Automoderated users, edit
1,887
edits
Changes
Talk:Swinging London (view source)
Revision as of 18:00, December 15, 2008
, 18:00, December 15, 2008question
I don't think we need a link from [[London]] here. I'd prefer not help PR campaigns designed to make [[immorality]] seem like a good idea. Children imitate what they see, which is why we hide any mention of certain kinds of bad stuff from them until they are old enough to understand why it's bad. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:47, 15 December 2008 (EST)
I don't think we need a link from [[London]] here. I'd prefer not help PR campaigns designed to make [[immorality]] seem like a good idea. Children imitate what they see, which is why we hide any mention of certain kinds of bad stuff from them until they are old enough to understand why it's bad. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:47, 15 December 2008 (EST)-
:I searched on "swinging london" and the April 15, 1966 [[Time magazine]] cover story pops up (the phrase has been used '''a lot!''' by Time magazine). It is available on-line (it's 10 pages or so). I've read some of it. It attempts to be somewhat "balanced." Not sure if it succeeds. Here's a quote in its attempt to be "balanced":
{{cquote|Not everyone looks upon London's new swing as a blessing. For many who treasure an older, quieter London, the haystack hair, the suspiciously brilliant clothes, the chatter about sex and the cheery vulgarity strike an ugly contrast with the stately London that still persists in the quieter squares of Belgravia or in such peaceful suburbs as Richmond. They argue that credulity and immorality, together with a sophisticated taste for the primitive, are symptoms of decadence.}}
Would it be appropriate to add an external link to the April 15, 1966 cover story?
--[[User:RickD|RickD]] 13:00, 15 December 2008 (EST)