50s Americana: A Contemporary Idol

Last updated on: May 24, 2016 at 6:34 pm by Chase Padusniak

50s Americana: A Contemporary Idol 2016-05-24T18:34:37-04:00 Chase Padusniak

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

(A depiction of a 50s housewife. Source: Pixabay.com, Public Domain).

In good Christian fashion, I’ve often tried to take my cue from Nietzsche and philosophize with a hammer. Even if the idols do not shatter, a chink in a previously-solid veneer means a hard-won skirmish. Though, the very work of such destruction always leaves one vulnerable to idolatry in another form. Some traditionalists smash the dreams of “Modernists,” but fall into a web of pseudo-history. And many a “liberal” sees history so clearly as to turn ressourcement into license for projection. Still, it is necessary work dating back to the golden calf and the money changers. The Lord himself is insistent that nothing we fashion should separate us from His love:

Pay attention! I am bringing a sword against you, and I will destroy your high places. Your altars shall be laid waste, your incense stands smashed, and I will throw your slain down in front of your idols. Yes, I will lay the corpses of the Israelites in front of their idols, and scatter your bones around your altars. Wherever you live, cities shall be ruined and high places laid waste, in order that your altars be laid waste and devastated, your idols broken and smashed, your incense altars hacked to pieces, and whatever you have made wiped out. The slain shall fall in your midst, and you shall know that I am the LORD. (Ezekiel 6:3-7)

One such idol of the American Church I notice time and again is the 1950s. The danger of nostalgia lurks behind a seemingly holy yearning, and so we are reminded of the days before legalized abortion, when women were women and men were men, when innocent teenagers dated innocently, and America prospered after its defeat of the Axis Powers. In this view, 50s men and women represent the heights of masculinity and femininity—likely churchgoers, happy at Masses before the ill-advised (though perhaps valid) reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

This narrative, however, relies on a Whig view of history. Material and spiritual progress continued unabated (or relatively so) for hundreds of years, upset only by the eventual capitulations of the 60s. This is a profoundly undialectical view of history. It lends itself to self-deception, and has more in common with those who utter ‘the wrong side of history’ than it does with the pilgrim church of Catholicism.

In reality, the Victorians were more sexually controlling than Americans in the 1920s, who themselves were more sexually permissive than those in the 50s. The 19th-century British invented our contemporary sexual dichotomies (e.g. heterosexual-homosexual), distinctions left unmade by our borderline-salacious medieval brethren. The modern housewife, as we understand her, is a post-agricultural way of seeing femininity. And who could forget that as little as 100 years ago we reached the heights of a eugenicist racism our ancient and medieval forebears couldn’t begin to imagine?

So, if history was not a difficult slog of progress until the 50s, then how should Catholics view the period? For one, we can never cease repeating that the values of those days are not the values of Catholicism. Women were not always just housewives; in fact, the new expectations of the 50s even meant drug abuse among wives and mothers. Consumerism, perhaps better known as the “throwaway culture,” hit an acme. The morality so beloved by many was in fact artifice, a device of what Nietzsche called “the Last Man.” Anti-Communism hit its full stride, beginning the failed Catholic-GOP alliance, only recently put on life support. Sexual mismanagement (again, more extreme than that of previous generations) boiled over, and so the dreaded 60s exploded onto the scene. Such is the fruit of un-dialectical living, once again un-dialectically appreciated.

Catholicism, on the other hand, demands radical living: poverty, self-effacement, and discomfort—the opposite of 50s moralia. It also demands a flexibility not often enough evinced by those prone to idolizing this period. Above all, it demands that we shatter anything, no matter how seemingly good, that stands between us and holiness.

Previous Post

May 19, 2016

Feeling and Loving with the Dead

Next Post

May 24, 2016 Evangelizing in a Post-Christian World

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Culture Politics Reviews Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 December 2020 November 2020 July 2020 May 2020 April 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 August 2019 July 2019 April 2019 March 2019 December 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What kind of animal did Jesus ride into Jerusalem?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ox Donkey Camel Horse