academia v. neelofer

Distaste towards suburbia, qualified by houses with white picket fences and perfectly manicured families, is central to the core of the beat generation so it comes as no surprise that Gregory Corso's "Marriage" and Lawrence Ferlinghetti's "In Goya's Greatest Scenes" brutally pick apart the superficially pristine world of suburban America. Corso's "Marriage" begins by posing the questions, "Should I get married?/Should I be Good?" (Corso 179.1-2) as if being married has a direct correlation to being good; being good, of course, means living the American dream of a house with the white picket fence, two car garage, 2.5 children and a dog. However, within the first stanza, Corso quickly reveals his true, 'alternative' self: "Don't take her to movies but to cemeteries," (Corso 179.3) erecting the foundational beliefs of the beat generation, beliefs that the social norm of the 1950s considered to be radical, disruptive, and counterproductive to the growth of an upwardly mobile society.

Corso's nonchalance towards the '50s life style grows as he mentally flips through the different kinds of women from the stereotypical straight laced Stepford wife to "a beautiful sophisticated woman/tall and pale wearing an elegant black dress and long black gloves" (Corso 181.90-1). Even being married to a person and a setting diametrically opposite of the dominant American culture of the time, marriage to a high society woman in the cultural mecca of the world: New York, is a "pleasant prison dream" (Corso 181.95). It conveys that Corso's distaste lies within the institution of marriage, not a specific type of girl. Marriage is the gateway to a suburban lifestyle and Corso is clearly not a fan. The poem closes at the epitome of Corso's blasé attitude, "Because what if I'm 60 years old and not married,/all alone in my furnished room with pee stains on my underwear/and everybody else is married! All the universe married but me!/Ah, yet well I know that were a woman possible as I am possible then marriage would be possible --" (182.103-6).

Similarly, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, contemporary of Corso, bluntly exploits the underlying truths of the '50s culture, comparing the culture to "the moment when they [the people of the world] first attained the title of 'suffering humanity'" (Ferlinghetti 249.3-5). The rampant rise of suburbia in America parallelled the growing security Americans felt with their government. With looming threats of nuclear bombs, people found hiding underneath desks an acceptable shelter. If not for the counterculture of the beat generation, the revolution of the 1960s would not have become a reality.

The human suffering Goya depicts in his paintings is timeless much like the vicious, self-feeding cycle of injustice within the human race. Never has it been as terrible as it is in times of ignorance and apathy. Recent examples of human suffering at its worse include 1950s suburbia and suburbia today, which has been dubbed "middle America" by the Left. The "maimed citizens in painted cards" (Ferlinghetti 250.33-4) with "strange license plates and engines that devour America" (Ferlinghetti 250.35-7) are still travelling the "freeways fifty lanes wide" (Ferlinghetti 250.28) "illustrating imbecile illusions of happiness" (Ferlinghetti 250.31).

Americans today are exponentially better imitations of their '50s predecessors because not only have they perfected the art of apathy but with such arrogance that they are rapidly alienating any allies they might once have had. Unquestioning of the world around them and the press releases they hear on the corporate media puppets blaring through their 30 inch plasma screens, Americans have convinced those being oppressed that they, the oppressed, must incorporate into their lives such as the institution of marriage. Unless you are bound by religion or other similar beliefs, there is no reason for a person to get married beyond benefiting from the legalities of the system (read: tax breaks). If two people genuinely love each other enough to spend the rest of their lives, why does their race, religion, or sexuality matter? Why is there a massive gay rights movement to legalise marriage? Why is there a counter movement for a constitutional ban? Marriage is not an ethical issue unless religion is dragged into it; I distinctly recall our founding fathers creating stipulations to bar the influence of church upon the state. Government should institute civil unions for every kind of marriage; if one's religious beliefs dictate for a marriage, then those people are welcome to have the ceremony. The government should not be forced to recognise the ceremony as a binding contract like civil unions would be.

Recommended reading: Gregory Corso's "Marriage" and Lawrence Ferlinghetti's "In Goya's greatest scenes"