Comparing the Books, Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the Sixties and The Sixties: Y :: American America History

comparability the Books, Destructive generation Second Thoughts Ab kayoed the Sixties and The Sixties historic period of Hope, days of Rage The preface to Peter Collier and David Horowitzs Destructivegeneration Second Thoughts most the Sixties and the introduction to ToddGitlins The Sixties old age of Hope, geezerhood of Rage both try to explain theauthors reasons for writing their books. Both books, base on nostalgia,deal with the good and the bad which have come out of the sixties. However,while Collier and Horowitz detect the sixties more as a time ofdestruction, Gitlin places more emphasis on the spirited atmosphere which lead to the destruction. This destruction they all refer to includes thediminished placement of trust in America, the rising problem of drugs, andthe overall havoc created by dint ofout the country. Therefore, the authorsgive devil very different descriptions of the era of which they were all apart. Even in the beginnings of the works, the d ifferences are verynoticeable. Collier and Horowitz begin by trying to advert a summarymoment (Collier and Horowitz 11) of the decade. This moment involves arevolutionary pigeonholing known as the Black Panther Party. The authors seem tocriticize this stem by commenting on their appearances and their actionsin certain events. For example, at a cocktail party, peerless Panther spit inthe face of an army draftee because he brought a black friend from the armyhome while on leave. When the Panther returned to the party, the peoplepresent pre played not to notice that anything had happened. Later, whenmis commiserateings occurred amongst ii guests at the party which resultedin one of them making a racial remark, anger was fue take in the chemical multitude andamong former(a)s who had heard intimately the event. Collier and Horowitz, whenremarking on their reactions, emphasize that while in ordinary multiplication theevent would not have caused many problems, during the sixtie s, peopleconsidered it more of a sign that revolution was worthwhile. Perhaps theauthors were suggesting that the revolution was created out of exaggeratedproblems or that those leading the revolution, such as the Black Panthers,did not quite extrapolate why they were leading it. Collier and Horowitzseem imply this belief through the portrayal of the Panthers as uneducatedwhen listening to Genet speak on their behalf The Panthers milled aroundin sullen incomprehension as he talked (P.12). These carry to be theirreasons for why the revolution caused so much destruction. On the early(a) hand, Gitlin begins his introduction by describing hiscomparability the Books, Destructive Generation Second Thoughts About the Sixties and The Sixties Y American America HistoryComparing the Books, Destructive Generation Second Thoughts About the Sixties and The Sixties Years of Hope, Days of Rage The preface to Peter Collier and David Horowitzs DestructiveGeneration Second Though ts About the Sixties and the introduction to ToddGitlins The Sixties Years of Hope, Days of Rage both try to explain theauthors reasons for writing their books. Both books, establish on nostalgia,deal with the good and the bad which have come out of the sixties. However,while Collier and Horowitz describe the sixties more as a time ofdestruction, Gitlin places more emphasis on the spirited atmosphere whichled to the destruction. This destruction they all refer to includes thediminished placement of trust in America, the rising problem of drugs, andthe overall havoc created throughout the country. Therefore, the authorsgive two very different descriptions of the era of which they were all apart. Even in the beginnings of the works, the differences are verynoticeable. Collier and Horowitz begin by trying to describe a summarymoment (Collier and Horowitz 11) of the decade. This moment involves arevolutionary group known as the Black Panther Party. The authors seem tocriticize this group by commenting on their appearances and their actionsin certain events. For example, at a cocktail party, one Panther spit inthe face of an army draftee because he brought a black friend from the armyhome while on leave. When the Panther returned to the party, the peoplepresent pretended not to notice that anything had happened. Later, whenmisunderstandings occurred between two guests at the party which resultedin one of them making a racial remark, anger was fueled in the group andamong others who had heard roughly the event. Collier and Horowitz, whenremarking on their reactions, emphasize that while in ordinary times theevent would not have caused many problems, during the sixties, peopleconsidered it more of a sign that revolution was worthwhile. Perhaps theauthors were suggesting that the revolution was created out of exaggeratedproblems or that those leading the revolution, such as the Black Panthers,did not quite understand why they were leading it. Collier and Horowit zseem imply this belief through the portrayal of the Panthers as uneducatedwhen listening to Genet speak on their behalf The Panthers milled aroundin sullen incomprehension as he talked (P.12). These tend to be theirreasons for why the revolution caused so much destruction. On the other hand, Gitlin begins his introduction by describing his