So many these days have a talent, it seems, for being snarly no-accounts, not least, at protests this forgiving country has let unfold as prolonged, horrid irritations they’ve intermittently been on our streets, or even elite campuses. Ain’t it time to dump some of the late ‘60s heritage (which has only led to more and more movement downward), and once over 21, go forth as more self-respecting (and better-clad) adults?
I sometimes feel this problem visually when catching old “Perry Masons” on TV (along with many others who do so, too). Yes, “Perry Mason”… Where the men and women, so right for their roles, and dressed to the nines, compared to today, were in real life … perfect humans? No way!
Apparently Raymond Burr, doing so wonderfully with the iconic part of his lifetime, did have his kinks. But at least he tried in his role to look like a true adult, and he conveyed that successfully.
Beyond Hollywood, this was once basic for most in real life as well: to at least give it the old college try of sorts, making an effort at adulthood, and yes, dressing the part, too. For the Mason cast, it was a period when these types were still marked by truly adult challenges of a Depression background, followed by the existential exigencies of World War II, in which so many of that generation served. Including Mason’s sidekick, Paul Drake, who in real life (as William Hopper, son of the gossip columnist, Hedda Hopper) was indeed in that prolonged conflict; and who in his role, also looks fully and completely mature, including via an unhealthy penchant for smoking cigarettes in an eminently cool way.
This was a proclivity that killed off William Talman (“Mason” prosecutor Hamilton Berger) far too early. But he also seems truly adult on “Mason,” yes, in his own fine suits, ties and shoes, and with hair clipped just so.
And the women (pre-pants and jeans revolution) in their dresses, nylons, and heels! Naturally including Barbara Hale’s Della Street, plus this or that defendant or other secretary – yes, being a secretary WAS OK back then, too.
At least they all “made the effort” toward maturity – I do seem fond of that formulation, don’t I? The old college try… Speaking of which: college, too, used to be for would-be adults, didn’t it? Back in the day (as late as the early ‘60s) Cornell or Harvard were (for men) still worthy of sport coats and ties. Not remotely now, except perhaps at graduation.
In that period these collegians at Ivy League schools were serious, or certainly did their best to look and be that; and to respect what these fora of enlightenment were then giving them.
As with Raymond Burr or William Talman, World War II wasn’t yet cartoonish to these students of the ‘50s and into the first years of the ‘60s. It wasn’t at all the stuff of pastiche, Colbert-type “material” for jokes; and speaking now of Colbert or Jimmy Kimmel, they, too, have great appeal, especially to the puerile! Vs. the ex-king of late night, and the one who always will be, Mr. Johnny Carson.
Who by the way was also in WW II. Who by the way boxed in his youth. Who by the way was a private plane pilot…
And who by the way, also looked right in his own suits and sports jackets, and like an adult, a true adult.
A flawed one, too? No question (just read his sidekick Henry Bushkin’s book on Johnny). But again, in earlier generations you simply gave it the real go to become the best adult you could be, Achilles heels and all.
Would that that were still overwhelmingly the case and way? Nothing good emanating from late ‘60s and ‘70s overturning of longstanding civilizational norms? Of course there was, and is.
But I still stand by my title and theme here: i.e., “the effort at adulthood.” Is it REALLY so bad to aim higher, choose more suitable role models, and respect oneself (including sartorially)? The answer seems to be: it sure vouldn’t hoit, as Brooklynites once put it; and as it says here as well.