that's not the only out of date reference he makes... I think the implication is that he's been out of touch with society for a long long time.

A tangentially related note: you and I, Marxy, are both fans of "Hair" and fans of the colour and vibrancy of 1990s Japan. Now, one of the 1001 reasons I've given for being fascinated by Japan was (in some interview earlier this year) that the 1960s was a very formative experience for me, and that Japan sometimes feels like "a permanent 1960s". Now, I know you won't agree with the "permanent" part, but would you say there's something in the 60s part? I'm talking about a certain tender-mindedness, a gentle experimentation, a benign, whimsical, hippyish emphasis on peace and love, and the relationship of these things to economic security. I know "Hair" satirizes the 1960s counterculture, but I think it does so affectionately (the same way Neomarxisme sees Japan, perhaps).

But did either of you actually see HAIR performed on broadway? I did in 77 and was part of the audience called up on stage. My one "Broadway appearance". I was about 8.

Japan sometimes feels like "a permanent 1960s".

I think this illustrates where our paths have diverged. I certainly like the aesthetic content of the 60s, but I also think the political and philosophical content of the counterculture in the West greatly improved society. Yes, the Left went too far. Yes, no one actually lives in communes now, etc, etc. But even a conservative like David Brooks will admit that the 60s shook up American society like no other decade has since. Massive structural changes, legal improvements for minorities, a government willing to go after the mob, monopolies and crooked media institutions. Mistakes were made, but the 50s "everything's swell!" fake-uniformity went out the window.

Despite a colorful exterior, Japan continues to have the structural conditions of 50s America. If you are concerned solely with aesthetic issues, which I know you are, the 60s (defined specifically as a retro movement) lives here in Japan way more than anywhere else, hands down. More mods per capita in Tokyo, I bet. But think about the hippy messages in Hair or the very idea of social satire that Hair exploits: nowhere to be seen in Japan.

think about the hippy messages in Hair or the very idea of social satire that Hair exploits: nowhere to be seen in Japan.

Oh, I can't agree completely with that. Didn't we just discuss the Peace issue of Relax? Sure, it lacked much political edge, but so did "All You Need Is Love" by The Beatles. As for satire, well, there's always Masamania.

Right: there's one guy with a blog. Jonathan Swift has a huge smile on his face somewhere in heaven.

Give me better examples of where 60s "values" exist in Japan. We both know where to find 60s styles.

masamania was around when web pages were still called web pages.

as for 60's values, does amphetamine usage and VD count?

there's one guy with a blog

If we agree that "Hair" is affectionate satire, there's tons of similar stuff in Japan. Think of Smap dressing up as Yon-Sama and ribbing him for his beatific narcissism. Is that any different from "They'll be gaga at the gogo when they see me in my toga etc"?

60s values include things like free love, very much alive in Japan, as love hotels and ideas like the "keepu boyfriend" (the one you ask the shop to keep for you just in case the other ones are unsatisfactory) confirm. I do think that 90s Japan felt more like 60s Britain than 00s Japan does, though. The colours, for instance.

"free love" only means something when there is an opposite, since there was none here, it means nuttin.

Speed was the bad side of 60s drugs. Mods and Altamont. Japan never got enough of the "creative" drugs.

VD is everywhere. Probably less in Japan than elsewhere.

Think of Smap dressing up as Yon-Sama and ribbing him for his beatific narcissism. Is that any different from "They'll be gaga at the gogo when they see me in my toga etc"?

Yes, but I may have to concede that the difference is one of high art vs. low art. Hair is pop musical with high-art sensibilities. Smap x Smap is 100% high art free. Whether that leads to a value judgment... I'll avoid that alleyway. But, if we're still on the 60s tip, pop culture was borrowing HEAVY from high-culture from '66-'68. Then it went "back to the earth."

Is Smap's satire different from "Hallejulah Mary loved her son / Why don't my mother love me?" That's a heavy line, man.

actually VD rates are on the massive inccrease here.

Hair is pop musical with high-art sensibilities.

"Hair" may be clever-clever or risqué in its references (they rhyme Antonioni with Roman Polanski and throw in references to Shakespeare and The Bible), but it never goes anywhere near high art in terms of the risks it takes with form or the places it leads its audience. It's Broadway pabulum, strictly middle-brow. No John Cage or Bruce Nauman techniques here! Not even any Yoko Ono, though possibly some satire on Yoko Ono types. In other words, it's by and for the kind of people who read The New York Times' coverage of avant garde art rather than the kind of people who go to avant garde art events. It can refer to it, but it can't perform it.

It's ironic you mention the Milos Forman connection - a Musical that was of the times at it's debut in 1968 being made into a timecapsule or throwback movie of sorts in the 1979 film version.

So now we have a (by no means terrible nor essential) 2005 remake of a 1971 film.

That's a great analogy. I can't watch Hair the film because it's way too colored by 70s funk. I'm sure the Danny Elfman songs will age equally poorly.