I recently reread an article of mine written in 1964, and I think it is still valid. There is not much difference. Many of the items on the agenda 37 years ago are still there.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The greatest difference between now and 1964, when I began teaching, is that public policy has pretty much eradicated the dream of Martin Luther King.
The idea that historians write the definitive version of something that will last for all time is less current than it used to be.
If I have not read a book before, it is, for all intents and purposes, new to me whether it was printed yesterday or three hundred years ago.
Many things happened in the sixties, but the period is no more significant, better, or more 'political' than today. It's time to turn the page.
The Sixties are now considered a historical period, just like the Roman Empire.
We live in an era with no historical precedents. History is no longer useful as a tool in helping us understand current changes.
Even though we now have the half-century-old new Constitution, there is a popular sentiment of support for the old one that lives on in reality in some quarters.
A war still rages over the legacy of the 1960s.
The work that lasts over time is the work which still speaks to us when all contemporary interest in that work is extinct.
Anything on paper is obsolete!