Skip to main content

The 1950s are often portrayed as a period of social cohesion. Why is this misleading?

When we think of the 1950's, most people think of similar things such as "Leave it to Beaver", very conservative and cliched pop music, and high patriotism. Our view of that time is one of social conformity to conservative values, with a traditional nuclear family where the father worked and the mother stayed home, where a majority of people attended church, where crime was relatively low, where a majority of American citizens were extremely patriotic, and where entertainment media emphasized these same conservative values and were subjected to censorship if they did not conform. This is misleading because while these things were all true to a certain extent, the world was obviously not perfect and not everyone was conforming or upholding traditional values, even if it seemed like they were. The 1950's were actually a very tumultuous time period, with the end of World War II leaving Europe war torn and in debt, the outbreak of the Korean War and the clashes of opinion over our objectives there, and several social issues such as civil rights and feminism were coming to a head. People were re-examining traditional values and abandoning them or fiercely defending them. Lots of violence and protests stemmed from these social issues. Entertainment media were also evolving, with the popularity of rock and roll growing steadily. The threat of Communism also became a huge issue, sparking the Cold War and the McCarthy hearings. So, in reality, the 1950's in no way was characterized by social cohesion. Then why do we remember it that way? Because the reasons it was not socially cohesive are very controversial issues that most people don't like to think about or discuss. For instance, for a majority of Americans, it is not a source of pride that we practiced racial segregation, that we denied women equal pay with men, or that there are international problems that we cannot always fix. Even at the time, no one wanted to face or talk about "taboo" subjects whether it was because of their own discomfort with it or because they didn't want to be a negative influence on children, so most forms of media were heavily censored and did not show anything that would deviate from the social norms at the time. Also, with all the problems going on in the country and the world, people probably wanted entertainment that allowed them to escape said problems by watching a "perfect" family go through life in a "perfect" world. So, the 1950's were not a period of conformity, but are portrayed that way mostly because people were ignoring the world's problems.

Comments

J Chambliss said…
This is a really well structured and coherent analysis of the social issues shaping the 1950s. I think your points are well made, and do much to explain how the 1950s projected a reality not experienced by many Americans.

Popular posts from this blog

Mythology and Superheroes in Comics

Ohhh my goodness... When I decided on trying to analyze the mythological origins and references in superhero comics, I had no idea the can of worms I was opening up... On the one hand, it was awesome to see just how many connections there were between superheroes and psychology/mythology/philosophy, but all the information also made it terribly difficult to distinguish what I should be using and how to tie it all together. When I was talking to one of my sorority sisters about it she said, "Oh yeah, well, research essays are kind of like putting together puzzles..." and I think that really sums up what writing this paper was like for me. Fortunately, I was really interested throughout the whole process and I very much enjoyed writing the paper. Being a psychology major, I was especially interested in reading about the Jungian archetypes that had a lot of parallels with major modern comic books superheroes. I was also able to incorporate Joseph Campbell's "hero cycle...

Why blame comics for societal failure?

Why blame comics for societal failure? Society blamed comics for the societal failures because it was a fairly new industry, and as things seemed to go “wrong” they figured it must be comic books. When a child grew up during the war, his father was probably killing people and the military and his mother was probably making things in factories to help kill the opposition. The only things kids had to “babysit” them was comic books, and they read many different kinds. So when kids starting acting differently in this new generation the figured it must be the comic books. Society didn’t want to believe it may have been the internal and external scars war causes on the soldiers and their families. Also the fact that young unattended children are reading these comics may not be able to differentiate between fantasy and reality. When society fails it always needs a scapegoat then it was comic books next it was rock and roll. Society naturally resist change.

#FUTURES: Tomorrow Idris Elba will be the Last Man Standing

There is some bad buzz around Pacific Rim on the web. I suspect the possibility of a giant robot movie being awesome is too much for some people.  The internet is full of dark corners, but until we see the movie we won't know the box office.  What we can tell right now is that Idris Elba is doing his part to make the movie a success. A standout performer, Elba has made a name for himself in countless productions .  He achieve wide recognition for his turn on the big screen in films such as Thor and on the small screen in the BBC's Luther . Of course, the open question about actors of color in any film is whether not they will help or hurt the box office.  Will Smith recent disappointment with After Earth opens the door for this conversation. His lack of success sparks the question who will be the next "bankable" star of color. There can be only one! See what I did there:-)  These sentiments reflect a Hollywood centric approach that ignores Nolly...