The Counterculture Canon

[blurricus]

Look at Wiki for details on what I'm talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_Ask_Alice

I'm well aware of all the speculation around the legitimacy of the author. Wikipedia didn't really open any new doors for me in that regard. Another question is easily posed:
Why is it, if fiction, that it isn't counter-culture? What difference does that make?

 

[Peder]

I've been reading this thread with some interest in view of all the things that have been said about my own generation (the infamous Silent Generation), and a couple of sets of questions keep recurring.

One set of questions has to do with the meanings of "culture" and of "counterculture." The canon that was originally listed here had to do with counterculture "then," in that time frame. Hasn't culture changed since then? If so, hasn't the meaning of counterculture changed since then? Or not? If culture has changed, wouldn't today's counterculture be different, with different books, and attitudes -- and indeed even different media for expression, e.g. the Web? And mightn't the original counterculture books simply be outmoded?

The second set of questions revolves around the notion of coming of age. Was counterculture then, and is it now, simply a phase in a person's life? Irrespective of the surrounding culture? A set of attitudes associated with "coming of age?" So, would yesteryear's counter cultural books even have the same appeal to the same people (now grown up) who reacted to them originally?
Or even to the people currently in the appropriate age range with but modern day attitudes? And modern-day surrounding culture?

Either way, if "counterculture" is a shifting concept then it is hard (for me) to envision enshrining the original counterculture books in an unchanging canon, almost no matter what they said. Except perhaps for historical purposes.

Just wondering, and finally had the time to ask,
Thanks for reading,
Peder

 

[novella]

I'm well aware of all the speculation around the legitimacy of the author. Wikipedia didn't really open any new doors for me in that regard. Another question is easily posed:
Why is it, if fiction, that it isn't counter-culture? What difference does that make?

Because it's not just 'fiction', it's an intentionally manipulative morality play, a cautionary tale written by The Man. To me, books in the counterculture canon (if there is one, as this thread is about) posit and explore ideas, ways of living, and ways of writing that were previously ignored or nascent in Western literature.

Get back to you later, Peder. Must run.

 

[novella]

I've been reading this thread with some interest in view of all the things that have been said about my own generation (the infamous Silent Generation), and a couple of sets of questions keep recurring.

One set of questions has to do with the meanings of "culture" and of "counterculture." The canon that was originally listed here had to do with counterculture "then," in that time frame. Hasn't culture changed since then? If so, hasn't the meaning of counterculture changed since then? Or not? If culture has changed, wouldn't today's counterculture be different, with different books, and attitudes -- and indeed even different media for expression, e.g. the Web? And mightn't the original counterculture books simply be outmoded?

The second set of questions revolves around the notion of coming of age. Was counterculture then, and is it now, simply a phase in a person's life? Irrespective of the surrounding culture? A set of attitudes associated with "coming of age?" So, would yesteryear's counter cultural books even have the same appeal to the same people (now grown up) who reacted to them originally?
Or even to the people currently in the appropriate age range with but modern day attitudes? And modern-day surrounding culture?

Either way, if "counterculture" is a shifting concept then it is hard (for me) to envision enshrining the original counterculture books in an unchanging canon, almost no matter what they said. Except perhaps for historical purposes.

Just wondering, and finally had the time to ask,
Thanks for reading,
Peder

All interesting questions, Peder.

First, I think that no canon is unchanging. What was regarded as the best poetry 100 years ago is hardly read now (with a few extremely exceptional exceptions such as Shakespeare and Homer). Matthew Arnold? John Donne? These guys are read in literature classes because they have been adopted into the canon of literature, but for the large majority of people they are forgotten and irrelevant.

To go to your first discussion point, re culture vs. counterculture, IMO the books under discussion here shifted the way some people write and live. These books are still relevant, even as precursors to poetry slams, blogs, journalistic autobiography, and other modes of writing that are more commonplace today, yet still viewed as renegade or outside the standard forms of fiction and nonfiction and written poetry. Not sure if this is getting to the heart of the matter . . .

To go to your second point, the question of age, I can only think that Walt Whitman was always Walt Whitman, that Ken Kesey was always Ken Kesey, and that Kerouac and Ginsberg were thoroughly themselves throughout their lives. Yes, perhaps there is an age of intellectual exploration when a person discovers certain texts and ideas, and this might indicate that these writers appeal to a certain age group, but as practitioner of a craft, they were grown men delving into their work with serious purpose.

I don't think that 'counterculture' in this sense is a shifting concept, just as modern and postmodern are not shifiting concepts, but recognizable paradigms.

(I probably should have interspersed my comments with yours, but it's rather time-consuming. Oh well.)

 

[Peder]

I don't think that 'counterculture' in this sense is a shifting concept, just as modern and postmodern are not shifiting concepts, but recognizable paradigms.

Novella,
I think that sentence has exactly the difference in perspectives that we brought to my question and your answer.
Now I'll mull,
Many thanks,
Peder

 

[pontalba]

Culture itself changes, why shouldn't counterculture.
In any battle for example, there were set rules and patterns that were followed. And when one side didn't change tactics to match the attackers they were massacred.

Counterculture would inevidibly have to follow the same pattern or die.

 

[novella]

Culture itself changes, why shouldn't counterculture.
In any battle for example, there were set rules and patterns that were followed. And when one side didn't change tactics to match the attackers they were massacred.

Counterculture would inevidibly have to follow the same pattern or die.

What point are you trying to make in the context of this discussion?

 

[pontalba]

IOW the counterculture of yesterday to an extent becomes the (mainstream) culture of today and a new counterculture must/will/does evolve to counter balance it.
So they both evolve and change. So in a real sense yesterdays counterculture becomes what it critized to begin with.

Literature equaling and reflecting Society in general.

 

[Doug Johnson]

Look at Wiki for details on what I'm talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_Ask_Alice

As for questioning my bona fides re counterculture, I'll tell you what: I'm 45 and spent most of high school on acid, pot, and ludes.

When the Republicans nominate, and the country elects, a president who allegedly did cocaine, does drug use really count as "Counter culture?"

 

[Peder]

Well, Novella,
I've mulled, and I have gone back and reread the thread to see if I missed something. And I conclude that many of the thoughts on my mind were also already raised by others here, and yourself. So I'm somewhat at a loss as to how you and I seemed to have missed each other's pointx so completely in our exchange of posts. But I would say we did.
What to do about it? Nothing especially. I'm not interested in deflecting a discussion which is going along well.
So I'll sit in as listener only,
Thanks for your interest,
Peder

 

[SFG75]

One set of questions has to do with the meanings of "culture" and of "counterculture." The canon that was originally listed here had to do with counterculture "then," in that time frame.

I would have to agree on this point. What are some counter-culture books today? I'm not certain which works would qualify. Fight Club has been mentioned, but is it message alone or popularity that makes it a choice for today? On another matter, are the works of the past signficant today? Other than serving as an influence to scholars and activists at that time when the given work was extremely relevant, I'd have to say the influence is very minimal today.

And mightn't the original counterculture books simply be outmoded?

It certainly looked that way as the hippies became yuppies during the '80s

Either way, if "counterculture" is a shifting concept then it is hard (for me) to envision enshrining the original counterculture books in an unchanging canon, almost no matter what they said. Except perhaps for historical purposes.

I don't know about this point, there are still some books that absolutely rock a person's world. Brave New World, On the Road, not to mention some other works that are still notorious for being trensetters and shocking in content.

Just wondering, and finally had the time to ask,
Thanks for reading,
Peder

Glad that you did, it's what makes a thread all the more interesting.

 

[novella]

IOW the counterculture of yesterday to an extent becomes the (mainstream) culture of today and a new counterculture must/will/does evolve to counter balance it.
So they both evolve and change. So in a real sense yesterdays counterculture becomes what it critized to begin with.

Literature equaling and reflecting Society in general.

I don't think that's true at all. Can you give an example?

As I said earlier, I think these writers were who they were as lifelong projects and never joined the mainstream. Nor were they accepted into it. Read any of their obituaries. Hunter S. Thompson and Ginsberg both died not long ago.

'counterculture becomes what it criticized to begin with"??

I honestly can't think of an example of that that connects in any way with the literature we're talking about. For one thing, I don't believe that 'counterculture' literature necessarily criticizes anything. Again, can you give a concrete example of what you're referring to? I mean, in theory, it sounds like an idea that might work if it had any basis in fact, but I don't think it does.

 

[Peder]

Against my short-lived promise to remain silent, I'll offer that as exactly the root of the difficulty in communication among some newcomers of us here. There seem to be different ideas about what constitutes "culture," what constitutes "counterculture," who or what is in the "counterculture," and especially what "canon" means and what it takes to become a part of "the canon.". In short, all the definitions of all the key words are up in the air IMO. Or, if you all are in agreement with one another on definitions, then it is my ideas that differ from everyone else's here, except that I do understand Pontalba clearly and happen to agree with her.
Peder


I won't get sucked in. I won't get sucked in. I won't get sucked in. I won't get sucked in........

 

[pontalba]

Novella The example is History. Civilizations change, their 'morals' for want of a better word change throughout Time. Society changes. What was unacceptable behavior even back in the 1940's, 1950's is not given a second glance now.
What is going on now is nothing new however, all part of the cycle. Nothing is new under the sun. Humans only think it is, if they don't read and more to the point understand their history.

I don't want to argue about this, I presented the way I feel about your question. And if you disagree, fine, we agree to disagree. That is one of the purposes of discussion.

I could fill this forum with "examples", but reading History is lots more instructive than my poor attempts.

 

[Peder]

On the Road
The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test
Naked Lunch
Ken Kesey’s books, incl. One Flew Over . . .
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
Be Here Now
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Catch-22

Some I might include:

Catcher in the Rye
The Bell Jar
The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit
A Clockwork Orange


What is your experience with these?

Well, Novella,
From your opening post, at least I can answer that question.
I have read an even half-dozen of your dozen, and refused to finish one other, and my experience is that none has spoken to me in my life situation, nor has any changed either me or my life, or my life situation.
Hope that helps.
Sincerely,
Peder

 

[SFG75]

'counterculture becomes what it criticized to begin with"??

I would have to agree with pontalba's statement. Yesterday's student radical who occupied the administration building is now employed in the administration building or is a professor at a state institution for "the man." In regards to the topic, that being books, I agree that the countercultural books can become that which they criticized. How so? Perhaps by being in the minds of aging cultural workers such as artists, writers, journalists, politicians, etc.; codified in the academic setting through being the favored works that are read to the detriment of recent works that languish in obscurity as a result of the aging fossil of a professor who never got over his/her fixation with On the Road. Very shrewd insight there pontalba.

 

[novella]

This ‘shrewd observation’ is based on nothing. It has no correlation in reality. SFG, you’re making huge generalizations that are simply not true. These books are actually NOT read at the university level nor at the high school level as part of the curriculum.

The college curricula now are far more focused on reading world literature in translation and in the literatures of ‘minority’ populations (women, African Americans, refugees) than in anything written in this so-called countercultural canon. Look at any college catalogue (as I have been doing a lot of lately) and you will not see a mention of these books. Further, the average professor of literature at the college level today is certainly nothing like you describe, but is more likely to be multilingual, female, and extremely involved in current events and their students’ ideas. At least the ones I know are, and I have several who are close friends.

This is just a lot of hot air at this point. Peder, pontalba, and SFG, I think that in order to have this discussion at any decent level it would be helpful not to generalize about what large populations of stereotypes pulled from thin air might be doing if they actually existed.

The dominant culture in the US right now is FAR from anything I would call countercultural at any time. It’s right-wing, consumerist, willfully ignorant, obsessed with celebrity, taken up with traditional Christianity. Further, in the context of a literary canon, the current obsession with confessional memoir and political diatribe says a lot about the times we live in, and these books are coming out of the minds of people born well after 1970 (Eggers, Frey, Burroughs and co; Coulter and co), while poor old Al Gore is still talking about the fate of the earth.

 

[Doug Johnson]

and these books are coming out of the minds of people born well after 1970 (Eggers, Frey, Burroughs and co; Coulter and

Dave Eggers (born March 12, 1970 in Chicago, Illinois)

James Frey
Gender: Male
Birthplace: Cleveland, Ohio
Birthday: 9-12-1969

Augusten Xon Burroughs (born October 23, 1965)

Ann Coulter
Date of birth (location)
8 December 1961
New York City, New York, USA

 

[novella]

Dave Eggers (born March 12, 1970 in Chicago, Illinois)

James Frey
Gender: Male
Birthplace: Cleveland, Ohio
Birthday: 9-12-1969

Augusten Xon Burroughs (born October 23, 1965)

Ann Coulter
Date of birth (location)
8 December 1961
New York City, New York, USA

I knew I was going out a limb with that one . . . Anyway, it's a minor point. It's their chosen subject matter that matters.

 

[novella]

When the Republicans nominate, and the country elects, a president who allegedly did cocaine, does drug use really count as "Counter culture?"

That speaks more to the wilfull ignorance of the average GOP voter than anything else. Isn't it the conservative line that such allegations are all cruel and baseless lies?