You are absolutely right--
LLR is looking at it as a historian, with this purist kind of view, where we who lived it, were involved along a very broad spectrum of "hippieness"....very few actually renounced EVERYTHING. Livings had to be earned, food bought, medical care obtained, it's an affectation to think that one can completely reject a way of life. I think the true rejection was far more internal. We sensed, with the instincts of the young, the hypocrisy, the compromises, the selling out of the older generation, without understanding the reasons why these things happen. Looking back, we color much of that past with the way we want to see ourselves---fearlessly taking on the establishment, honest, clearsighted---but not terribly farsighted.
I lived in two separate communal situations after graduation from college. I wouldn't say they were any better or worse than the multitude of living arrangements we all have lived in--- depending a great deal on the people with whom one chose to cohabit. BUt I do think that the thought posted by someone about how the dreams died a'borning was true. How difficult it is open your minds to new thoughts especially from the next generation!
I understand George W. did sow a few wild oats in his day. SO did I, and so did most of us who lived that particularly strange transition.
I don't think it harmed me or changed the basic person I am. ANd I think that while Clinton was one of our generation, what he IS is NOT a product of it.
penni -call me Sunshine |
