristen Smith

Information from: Paul Gardner, New York Times, Saturday February 8, 1964 page 25

Public Domain footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxgEwZ1qw5I

Beatles Invasion: http://www.beatlesbible.com/1964/02/07/beatles-american-invasion-begins/  http://www.beatlesbible.com/1964/02/07/beatles-american-invasion-begins/2/ 

 

Beatles Rare Photos

Image by Mike Mitchell, AP Images

Beatle Infestation

Saturday, February 8 at 1:20 P.M., a PanAm flight from London to New York brought 4 unknowingly famous men to America. Greeted by 3,000 screaming teenage fans, the Beatles were welcomed into America in February of 1964. Their arrival was recorded for the news. A household name, the Beatles had already gained great popularity before they ever set foot into the states.

“Multiply Elvis Presley by four, subtract six years from his age, add British accents and a sharp sense of humor. The answer: It’s the Beatles,” Paul Gardner, reporter for the New York Times, said.

That’s exactly what the Beatles were. They brought a wave of culture into America that didn’t previously exist, including “tight pants, boots, and hair that never seems to be cut,” Gardner said.

It seems that the four young gents were not aware of their momentous fame in a country like the U.S.

“All we knew was that a couple of the records had done well in the States,” Cynthia Lennon said in an interview for the Beatles Bible website. “We believed there was still a huge mountain to climb if The Beatles were really to make it there.”

 

Beatles, Who?

The Beatles, also known as the Fab Four, was comprised of Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison and Ringo Starr.

Laura Young, who was 8 years old when the Beatles first came to America, remembers going to their concert as a teenager. “They were touring and came to Lake Charles, which is just down the road from where I grew up,” Young said. “I went with a few of my friends and we had all picked a Beatle to be our husband, and I got stuck with Ringo.”

The Beatles were a different kind of rock ‘n’ roll than what Americans were used to. Compared to American rockers like Elvis, they definitely had an unusual look.

“They’re different,” Danielle Landau, a Brooklyn 15-year-old from Gardner’s article, said. “They’re just so different. I mean, all that hair. American singers are soooo clean-cut.”

The band is remembered for trippy lyrics, iconic hairstyles and a revolutionary take on rock ‘n’ roll music.

 

Beatles in the Media

For their first live television appearance, The Beatles went on the Sunday February 9 evening episode of The Ed Sullivan Show. The second appearance took place on the following Tuesday, where they played a concert in the Coliseum in Washington. On that Wednesday, for Lincoln’s Birthday, they performed two shows at Carnegie Hall. Their third television appearance took place in New York the weekend after and was recorded on tape.

Come Together 

When the Beatles first came to America, they weren’t welcomed as warmly as their airport entourage may have let on. In a press conference that took place upon their arrival, an interviewer asked them the following question:

“In Detroit Michigan, there handing out car stickers saying, ‘Stamp Out The Beatles.'”

Paul then replied, “Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.”

The group as a collective had a wit that paired with their sweet British charm to make fans of all ages swoon.

 

 

Official Texas State University Disclaimer
Comments on the contents of this site should be directed to Elizabeth J (Be Clark.