Why the 1920s-1940s?

[FedoraFan112390]

From what I've seen on my 8 years around here, most people here tend to love and gravitate more toward the 1920s-1940s roughly than any other period; most seem to define that rough span as being the "Golden Era". From what I've seen, 1927-1945 or so is the most common marker points for the Golden Era around here, and mainly the '30s-'45 in particular.

My question is: Why that era? Why that range?

I'm not questioning your like of it - not in any negative way. I'm not asking you to justify your love of it, more asking why you love that period, why for you the '30s-40s is the Golden Era?

Myself, I view roughly 1935-1965 as the "Golden Era". The high point in the Presidency of FDR, the birth of color (the wondrous Technicolor hues depicted in Gone with the Wind and The Wizard of Oz), and the waning of the Depression, America's triumph in WWII, the birth of the Atomic Age and all of the good and bad associated with it (especially the obsession with futurism circa '45-mid 60s), the mid-late '50s as (IMO) the high point of American society (A time of decent politics, post McCarthy, prosperity - a period of "Pax Americana"), the beautiful color films of the 1950s and the glamour of Monroe and the birth of Disneyland and all it stood for then. A time when men were men, women were women, and everyone seemed to look toward America's future with hope. I love all of the music from the 1940s-1965; I'm not particularly a fan of 1930s era music with some exceptions. Swing, Jazz, Bebop, early Rock - that to me is the pinnacle of American music. An era which saw the likes of Gable, Bogart, Stewart, Flynn, Niven, the Rat Pack, Marlon Brando, James Dean, Rod Taylor and many other leading men and beautiful ladies like Vivien Leigh, Lana Turner, Lauren Bacall, Sandra Dee, Elizabeth Taylor and many others. The era of the nostalgia 8mm home movie.

I cut the era off in March 1965 as the first ground troops make their way into Vietnam and America begins to enter an age of turmoil, and rejects long-held social mores that we've never gotten back since.

That's why for me, 1935-1965 is the Golden Era; Why is the 30s-40s the era for you?

 

[LizzieMaine]

It's not a material or a nostalgic thing for me. It's a matter of philosophy. The rise of Disneyland and all it symbolizes, to me isn't a glorious nostalgic thing -- it's the final unholy triumph of the Boys From Marketing. I would have spent the late fifties reading Vance Packard and saying "see, I told you so!" Other than that I would have been middle-aged and fed up, much as I am today.

The thirties -- the most genuinely radical decade of the 20th century --were my kind of Era, a time when people really believed they had the collective power to make meaningful changes in the world, and actually hit the streets to do something about it.

If I have heroes at all, it's people like these, who put what little they had on the line for the common good. Unfortunately, many of them ended up selling out their dreams for a beaverboard house in Levittown and a Mercury that rusted out after two years.

As for music, burn everything recorded after 1942. The American songbook died during the war, and never came back.

 

[AmateisGal]

It's a complicated question for me. Growing up, I was in love with the late 18th century and early 19th century, specifically the American and French Revolutions, the Regency, and the Napoleonic period. I still enjoy those eras, but I don't have the same passion for them as I do the Golden Era. Odd that I made the switch, especially considering I wanted nothing to do with anything WW2 related when I was growing up. I think it was when I saw my parents watching The Winds of War and I saw the horror of the concentration camps depicted onscreen. However, I thoroughly enjoyed watching classic movies on my local PBS station's Silver Screen Classics that aired on Saturday nights. Ball of Fire and They Got Me Covered were early favorites that I taped on old VHS tapes so I could watch them over and over again.

But something happened when I was in high school. I watched Memphis Belle, the Hollywood movie, not the documentary, and I read a few novels set during the war. Slowly, my interest began to grow, though it didn't fully take over until I was in graduate school and I decided to study World War II instead of comparative studies between the women of the American and French Revolutions (I didn't know French and hadn't the time nor inclination to learn it considering I was a mother of three young children and didn't have an ear for languages).

As I dug deeper into the period, my fall became complete. I love the movies, the fashion, the music, the social mores of the time. Was it a perfect world? Buy no means. Yet World War II saw the birth of so much change and it was on a global scale - to be frank, not all that change was good.

Immersing myself in this period also helps me feel closer to my grandparents. I lost my grandpa about 8 years ago, but my grandma is 90 and still going strong. I was very close to them growing up, and perhaps it is in honor of how hard they worked and sacrificed (both were children of immigrants) to build a very successful life for themselves that I gravitate toward this time.

So, yes. A complicated question. I once wrote a post on why I write WW2 fiction that perhaps explains it a bit more succinctly: http://modernbellesofhistory.com/melissa-marsh/we-can-do-it-or-why-im-a-world-war-ii-aficianado/

 

[FedoraFan112390]

It's not a material or a nostalgic thing for me. It's a matter of philosophy. The rise of Disneyland and all it symbolizes, to me isn't a glorious nostalgic thing -- it's the final unholy triumph of the Boys From Marketing. I would have spent the late fifties reading Vance Packard and saying "see, I told you so!" Other than that I would have been middle-aged and fed up, much as I am today.

The thirties -- the most genuinely radical decade of the 20th century --were my kind of Era, a time when people really believed they had the collective power to make meaningful changes in the world, and actually hit the streets to do something about it. Unfortunately, many of them ended up selling out their dreams for a beaverboard house in Levittown and a Mercury that rusted out after two years.

As for music, burn everything recorded after 1942. The American songbook died during the war, and never came back.

For me, it's a matter of nostalgia I suppose. While it was made after the era, the introduction to the film Grease captures everything I love about the period in question.

 

[FedoraFan112390]

Immersing myself in this period also helps me feel closer to my grandparents. I lost my grandpa about 8 years ago, but my grandma is 90 and still going strong. I was very close to them growing up, and perhaps it is in honor of how hard they worked and sacrificed (both were children of immigrants) to build a very successful life for themselves that I gravitate toward this time.

So, yes. A complicated question. I once wrote a post on why I write WW2 fiction that perhaps explains it a bit more succinctly: http://modernbellesofhistory.com/melissa-marsh/we-can-do-it-or-why-im-a-world-war-ii-aficianado/

For me it is similar in some respects. I was raised by Baby Boomers, and to be honest (no offense to our Baby Boomers here), I don't much like the world they gave us. My grandparents' generation, and great grandparents' generation, however, gave us an amazing America, a good society, a simpler society, one I envy them for having lived in, and wish I could know better. My grandfather (1920-1975) I did not ever meet, but I admire him, and his father before him (1883-1956) I admire even more, and I want to know about the times they lived and dominated. I put my range at '35 to '65 as I feel that represents the high points of both generations. I view the era after 1965 as the time of the Baby Boomers - and it is not an era I much like.

 

[AmateisGal]

For me it is similar in some respects. I was raised by Baby Boomers, and to be honest (no offense to our Baby Boomers here), I don't much like the world they gave us. My grandparents' generation, and great grandparents' generation, however, gave us an amazing America, a good society, a simpler society, one I envy them for having lived in, and wish I could know better. My grandfather (1920-1975) I did not ever meet, but I admire him, and his father before him (1883-1956) I admire even more, and I want to know about the times they lived and dominated. I put my range at '35 to '65 as I feel that represents the high points of both generations. I view the era after 1965 as the time of the Baby Boomers - and it is not an era I much like.

I usually end at about 1962 for things I like (music, fashion, movies, society, etc.). I agree that the mid-60s was not a good time in a lot of ways - I'm no fan of the free love movement and the drug experimentation. I do think the protests against the Vietnam War were important. But like you, I intensely dislike the world the 60s and on left us.

 

[tonyb]

I pay perhaps an inordinate amount of attention to style -- not fashion, not trends, not even any particular era.

There has always been better and worse styles. Still, I wouldn't argue that some eras weren't more generally stylish than others. But that's just me. Unlike many here, I'm a big fan of the cutting-edge art and architecture of the early post-WWII period -- say, 1945 to 1955 -- which was itself an outgrowth of what was seen in earlier decades in the work of Frank Lloyd Wright (notably) and the "International" style architects and the designers of the Bauhaus and all of that.

If ever I daydream of being in another time and place, that time is late-1940s to early '50s, and that place is Southern California. Established neighborhoods full of California craftsman style houses, and newly built-out outlying districts full of airy post-and-beam modernist structures. Lots of glass, and room enough to swing a cat.

Romantic? Guilty as charged. But wotthehell, sometimes it's good to focus on the best parts and disregard the rest.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I usually end at about 1962 for things I like (music, fashion, movies, society, etc.). I agree that the mid-60s was not a good time in a lot of ways - I'm no fan of the free love movement and the drug experimentation. I do think the protests against the Vietnam War were important. But like you, I intensely dislike the world the 60s and on left us.

My problem with the sixties is the sleazy hedonism, the ultrareactionary sexism, and the majority of the music. I'm not sure which I dislike the most.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

a period of "Pax Americana"), the beautiful color films of the 1950s and the glamour of Monroe and the birth of Disneyland and all it stood for then. A time when men were men, women were women, and everyone seemed to look toward America's future with hope.

The rise of Disneyland and all it symbolizes, to me isn't a glorious nostalgic thing -- it's the final unholy triumph of the Boys From Marketing.

I think that depends upon the era. If we're talking about the pre-Eisner Walt era then I would be inclined to agree with FedoraFan. Walt created Mickey but Eisner spawned The Mouse.

 

[AmateisGal]

My problem with the sixties is the sleazy hedonism, the ultrareactionary sexism, and the majority of the music. I'm not sure which I dislike the most.

Yes to all.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think that depends upon the era. If we're talking about the pre-Eisner Walt era then I would be inclined to agree with FedoraFan. Walt created Mickey but Eisner spawned The Mouse.

Nertz. Ub Iwerks created Mickey. Walt just exploited him.

That said, I'll agree with you that Eisner was in league with the Devil.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Yes to all.

That said, though, there were some good things in the sixties. "Green Acres" was a work of demented genius. And man landed on the moon. I'm not sure which I consider the greater achievement.

 

[AmateisGal]

That said, though, there were some good things in the sixties. "Green Acres" was a work of demented genius. And man landed on the moon. I'm not sure which I consider the greater achievement.

Ha! Yeah, there were a few good things about that era. The Civil Rights movement was crucial, of course, and on a cultural scale, there were some terrific movies like The Great Escape. It also gave us Hogan's Heroes which I know is corny and cheeseball, but I adore it anyway.

 

[Stearmen]

You all do know that it was the WWII generation that was in charge through the 60s? And for the U.S. WWII Veterans were President from 1953- 88! The WWII generation were also the parents of all us Baby Boomers, go figure and they did not spare the rod, and second place was just the first looser, no ribbon for just showing up! I guise the biggest short coming of the Baby boom Generation, was mollycoddling their kids!

 

[Lean'n'mean]

Aren't rose tinted spectacles great !

 

[Lean'n'mean]

the sleazy hedonism, the ultrareactionary sexism, and the majority of the music. .

Yep, that's 2015 in a nutshell...

 

[Trenchfriend]

I like the style of the 30's to 40's, because this was real "style" to me.

But, to me, greatest moments of music are in the beginning until mid-60's, I think.

The Kinks - All day and all of the night
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4DV-5d6a5g :rockon:

The cascades - rhythm of the rain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQstQST1GiM

 

[Fading Fast]

I think it started with my dad. He was born in 1924 and was a man of the '30s and '40s more than anything else. The Depression and WWII defined him, his value system, his approach to life. Growing up on the late '60s / '70s, I lived in two worlds - the cultural mishmash of the "outside" world and the very clear moral / ethical (I didn't say always right, but clear) world inside our house of the '30s / '40s. As a kid, I knew these two worlds were very different and parts of both appealed to me, but I also knew that most kids weren't experiencing this dichotomy.

Away from that, I discovered old movies (oddly, pretty much by myself when my grandmother died and we inherited her TV as a second set - hence, I could choose what to watch) and fell in love with the movies of the '30s and '40s. This is the superficial stuff that makes the Era fun for me. The clothes, the styles, the cars, the houses, NYC (many movies where shot there), the manners, the trains, the music, the dancing - I just enjoyed watching it all as a kid. And juxtaposed against the cultural helter skelter of the '70s, it looked inviting, calm, rational, etc. Is this romanticized - yes. Did I know it was as a kid - not really.

I am very clear eyed about the social, political and cultural challenges of the '30s and '40s - my initial interest as a kid led me to a life of studying about the period - but your question was "why that era?" For me, it was my dad as a heavy influence - think of him as a bulwark against the chaos of the '60s and '70s. And the movies showed me the controlled style of the era versus the loud chaos of the late '60s / '70s. As a kid my attraction was both intuitive and surface / now it is very well studied, but I also allow myself to enjoy the parts I like (romanticizing if you like), with no ignorance of the negatives, but a willingness to set them aside so that I can enjoy the period.

I also enjoy much from the '20s, '50s and '60s - and have read and learnt extensively about those periods, but still gravitate toward the '30s and '40s for, I think, the aforementioned reasons.

One note on the politics of all of this (without violating our forum policy at all - I believe). I am very passionate about my political beliefs and am equally passionate in my hatred of talking about politics as I believe intelligent, mature people, who have well-thought-out politics, are not going to change their beliefs because they have built a political belief system based on core premises that might or might not be right, but are deeply embedded in their belief and personal-identity system.

Hence, political conversation quickly becomes angry and meaningless at the same time - to wit, if your premise, based on decades of thought, is X about taxes or social spending and mine is Y, neither one of us is going to move the other. I view the politics of that era as an incredibly interesting aspect of the era - and I have read about them extensively. I believe that today, we are still fighting the same political battles of the '30s, just in ways that look different on the surface. But I don't get hung up on the politics of the Era as, like today, I am passionate in my convictions but absolutely exhausted from the fighting.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Yep, that's 2015 in a nutshell...

Those aren't even the worst things about 2015.

 

[LizzieMaine]

You all do know that it was the WWII generation that was in charge through the 60s? And for the U.S. WWII Veterans were President from 1953- 88! The WWII generation were also the parents of all us Baby Boomers, go figure and they did not spare the rod, and second place was just the first looser, no ribbon for just showing up! I guise the biggest short coming of the Baby boom Generation, was mollycoddling their kids!

We've had this discussion around here before, but the WW2 generation was far from uniform in being stereotypical "out behind the woodshed with you" beating-the-snot-out-of-kids-for-talkng-back" parents. The 1950s were very much an era in which "progressive parenting" was popular, with the whole "make a pal of your kids" philosophy coming into vogue then. There are those here who didn't have that experience, but that doesn't mean it wasn't extremely common, especially in upscale suburbs. Benjamin Spock's theories were very widely followed by families in all walks of life, with the WW2 Generation his most earnest disciples, "progressive" private elementary schools were popular among those who could afford them, and starting in the early sixties, Montessori education was a widespread American trend. The women's magazines of the fifties well document the back-and-forth debate over the "woodshed" mode of childrearing versus the "progressive" mode.

The WW2 Generation, when they were running the country, also gave us motivational research, planned obsolescence, and The Eighties, about which the less said the better.