In most history classes and history books I have read to this point, a time period is by default characterized by its most iconic symbols—influential people, remarkable events, and long-term effects on history at large. Historians, no matter on the “winning” or “losing” side of history, tend to record the most abnormal features of their period. This means that the “louder” some people are, the fewer of them are required to enter historical accounts. Country leaders are worth historians’ attention by themselves. Activist groups who otherwise are already prominent people may need a few members to be remembered. Civil Rights movements take thousands of political-minded citizens to enter history textbooks. Natural disasters and wars take millions of ordinary people to gain the same level of attention.
I was repeatedly reminded of this fact when I was reading Vinen—the overwhelming amount of historical knowledge and remarkable events seemed over the top to me. For example, the sheer number of student protestors and incidents of violence made me feel as if everybody was in the turmoil. However, even though there were a lot of uncertainties and radical activities in ’68, the people involved undeniably represented a very small portion of the human population. Reading Vinen was like walking into a dance party—whoever is louder and crazier grabs the most attention. Therefore, I became more interested in hearing the silent majority—what ‘68 was really like.
The discussions with Geoff Brown and Sam Lord were a good alternative to the processed material presented by Vinen. Seeing Sam skillfully screen-printing posters and hearing him talk about weekly conferences and poster sessions in ’68 allowed me to visualize their daily life. Hearing Geoff talk about how the radical movement was defeated but he still persists also let me feel how they feel. Even though they would probably fall in the “loud” group in ’68, they were mostly involved in one thing, and other movements happening globally were probably just as distant to them as they were to an ordinary citizen at that time. Therefore, people’s lives were probably not as hectic as what we would have felt just by reading history books like Vinen. Literature, as opposed to history, is often written from a single and small point of view. It also carries more emotion and everyday details that history often neglects. Therefore, I am looking forward to the literature we are going to read, which may shed light on the silent majority in ’68 to see how significant the turmoil actually was.
I appreciate your juxtaposition of the factual history drawn from multiple perspectives and the more emotional literature that often has a limited and more intimate point of view. While it is important to look at historical events from an objective viewpoint, we often miss the voices of the “silent majority” you described, such as those who experienced 68 as a part of their everyday life and weren’t the movement leaders on whom historians typically focus. Vinen’s history of 68 is an overwhelmingly detailed account of the various conflicts playing out across the Western world during the time period, and it’s easy to get so caught up in the chaos of 68 as we look back from a historian’s point of view and thus forget to ask what life really looked like “on the ground” for those who lived through 68. Talking to 68ers like Geoff and Sam, as well as reading the literature emerging from and framing the time period, will help us get a new perspective on what 68 was in a more mundane and grassroots context.