Allen Ginsburg, Beat Poet |
By Alan
Caruba
In 1955
when I was graduating from high school, Allen Ginsburg, the now celebrated poet,
was writing “Howl” and on his way to joining the handful of writers who would
become known collectively as the “Beats” and icons of the “beat generation.” It
was and still is hokum.
The
lives of Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, William S. Burroughs, and others in their
circle included drug addiction, alcoholism, homosexuality, and an adolescent
self-involvement that translated itself into their writing and, as they burst on
the cultural scene in the latter 1950s, helped to shape it, and set in motion
changes in attitudes and behavior that are with us
today.
At the
time I regarded all the discussion of their writings as rubbish. In college I
read Kerouac’s novels, “On the Road” (1957) and “The Subterraneans” (1958) and
thought of them as little more than embellished diaries written by someone
without enough imagination to invent characters, basing them on his fellow
“beats” such as Neal Cassady and having little in the way of a plot. William
Burroughs wrote about his life in “Junky” and “Naked Lunch” showcasing what he
called “the most horrible things I can think of.” Ginsberg, a homosexual, poured
his ramblings into “Howl”, published in 1956. It was the kind of poetry that a
real poet, Robert Frost, referred to as “playing tennis without the net”; prose
masquerading as poetry.
All this is captured in a new book by
Ronald K.L. Collins and David M. Skover, “Mania: The Story of the Outraged and
Outrageous Lives that Launched a Cultural Revolution.” ($26.00, Top Five Books).
The authors spent more than eight years researching and writing the story of a
group of people, most of whom would fade into anonymity, but who played roles in
the fevered drug and alcohol addled minds of the now famed “beats” who were said
to reflect the angst of their times and their post-war generation, as they come
of age in the 1950s.
I have
reviewed books since the 1960s when I was a very young journalist and, despite
the passage of time and the accolades heaped on Ginsberg, Kerouac, Burroughs, et
al, I thought they were a trashy, self-indulgent, and self-obsessed, often drug
addled adolescent bunch who, through a variety of contacts in academia, mainly
Columbia University, managed to crash through to publication with work that
strove to alter the literature of their day to reflect their lives and life
styles. Suffice to say, they were well outside the norms and values of their
time.
This is
not to say they did not secure a large readership and critical acclaim, but a
lot of it was a form of literary voyeurism, a desire to safely read about drugs,
booze, and homosexuality in the safety of one’s dorm room, cubicle in the Ivory
Tower, or suburban home. It was different, considered obscene, and by the
standards of the time, dangerous stuff.
If the
“beats” represented anything, it was a generalized yearning to do and be
something more than a corporate minion or the house-bound wife of one. The 1950s
spawned the 1960s with its “hippie” culture of drugs and rock’n roll. The Cold
War with the Soviet Union dominated the nation’s attention. Congress was looking
for Communists in government. Television was coming into its own with bland, but
entertaining situation comedies, variety shows, westerns and dramas.
The
youth of the nation wanted something that would let them break out of society’s
demand for conformity. The “beats” writings fed that longing. It also gave rise
to the popularity of drugs, a loosening of sexual restraints, but the beats were
not “hippies.” Kerouac was a pious Catholic and would be regarded today as
politically conservative. He was also an alcoholic who died “a classic
drunkard’s death” at age 47 in 1969. Burroughs would live to 83, dying in 1997.
Ginsberg would live to 79, dying in 2005 from bone
cancer.
The
beats emphasis on personal freedom contributed to the rise to the feminist
movement led by Betty Friedan and others. Concurrent was the civil rights
movement led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The 60s was a decade of turmoil,
John F. Kennedy was assassinated. His brother Robert would be as well along with
Dr. King. The Chicago Democrat Party convention in 1968 drew hundreds of
youthful protesters to the Vietnam War and, in general, the
“establishment.”
I doubt
that more than a handful of today’s younger generation knows anything of
Ginsberg, Kerouac, Burroughs and others of that era which seems distant even in
my own mind although I lived through all of it.
The
beat’s brief era of fame is the background music to our present times in which
the demands of homosexuals to marry are taken seriously, casual sex among the
young is the norm, women wait longer to marry and raise families, and there are
moves afoot to legalize marijuana while we fill prisons with those who sell and
use drugs.
What is
different is the rise of the environmental movement, the multi-million dollar
organizations like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth who lay claim to
“saving the Earth”, but exist mainly to thwart the lifeblood of any successful
economy, energy it requires. These and countless other groups exploited the Big
Lie of “global warming” on billions around the world and, as the original hoax
runs out of steam, it has been transformed into “climate change”, something that
always was and always will be something over which humans can do nothing, except
adapt and endure.
What is
different, too, is the growth of government at all levels in our lives. The
federal government spews forth thousands of regulations every month. Here in the
U.S. and across the pond in the European Union, those who grew up since the
1950s are demonstrating they are utterly clueless about how to manage a nation
or its economy. The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, but socialism is now the
order of the day.
We have
a President who makes no excuses for his youthful drug use and blames everyone
but himself for our present ills. The nation is desperate for leadership, for
grown-ups to save it from insane debt, an anemic economy, and massive
unemployment. There are few to be found.
Quite
possibly the beats would rebel against the times in which we live. Political
correctness is a cultural straight jacket. Their works were put on trial as
obscene and granted the protection of the First Amendment, but today we have
“hate speech” that can land you in jail. Add in the threat to Western
civilization that Islam represents and much of what the beats rebelled against
in the 1950s now looks rational and reasonable.
Editor’s Note: Alan Caruba is a
founding member of The National Book Critics Circle. He writes a monthly book
review website at www.bookviews.com.
© Alan
Caruba, 2013
1 comment:
It's easy, with hindsight, to appreciate the contribution these rebels and misfits made to the destruction of civilised society, but did it have to turn out that way?
I remember the extreme frustration and impotence I felt growing up in a 1950's provincial British town. The straight jacket of rigid social conventions and approved belief systems often made life unbearably dull and depressing, fertile ground for those of us who wanted to break free and follow alternative life styles.
Sadly, wisdom only comes with age, and I now realise that while individuals can be empowered and improved by embracing a cultural revolution, the bulk of the population are too selfish and too stupid to handle such freedoms. Sorry to be so blunt, but PC was never one of my strong points.
So, in answer to my question above, "....did it have to turn out that way?", yes it probably did because humanity simply hasn't evolved enough to cope with true freedom.
Post a Comment