The Lost Generation?
By Karen Timmerman, with comment by Alec Murphy
[1] One of the scenes in Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace and Music clearly meant by director Michael Wadleigh to have a profound effect on the viewer did in fact have a large impact on me -- though not in the manner in which the director most likely envisioned.
[2] This is the scene covering John Sebastian's performance of "Younger Generation," which sends a message about being a child and then growing up and having children of one's own. The lyrics convey this quite well, with "I swore when I was small, that I'd remember when, I knew what's wrong with my parents, that I was smaller then." Sebastian is talking about how children always think that their parents are silly and old-fashioned, that they will never grow up to be like them. The next few stanzas talk of growing up and no longer remembering why, as a child, we would think our parents were so "square." He finishes with the anxiety that parents feel when their own child is out and about, confronted with the dangers of drugs and skipping school. He advises parents to keep in mind that they lived like this as well when they were younger, and everything will turn out fine, singing "and I must be permissive, understanding of the younger generation."
[3] All throughout Sebastian's performance is a montage of clips showing the babies and young children present at Woodstock, often running naked through the festival grounds or being carried by their parents. Wadleigh and Sebastian are clearly trying to instill in the viewer a sense of wonderment and love for this generation that gets to grow up with parents who lived in a culture of love and peace.
[4] Even more touching, as Sebastian is taking the stage, the announcer calls an audience member over the PA system, urging him to "please come immediately to backstage right, I understand your wife is having a baby. Congratulations." The audience then bursts into enthusiastic cheers, though it is not quite clear whether they are cheering for the birth of a child or Sebastian's entrance. As the artist prepares to sing, he says to the audience that when he heard of the birth, he thought, "Wow, it really is a city here," and told the parents of the newborn child that their "kid's gonna be far out." It was these two statements that made me start to think about the effects having parents from the Woodstock generation would have on their children.
[5] Though the audience and documentary producers seem very gung-ho about showing the presence of children and babies at Woodstock, a younger generation that will be "far out" and do great things because of their peace-loving parents, I feel that it shows a message of despair for this new generation. Not only are they in a very dangerous situation at the festival itself, but I also do not see very much potential for kids growing up under the parenting of the counterculture represented at this festival.
[6] As Sebastian claims that "it really is a city at Woodstock," the camera pans out to show the crowd of half a million people packed into the field. It is hard to imagine how safe this environment could be for small children, as it is a well known fact that the concert had unsanitary conditions and a lack of sufficient food and water. It was not a place for parents to be bringing their children for three days, through bad weather and suffocating crowds.
[7] Not only are the conditions unsafe, but the behavior of the parents is also questionable. Though I'm sure there were parents there that made efforts to ensure their childrens' safety, one has to wonder about the neglect suffered under the hands of parents who spent their time consuming alcohol and smoking marijuana, among other drugs. There is a scene with a man carrying a child on his back and taking a tip of something from a silver can that leaves the viewer wondering if it could be alcoholic, or merely soda.
[8] In addition to the hazardous conditions present, this scene, along with the rest of the documentary, makes me wonder about what type of upbringing these children will have. The babies of this generation will be raised by parents who want to make a change and rebel against what they believe is wrong, but they are not doing anything to make it happen. Woodstock was supposed to be anti-Vietnam, and although it did promote a peaceful message, there were no politically charged statements or arguments that would have any sort of merit. The young people at this festival were more interested in becoming inebriated and dancing to the music, sometimes nude. What kind of an effect does this have on their children? Will they grow up apathetic to the country in which they live, content with drifting from place to place, listening to music and lazily declaring their so-called "beliefs?"
[9] Before viewing this film in its entirety, I had a completely different view of the audience counterculture that defined the Woodstock generation, but after seeing scenes like this I started seriously questioning the merit of the values and beliefs that these people held, and whether or not they would have any type of positive impact on generations to come. I believe that the people at the concert were more into the music and having fun than really working to express their own opinions, a trait that unfortunately has the chance to be passed on to their offspring. I also believe that Wadleigh and the backers of Woodstock used the concert and documentary in an attempt to profit from the festival by showcasing the audience more than the music itself. Upon further thought, it does seem a little suspicious that someone at Woodstock would be giving birth right before this particular performance by John Sebastian. An interesting project, given ample time, would be to do research into the generation that was spawned by the Woodstock culture and the effects the attitudes of parents had on their children. (see comment by Alec Murphy)
Comments
While I believe Karen is correct in asserting that it is totally unsafe to have a child at Woodstock, let alone give birth to one at the venue, I can’t quite grasp the argument that having parents from the “counterculture†generation (like many of the collegiate students’ parents now) would have a profound negative effect on the rearing of their children. Despite the fact that this generation was known for their liberalism, free love, independence, and anti-establishment and commercialism; I simply do not believe that this truly has any bearing on how these people will be as parents relative to parents who did not partake in the counterculture. The values of counter culture and the values of parenting do not collide. One could be a leading member in this counterculture, and have wonderful parenting -- just as someone else could be completely anti-counterculture and be a terrible parent. On another note, I think this scene is all about the decisions children make as they grow older, which is another testament to the youths’ independence from the decisions of their parents. Yes, while they may, indeed, be influenced by their parents, they could also very well be turned off to the negative aspects of the counter culture because they were witness to the negatives aspects of it first-hand. Therefore, I think this scene is more about the choices we make, as we grow older, and how those choices create our own reality, rather than how we are innately negatively influenced by our parents’ ill choices.
