Leary Bio: Opportunity for Unfounded ’60s – Tom D’Antoni – Huffington Post – 6/27/06
 Leary Bio: Opportunity for Unfounded ’60s Revisionism
Tom D’Antoni
The reviews of Robert Greenfield’s biography of Timothy Leary have allowed “sixties” revisionists to spread unfounded and uniformly negative opinions on an entire era.Having been one of the publishers/editors of the same “underground” paper in Baltimore that P.J. O’Rourke, the first of such revisionists, made his mark lying about, I have some expertise on the subject.
Here’s the myth promoted by the revisionists: The sixties were all about hedonism and self-satisfaction.I wish.
First of all, the subject of “The Sixties” is so broad and complex, so full of contradictions and countervailing points of view that to generalize about it at all is not worth the effort. There are a few aspects that need attention, however.
Simply put, the ethos of the era for us can be summed up in these words: fairness, community, freedom of personal choice, and peace. Period. End of sentence.
Fairness in how government treated its citizens, and how people treated each other. After having been told that America was the land of the free, we saw people refused voting rights, freedom to reside where they could afford to, even denied service at lunch counters, hotels and rest rooms.
Imagine that? “Who would make rules like that?” we wondered.
We were told that America stood for peace in the world and then they sent us to fight a war of vanity in Vietnam. That didn’t make sense to us and we did everything we could to bring our peers out of that hell. Many of us refused to participate.
The women in our life knocked us upside the head and let us know that things weren’t so hot for them. Made sense to us. In the eyes of conservatives, hippies were girlie-men then, and stayed that way. And the hippie women were manly-girls, let’s not forget that. This is nonsense and shouldn’t be believed any more than any of their familiar lies which have come into current relief so clearly these days, but which are consistent with their history.
We were told that sex was, what a sin? With the development of the birth control pill we were the first generation, and maybe the last to be able to have unprotected sex anytime we wanted, with whom we wanted. Was there something wrong with that? Did we keep on with it? Nah, we got married and had kids. Did we have fun while we tried out everything under God’s Red Light? Fuck yes.
Is that hedonism? Only to those who didn’t’ get any.
When we dressed or acted in ways that seemed strange to the generation before us we got our asses kicked, literally. Would you like to know how many times I was arrested on trumped up charges simply because I was a long-haired hippie who worked for “that” paper? Don’t forget, people were killed and imprisoned for exercising the rights guaranteed them in the Constitution.
What we found out was that the America we were taught existed was a figment of a script writer at best, and the deliberate misrepresentation, at worst.
All this has nothing to do with Timothy Leary, and none of it was taken into account by reviewers, NY Times and New Yorker included, who lashed out at an entire generation.
Did we take LSD? Sure we did. I took tons of it. I loved my hallucinations, even the bad ones. Did I find God? I’m still looking. Did it change my life? Yes, in some ways. It loosened the reins. I think if you asked P.J. O’Rourke if he regrets taking LSD and smoking all that dope, he would say he took some good things away from it.
But don’t tell me that Timothy Leary is responsible for anything except talking a good game. I enjoyed what he had to say. Some of it made sense and some of it didn’t’. I guess a few people bought it all, but that’s just human nature.
The bluster and meanness of the revisionists who have attacked an era in which the driving idea was to make a better world reveals their own bleakness of spirit. They build the idea that Leary was much more influential than he ever was.
Take my word for it, he wasn’t. The stars of the “counter-culture” (which actually existed) were just that, stars. We liked them. They entertained us. We took from them what we needed.
As those of us who fought for the right to control every aspect of our lives grow old and begin the fight to control the manner of our own death, the record needs to be set straight. Don’t fuck with us. We’re old, we know the score and we’re still determined to “reflect from the mountain so all souls can see it.”
This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 4th, 2006 at 2:20 PM and filed under Articles. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
One Response to “Leary Bio: Opportunity for Unfounded ’60s – Tom D’Antoni – Huffington Post – 6/27/06”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

Hear, hear! I second that emotion. The 60s about hedonism?! Excu-u-u-use me!! Hedonism is about self-satisfaction. However, we were the generation that was fighting for peace, for equality, for OTHERS! Did we have a little fun (okay, sometimes lots of fun) while we were doing it? Yup! But having fun does not a hedonist make, unless that fun is the be-all and end-all – the end rather than the means.
Were we about love? Darn right! But we were SERIOUS about love – and I am not being even the slightest bit facetious. Were we about “flower power” and nature and peaceful co-existence? You bet! But we were SERIOUS about those things; they were not simply just nice words or concepts: they were our raison d’etre. We spread the word of love, peace, nature, equality, etc. – but we also LIVED it! That is what made it different.
Did many of us smoke pot, take shrooms and LSD and trip out alot of the time? Yup! Yet even for those who did not “find God” (or some semblance thereof) in tripping, it was almost always a positive “mind-expanding” experience, as well as a bonding experience that has never been equalled, much less surpassed.
When someone asks me how I feel about what I did during the “60s” (which actually ran up until about 1974), I tell them that I am neither proud nor ashamed of what I did – but that, without question, I would not be the person I am had I not done those things: i.e., that the positives – psychologically, emotionally, socially, politically, etc. – FAR outweigh the negatives.
Don’t let the historical revisionists win. They are far too active in too many ways already. But this is “crossing the line” because it is US they are talking about – US and OUR time, and the incredible things we accomplished, both directly and indirectly.
Peace.
Posted on 05-Jul-06 at 9:14 am | Permalink