History
476
Devine
Spring
2007
Study
Questions for May 3rd
William L. O’Neill, The Counterculture
- How did Catch-22,
folk music, and the twist contribute to the origins of the counterculture?
- Although both see
them as important and as “setting a good example for the young,” how does
O’Neill’s assessment of the Beatles differ from Pielke’s?
- What role did
drugs play in shaping the counterculture?
- O’Neill argues
that contrary to Timothy Leary and others, drugs were not liberating but
“encourage[d] conformity among the young.” Why does he believe that the
pot-smoking younger generation was no different than their drinking and
tranquilizer-popping parents?
- How did Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters differ from Leary and
his followers?
- How did Janis
Joplin differ from Joan Baez? Why
was Joplin
more popular with the counterculture of the mid- to late 1960s?
- What was the
relationship between the counterculture and commercialism?
- O’Neill suggests
that the supposedly radical ethos of the counterculture was simply the
reappearance of self-indulgent romanticism fueled by the mass media and
its propagandizing of the pleasure principle. What evidence does he
introduce to support this view?
Would Farber agree with him?
- Why does O’Neill
argue that the counterculture increased social hostility and broadened the
gap between the privileged and the working class?
- Why does O’Neill
say that the counterculture was “hell on standards?”
P.J. O’Rourke, The Awful Power of Make Believe
- Why did the
author write this brief memoir of his own radical past? What does he want his readers to think
about or to take away from these personal reflections?
- What impression
does the author give you of daily life in the counterculture?
- Why does O’Rourke
believe Marxism was appealing to both his generation of young activists
and to the Third World of the 1980s? Why does he reject Marxism?
- O’Rourke suggests
that the “cultural revolution” of the 1960s was based on “bullshit,” and
that radicals’ willingness to believe in things that were “make believe”
rather than real did them more harm than good. Having read both Farber and
O’Rourke, who do you find more persuasive? Why?