Remembering The Chicago Eight with Graham Nash's "Chicago"

Artwork for Graham Nash's Songs for Beginners

   

    During the Democratic National Convention in 1971, the whole week was filled with anti-Vietnam War protests and violence. Multiple different groups had planned on protesting during this convention. The most prevalent of the groups included the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE), the Youth International Party (YIPPEE), as well as the Black Panthers. After this convention, eight protesters, known as the Chicago Eight, were subsequently arrested and charged with conspiracy although they were later acquitted. Despite no one being convicted, the trial became a significant event at the time. In his solo debut album released in 1971, English-American singer-songwriter Graham Nash wrote a song referencing this trial and those arrested titled “Chicago”. 

The 1968 Civil Rights Act introduced new anti-riot laws declaring it illegal to “cross state lines to incite a riot” (Little). Directly after the protests occurred, the mayor of Chicago, Richard Daley, wanted the protesters to be prosecuted under this new law, but the attorneys at the time did not think there was enough evidence to hold a trial. It was not until a year later that Richard Nixon, the newly appointed president, decided to arrest eight of the protesters from that day. This arrest and the new anti-riot law was controversial as many people felt it was a violation of the First Amendment’s promise of free assembly. During the trial itself, the judge and the defendants were continuously at odds with one another. The major conflict of this trial occurred when the judge ordered for Bobby Seale, the single African-American defendant known for his work with the Black Panther Party, to be chained to his chair and gagged after Seale had declared the judge a racist for not allowing him to represent himself. What happened to Bobby Seale was a key inspiration for Graham Nash’s “Chicago”. The opening lines state “So your brother's bound and gagged / And they've chained him to a chair”.  Nash continues the verse by asking “Won’t you please come to Chicago”. Here, Nash is asking other musicians and figures to help stand up for the defendants in this trial, specifically Bobby Seale. This question becomes the focal point of the song as Nash continues to repeat it throughout each verse. 

Courtroom Drawing of Bobby Seale Drawn by Howard Brodie (1969)

    Despite the negative situation Nash was inspired by, the song itself proposes a hopeful outlook for the future. After asking for help in the verses, the chorus begins with “We can change the world / Rearrange the world”. Nash believes that it is possible for society to change and to emphasize this, he ends the first chorus by singing that the world is “dying to get better”. Nash, however, makes it clear that in order to see this change people must come together and help each other. The second and third choruses start with Nash stating that “Yes, we can change the world”, but he follows this declaration with “If you believe in justice / And if you believe in freedom”. Instead of repeating that sentiment that the world was dying to change, Nash selected to only repeat “It’s dying”, and he places this after he says “justice” and “freedom”. This modification indicates that Nash believes justice and freedom are dying. He changes from “we” to “you” to signify to the listener, whether that is one of his fellow artists he asked for help from or the general public merely listening to Nash’s album, that they themselves can help society progress from the dark era of the Vietnam War. In order for the world to change for the better, people must enact change on an individual level first. 

Briana Sambrooks

Little, Becky. “7 Reasons Why the Chicago 8 Trial Mattered.” History, 24 September 2019,    https://www.history.com/news/chicago-8-trial-importance

Route 66: Ruins Of The American Dream

Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On": A Lasting Legacy

 Marvin Gaye’s “What’s Going On” released in 1971 was not only a commercial success, but also a social anthem that stems from the ideals of the 60s and shows the legacy of the time period as it has continued for more than 50 years to challenge and inspire.  “What’s Going On” focuses on an enduring social issue of the time: the Vietnam War.  Gaye not only had his own experience with the United States military as a member of the Air Force, but his brother was a veteran of the Vietnam War which allowed for Gaye to receive first hand knowledge concerning the conflict.  

 On the surface, the song is an obvious protest of the Vietnam War.  The song begins with the sounds of a welcome home party for a soldier returning from Vietnam.  Immediately, the lyrics launch into the issue: 

Mother, mother

There’s too many of you crying

Brother, brother brother

There’s far too many of you dying

However, Gaye is focusing on more than just the need to end the war.  He is making a critical statement concerning the direction in which the ideals of the 60’s have progressed.  In 1971, anti-war protests had escalated across the country.  The shooting of 4 students at Kent State had occurred in May of 1970 which then led to violent protests at the University of Washington and other institutions.  Other cities also saw violent clashes between student organizations and white collar workers as well as police forces.  As the song progresses, the speaker calls for an abandonment of the violence that has ensued as so many join in the anti-war movement:

Father, father

We don’t need to escalate

You see, war is not the answer

For only love can conquer hate

The 60’s were a time when we began to see a changing relationship between adults and children.  Through the evolution of the middle class, an increase in industrialization and a parenting movement that focused on allowing children to find themselves, a generation evolved  who had been influenced by outside forces other than their parents (Gregory and Sorey).The legacy of the 60’s generation is that they expected more and began to question the motives of those in authority.  This generation sought out true freedom and fought to initially change society for the better through peaceful protest.   Students were spending more time together at academic institutions than they had in any other generation and as a result collaboration and open discussions occurred that led to the questioning of authority and the ways in which issues were handled.  However, the changes were not occurring fast enough and as the 60’s progressed new radical practices emerged. By the end of the decade, violence had increased 156% (Gregory and Sorey).  Almost half of college students found violence  to be an acceptable form of protest, while  only 14% of the general public agreed (Gregory and Sorey).  Through “What’s Going On,” Gaye not only addresses the problems that are being caused by the escalation of violent protests, but also looks to provide an answer:

You know we’ve got to find a way 

To bring some lovin’ here today

Marvin Gaye channels his own social rage through the song as he  calls for the legacy of the 60’s to continue.  He was aware of the issues that were going unchecked throughout the country and saw the need to continue fighting for what is right.  The song does not push for an end to the “picket lines and picket signs,” but rather pushes for the fight for a better country to continue through protest while a resolution is sought:  

In the meantime

Right on, baby

Right on, brother

Right on, babe

Gaye sees the core problem of the situation as a lack of understanding as he implores to not be “punished with brutality” but instead for those to “talk to me, so you can see.”  Through the song, Gaye is able to show that the protesting culture of the 60’s was vital to bringing a positive change to the issues occurring within society, but also recognizes that the direction the movement took has led to larger problems, misunderstanding  and a battle between generations. A gap had been created between the generations as the youth found their own way to adulthood and the gap needed to be bridged in order to bring an end to the violence that had ensued..  Gaye does not hold the older generation completely accountable.  As he addresses the view that those have of the protesting generation through the fifth verse “Mother, mother, everybody thinks we’re wrong,” he also addresses the 60’s generation directly by using the plural first person to indicate that it is a problem for all generations to solve: “...we’ve got to find a way to bring some understanding here today.” 

“What’s Going On” can appeal to both those that protest and those that oppose the protesters by pointing to the negative aspects that have grown out of the protests of the 1960s.  This is what has led to the endurance of the song over the past 5 decades: an anthem that calls for two opposing sides to give up the fight and work to understand each other to make the world a better place.  

Sorey, Kellie C. and Gregory, Dennis, "Protests in the Sixties" (2010). Educational Foundations & Leadership Faculty
Publications,   2010,   Old Dominion University.  https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/efl_fac_pubs/42. 27
Feb. 2024.

Katie DeClercq

"The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel": Women's lib with a comedic twist

 

    The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel aired on Amazon Prime from 2017 to 2023 and features several Hollywood heavyweights in the lead roles. Rachel Brosnahan plays the lead role of Miriam "Midge" Maisel, a young mother living in New York in the late 1950s/early 1960s who follows her passion & natural talent as a stand-up comedian. The TV sitcom features social activism and strong opposition to oppression & prejudices, but the show primarily spotlights the women's liberation movement through the lens of female characters who fight for equal rights and representation. The purpose of the show's writers is clear: Showcase the men and women who were brave enough to see the world differently and imagine a new future for themselves and their loved ones. Below are just four of the many impactful characters who give viewers an inside look at what life was like in 1950s/1960s America.

Miriam "Midge" Maisel

    Several female characters throughout the series struggle to earn more respect from society and tackle 1950s/60s expectations of a woman's traditional role in society. Miriam, the main character, defies those expectations in several ways throughout the sitcom's five seasons, starting with the very first episode, when Miriam's husband, Joel, leaves her after announcing his affair with a secretary. She must establish her independence after playing the role of dutiful housewife and mother of two for so many years. She receives significant backlash and harsh judgment from nearly everyone she knows, including her parents, who act as if it is her own fault that her husband cheated on and then left her. 

    As Miriam pursues her dream career of stand-up comedy, she faces numerous obstacles and setbacks due to limitations placed on her by society. For example, numerous times, nightclub owners and patrons assume Miriam is a singer because of her gender and good looks; when she corrects them and explains she's a comic, the reaction ranges from disbelief to disgust. She's repeatedly talked down to or ignored altogether by club owners; numerous times, she loses her time slot to another comedian just because he's a man. But in spite of it all, Miriam ends up making quite a name for herself in stand-up comedy. She is eventually hired as the first female writer on The Gordon Ford Show, where she continues to encounter sexism from the male writers who drown out her voice and ideas. 

Rose Weissman

    Rose Weissman, Miriam's mother, is played by Marin Hinkle. Rose is an interesting character who initially seems quite content fulfilling the expected role of a stereotypical housewife. She caters to her husband, Abe, and works tirelessly to maintain the Weissman household. Rose seems to be satisfied with the life she's built, but something inside Rose compels her to suddenly flee New York and live by herself in Paris. Miriam and Abe frantically look for her, and when they eventually find her, they beg her to return to their life in New York. Both are completely flummoxed when Rose refuses. Her reasoning is simple: She was unhappy with her family and home life in New York, and Paris brought her immense happiness and joy. Why should she return to a place making her feel so miserable? Miriam is more understanding than Abe, who cannot fathom how Rose could possibly be so unsatisfied with her life as a wife and mother. He stays with Rose in Paris for several days, where the two rekindle the lost romance in their marriage and Abe comes to realize what has been missing in their lives. Eventually, Abe and Rose do return to New York, where Rose goes on to have a successful career as a matchmaker.     

Mei / Mei and Joel

    Maisel's characters not only defy societal norms for women's roles; they also challenge expectations for romantic relationships, incredibly progressive for the time period. Stephanie Hsu plays Mei, a witty and intelligent woman whose family runs an underground gambling ring underneath the nightclub owned by Joel (yes, Miriam's ex-husband). Mei is Chinese American, and she knows without a doubt that she wants more out of life than to be someone's wife and mother. Mei is on track to complete medical school and be a doctor. Even after she and Joel become romantically involved, she remains adamant that he will not derail her ambitious career aspirations. Mei ends up pregnant, and rather than marry Joel and play the role of dutiful mother and housewife, it is implied that she terminates the pregnancy before moving to Chicago to continue pursuing her career. Her character is inspirational in her ability to make difficult choices that no one else may understand but that are the best choices for herself in the long run. 

    Mei and Joel also break norms with their relationship through religion: Mei is not religious at all, and Joel comes from a strong Jewish background. At that time, it was expected that Joel would marry a nice Jewish girl. Even though he's terrified to disappoint and defy his parents, and he does hide Mei from them for awhile, their religious backgrounds are not the source of their eventual break-up. 

Abe Weissman

    Social activism and Abe Weissman, Tony Shalhoub's dynamic character, go together like peanut butter and jelly. Abe is Rose's husband and Miriam's father. At the start of the show, Abe is a tenured professor of mathematics at Columbia University, and he also does research for Bell Labs. He is constantly musing about how much of his life has passed by without feeling like he's actually done anything. There is a void he desperately seeks to fill, and at the end of season three, he's figured out how to do it: Abe leaves his well-paying position at the university to earn a fraction of his salary writing for The Village Voice. There's a scene where Miriam comes home to find her father and his radical group of new friends sprawled out all over the house, planning and plotting and smoking endless cigarettes. It definitely has a Vida vibe, just not underground! 

    Abe undergoes another profound transformation by the end of the show. His entire life, he's believed wholeheartedly in the power of patriarchal lineage, that inherent brilliance will manifest itself in a male son or grandson. He has held the assumption that the male heirs to the Weissman name are destined for greatness; he never gave the women another thought. Thus, he's been waiting (pretty impatiently) for this greatness to manifest in his grandson Ethan. Imagine his surprise when one day, he hears a beautiful piano tune being played from memory and sees his granddaughter Esther, not Ethan, seated at the piano. Abe's eyes are opened to his profound oversight: He'd been so hell-bent on the greatness of a son or grandson, simply because of their maleness, that he'd completely overlooked his granddaughter and, more alarmingly, his daughter Miriam. Abe realizes in amazement: "My daughter is a remarkable person, and I don't think I've ever said that" (Season 5, Episode 8). This is an extremely powerful moment of self-awareness, and it occurs at the very end of the show to leave a lasting impression on viewers.

* * *

    The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel is a wildly entertaining sitcom that features characters who attempt to combat sexism, racism, and traditional societal norms of the 1950s and 1960s. Viewers today will appreciate the historical ties and accurate representations of the time period, but they will also recognize that though changes have been made, America has a long way to go to achieve true equality for all.

By: Katie Endris

Beatty's "Shampoo" is Exhausting in So Many Ways

 

The '60s remembrance I selected is the movie “Shampoo,” which came out in 1975 but takes the viewer to November 4, 1968, the eve of the Presidential Election, to start the film. The movie follows George, played by Warren Beatty, who interacts with a dizzying number of people representing various stereotypes and always appears to be running to the next thing. Beatty co-wrote the movie with Robert Towne. 

George is what I would call “a man, written by a 1960s nostalgic man.” He is what I would imagine a young man enjoying the sexual revolution of the 1960s would appear like: handsome, surrounded by women, while working as a hairdresser in a salon, bouncing from one bed to another with little regard for feelings. He burns his candle at both ends to bedhop everyone from Goldie Hawn’s Jill, who plays his girlfriend, to Jackie, played by Julie Christie. His life is exhausting, and Beatty's film exhausts all the stereotypes of the time to leave any with redeeming value.

During the film, we see George bed four different women in a twenty-four hour period. George is also trying to open his salon but struggles with the bank to get a loan, not understanding the process and the terminology. He grows frustrated with the banker and stomps out when he is rejected. Outside the bank, he throws a tantrum. Back at the salon he works at, we see George is all over the place. He does not know how to manage his time or other people's demands in the salon. He always leaves things unfinished, walking out before customers are completely satisfied. 

In an early meeting with Jackie, one of his lovers, he says to her: “I don’t fuck anybody for money; I do it for fun.” This line becomes a huge foreshadowing of our ending and a fitting tribute to the type of man George represents and the type of woman we see Jackie becoming at the end.

George benefits from the type of women written in this film as characters who greatly desire their sexual freedom and want to prove it. (Women, written by men also.) Hawn’s Jill, his younger girlfriend, is childlike and immature, always running to George for advice and information. She hangs on his every word, and when the situation shifts and he intends to be seen with other women, she is “cool” and unbothered by his attention shifting. When Jill discovers George sleeping with another woman and confronts him, she is sad, but there is no meltdown, just acceptance as she moves on to someone else. 

This is a negative representation of the time, grossly oversimplified by different groups. Men are cheaters and oversexed, taking full advantage of the women around them. Women are hungry for sex and willing to do anything to get it -- especially with George. The black characters in the movie are portrayed in servant roles only. They are hair washers in the salon, park cars, and work in the home as housemaids. They have minimal dialog and are always portrayed in uniform. Homosexual characters are heavily stereotyped as emotional and whiney. The salon that George works at is run by a gay man who is so dramatic and emotional. Wealthy business owner Lester asks if George is a “fairy” because he is a hairdresser. The language around homosexual is negative by today’s standards “faggot,” “faggoty,” and “fairy.”

Near the end of the movie, we have the story told in two different types of parties. The first is a conservative watch party with rich, older voters eager to celebrate the election of Richard Nixon. Every face is white, the conversation is dull, and the characters are eager to listen to boring elected officials talk about politics and change. The end of the party is broken up by a bomb threat, sending us to another party with a different clientele. At this party, we see mostly young hippies openly doing drugs, bathing nude, enjoying music and strobe lights. 

At the movie's end, George professes his love to Jackie, one of his lovers, the girlfriend of a wealthy businessman, and begs her to be with him. But she cannot as she has just agreed to run away with the businessman and marry, leaving behind a broken, hopeless George for a life with money and servants. In the final scene, we see Jackie driving off into the sunset, leaving George behind.  

The ending scene becomes a nice parallel for the idea of the 1960s and the ideas about relationships. The sex-fueled time of the 1960s is over, and in its place are the serious 1970s. 

By Heather Nichols

"Da 5 Bloods:" Spike Lee and the Black Vietnam Experience (Keppler)

     I have been looking for an excuse to carve out two and a half hours to watch Spike Lee’s 2020 Vietnam War drama, Da 5 Bloods, and this is the perfect one. The experience of the white Vietnam War veteran has been the subject of significant cinematic exploration, including major films such as Apocalypse Now, Born on the 4th of July, In Country, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, and The Deer Hunter, to name but a few. Few, if any, major motion pictures have intentionally and specifically addressed the Black experience in and after Vietnam, despite the fact that, as noted by the film, they comprised 31% of the ground troops, while simultaneously making up only 11% of the total American population. The film uses these statistics to great effect, to highlight the inequities of the Black experience both on the home front and while fighting what the characters deem an “immoral war.”

    In many respects the film is a traditional one, exploring the lasting and complex connections made between soldiers who share similar experience and trauma, fraught father-son relationships caused by the aftershocks of guilt and terror, the lingering emotional impacts of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and even including a treasure hunt for gold that went missing after a CIA plane crashed in the deep Vietnam jungle. The film follows four Vietnam War veterans who return “in country” decades later to retrieve the body of their fallen leader, “Stormin’ Norman” (powerfully played by Chadwick Boseman in his final role before succumbing to colon cancer) and to collect the aforementioned gold which they discovered and buried to collect at a later date. Incidentally, the gold was originally intended to be paid to Vietnamese collaborators, but the plane crash derailed these plans. A stark thematic juxtaposition is drawn here between the United States government’s treatment of Vietnamese citizens who help it achieve its aims and the Black soldiers who literally put their lives on the line without commendation, recognition, or compensation. The group, who have named themselves “Da 5 Bloods,” claim the gold as their own, and at the behest of their charismatic leader “Stormin’ Norman” intend to redistribute the wealth to the “Cause” as reparations. I don’t want to spoil too much here, but Norman is killed, the gold is misplaced, and the remaining Bloods return much later with their own personal designs on the money.

    Lee masterfully interweaves actual and recreated footage of the war to underscore the significance of Black involvement in the war, including a poignant testimony to Martin Olive, who was the war’s first Black Medal of Honor recipient after saving his squad from certain death by falling on a live grenade, and a painful moment where the Bloods learn of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. by a white man, and to highlight the war’s grotesqueness, including horrific images of the My Lai Massacre, “Napalm Girl,” and the execution of the Viet Cong prisoner.

 

Martin Olive

    A moment that stood out to me most viscerally was Lee’s use of Muhammad Ali’s compelling refusal to be inducted into the United States Air Force to begin the film. Ali, and by extension, Lee draws a parallel between the treatment of the Vietnamese and the Black population at the hands of the government. Ali famously had “no quarrel with the Vietcong,” when he was being harassed, exploited, and mistreated in his own hometown of Louisville. His refusal to participate in the war against the Vietnamese cost him a great deal, resulting in both a criminal prosecution and a boxing ban, but highlighted the inequities of the Black experience on the American home front and overseas.

            This is, I believe, Lee’s overarching purpose - to recognize the manifold contributions of Black soldiers to a country that after all of this time still does not reciprocate, to acknowledge the cost to the individual and collective of making those contributions, and to agitate for ongoing change. Again, I want to avoid spoilers, but, as it turns out, reparations can be used to advance causes that linger even still today.

 

Langmann, Brady. “Spike Lee's Da 5 Bloods Honors the Real Black Soldiers Who Died in Vietnam.” Esquire, June 12, 2020, https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a32837667/da-5-bloods-spike-lee-true-story-milton-olive-james-anderson/.

 “Muhammad Ali Refuses the Vietnam War Draft.” YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrRvPMefaAc&t=13s.

 

 

"Did the Sixties Dream Die in 1969?" Exploring the Idealist Nostalgia of the Sixties

“Did the Sixties Dream Die in 1969?” is an article by James Riley that critically examines nostalgic romanticist views of the 1960s. Riley is a counterculture expert who works as a Fellow and College Lecturer in English at Girton College. His areas of focus include modern and contemporary literature, popular film, and 1960s culture. He has also published a book on 60's counterculture: The Bad Trip: Dark Omens, New Worlds and the End of the Sixties (Riley).

Riley's article challenges the utopian views of the Sixties as a time of freedom, hope, and idealism among the people. He recounts the popular narrative of the Sixties: that the era was consistently full of positive social and cultural change and the true halt to this positivity and love was due to the violence of the Manson family, the Zodiac killer, and the chaos that ensued during the Altamont Free Concert. He rejects this notion that violence was only present at the end of the era:

The decade did indeed usher in a wave of progressivism and it also had its shadow-side, but such negativity was not limited to its final days. If anything the darkness, so to speak, was present from the start and across the 1960s it hovered particularly close to the decade’s much-vaunted counterculture (Riley).

"Hell's Angels attacking fans at Rolling Stones concert at Altamont, California in 1969" by Michael Ochs Archives./Michael Ochs archives/Redferns

During The Rolling Stone’s Altamont Free Concert, an unruly disorganized crowd, intense alcohol consumption, and the hiring of the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang led to chaos. Various assaults and the stabbing of a young man took place. This image shows the Hell's Angels using pool cues to keep the crowd in check (Pollstar Staff).

Riley's main argument is that the nostalgic portrayal of the Sixties as a dream overlooks the darker events of the decade and that history has transformed it into an idealistic myth. He proves his point that the Sixties were a violent era by providing numerous examples of disastrous patterns that plagued the decade: "Assassinations, nuclear tensions, globalised conflict, civil unrest, the growth of apocalyptic religious groups" (Riley). He is actively devaluing reminiscent viewpoints that paint the Sixties as an exemplary and magical time to be alive.

"unbelievable crap we have today?" by georgesbiscuits1969. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/lewronggeneration/comments/i45czn/unbelievable_crap_we_have_today

Riley is not a participant in the action of the Sixties, but rather a detached observer of its events. His detachment from the period aids in his objective viewpoint and analysis of the Sixties. In fact, it seems he is critical of participants of the Sixties and their views of the Sixties as a nostalgic utopia. On the other hand, his exclusion from the events of the Sixties can distance Riley from the actual events and emotions of the Sixties. To help create an accurate overall view of the Sixties, I believe it is important to read a variety of texts that reflect on the positives and negatives of the era. The article does make a great point about how history and nostalgia can influence how specific events are remembered. However, it fails to capture a holistic view of the Sixties from varying perspectives. From what I have read thus far about the Sixties I believe that the Sixties can be both: a period of violence but also of hope. While the period was afflicted with events such as assassinations, nuclear tensions, and civil unrest, there were also several positive aspects. The period yielded great strides in human rights, expanded environmental awareness, and fantastic music. While the era should not be viewed solely in a positive light, it should also not be viewed solely in a negative light.

“President Lyndon Johnson signs into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” AZ Attorney Wordpress. https://azatty.wordpress.com/2014/06/26/civil-rights-act-of-1964-arizona-celebration-planned/

Overall, Riley believes that history has transformed the Sixties into a utopian myth. When referring to the question, "Did the Sixties dream die in 1969?" according to Riley, the dream did not die, but the Sixties was not a dream in the first place. Rather the Sixties were a violent nightmare that has been corrupted by positively biased rose colored lenses. Although his viewpoint may be influenced by his detachment from the decade, Riley reminds us to view historical events from multiple lenses and to always keep a critical eye on how history represents major historical events.

-Paige House

Works Cited

Pollstar Staff. "'Rock’s Darkest Day': A Look Back At Altamont, 50 Years Later." 5 Dec. 2019,

            https://news.pollstar.com/2019/12/05/rocks-darkest-day-a-look-back-at-altamont-50-years-later/

Riley, James. “Did the Sixties Dream Die in 1969?” University of Cambridge. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/discussion/did-the-sixties-dream-die-in-1969