“If you're going to Kansas City
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair
If you're going to Kansas City
You're gonna meet some gentle people there”
Chapter 5: Dizzie-Go-Lucky
Dizzies are a nearly mythological part of American culture. A popular outfit for costume parties, dizzies are seen as the quintessential people of the 1920s. This is believed in the face of overwhelming evidence that they made up a rather small minority of the population. They were not even in the majority of youths during the 20s and 30s. They were rather a group of individuals who were easily identifiable due to their uniqueness and, in many cases, the extremity of their ideas. This allowed them to have a far greater impact on the world at large, since their ‘new’ ideas were rather powerful and so influenced those who were not even remotely connected with ‘the movement’.
Although I have previously hinted at and briefly mentioned dizzies, I have not directly addressed it. I have buried the chapter on dizzies, the one that would be most appetizing to many readers, for two reasons. The first is to make people read the rest of my book and do some searching for it. The second is that dizzies were not who we now think them to be. People think of the dizzies as these idealistic, carefree people who had a very interesting sense of style. This is, of course, a whitewashed version of who dizzies were. They would likely be offended by the generalization of them as dizzies as well, thinking that to be a simplification of them and to not address them as peoples in their own regard.
Then, with the realization that our conceptions of who dizzies were (some would argue that the past tense is improper and we should say ‘are’) is false, we must ask, then who are the dizzes?
It is not entirely accurate to say that dizzies came to be because of drugs like LAD. Their origins can be found prior to the creation of ‘euphoria’, as they preferred to call it. It is more proper to think of the dizzies as a new generation of Bohemians. It seems to be a historical truthism that through history there is an ebb and flow of movements and beliefs. Just as their have been several ‘Great Awakenings’ during American history, it is also possible to see a pattern of liberalization of social norms as American history progressed, with several periods of rapid changes happening during ‘Great Liberalizations’, if you will.
The dizzies should be considered a manifestation of the Third Great Liberalization, occurring roughly from 1910 - 1940. It would seem that the Third Great Liberalization might be a generalization or perhaps secularization of the ‘Social Gospel’ that was popularized during the Third Great Awakening (this is not to say that their is a connection between all Great Awakenings and Great Liberalizations, but just in this particular instance). The modern reader tends to forget that all of the progressive movements of the late 18th / early 19th century were, for the most part, religiously motivated. These were not often simply secular motivations, at least by the people at large. Most of the common folk desired to be the catalyst of social change for religious reasons (although there was the occasional freethinker amongst them). These progressive reasons were an obvious genesis for the origins of the dizzie movement.
Another obvious influence on the dizzies of the was the members of the Second Great Awakening, the bohemians. The argument can in fact be made that the dizzies movement was a rebirth, or revitalization, of Bohemianism. If we look at the literature of the early 1920s, news sources who bothered to first notice the dizzies were often referred to as ‘neobohemians’. There are, of course, many parallels between the two groups. Both the bohemians and dizzies share a reverence for nature, an appreciation of arts, and displayed social norms which were more communal and open when compared to society at large
The differences between bohemians and dizzies show that the dizzies were a unique phenomenon and not just a revitalization of the by-then very much dead bohemian movement (the only remnant being the Bohemian Club in San Francisco, which was only frequented by the rich, powerful and famous). While Bohemianism, in the United States although not necessarily Europe, was a way of life truly limited to a select few educated peoples, most notably journalists, a connection so strong that bohemian was often used as a synonym for journalist during the mid-19th century. On the other hand, dizzies were not just those who belonged to the elite but rather reflected a membership which came from a wide variety of backgrounds.
During and following WWI, a great shift in demographics was occurring. Many of Americas young adults flocked to the cities in an attempt to find work, and perhaps a life more exciting than what existed for them on Uncle Henry and Auntie Em’s farm. Many of them flocked to the excitement of jazz, speakeasies and the flapper lifestyle. A strange brew was being mixed. America’s cities were composed of upper crust socialites, fresh immigrants, farm-fresh innocents, organized laborers, aspiring African-Americans, awakened Pentacostals, crusading Progressives, corrupt councilmen, and vocal Catholics. There was inevitably friction. Between gang violence, labor struggles, race riots, and political machine clashes, America’s urban melting pot was burning hotter than ever. It may be strange that the dizzies were born out of such a violent state, but as Newton’s most famous law says, “To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
It is because of this insanity that many young folk found in the cities that they flocked to dizzie culture. Whether or not dizzies would have come to be without the substance LAD is unknown. All of the other social reasons for their development existed but LAD is seen as a very critical aspect of the dizzies. This, and other ‘What If?’ questions, are best left to speculative historical fiction. The fact of the matter is that LAD existed and was an integral part of the dizzies.
Dizzies, like most social groups in U.S. cities, came to be associated with a neighborhood, sharing a community together. Along with Chinatowns and Little Italies, dizzie districts or ‘diztricts’ began to form in cities across the U.S., often near college campuses (especially if they had done LAD trials like John Hopkins University or the University of Chicago). Their expansion was facilitated by the secretive nature of the entertainment culture nature of the Prohibition Era - ‘dizzie only’ speakeasies soon arose, renamed as ‘live-easies’ by their patrons. The first and most famous diztrict was, of course, Hyde Park, the center of the Chicago Renaissance
Hyde Park was the perfect breeding group for the dizzies, at its core was the University of Chicago, the child of John D. Rockefeller. This provided a large pool of intelligent, but still impressionable, young people. Also, it was overbuilt. Hyde Park was the site of the World’s Columbian Exposition in 1893. The fair had covered hundred of acres. By 1920, there was plenty of large and inexpensive housing available for the dizzies to occupy. It was on the South Side of Chicago, far from the hectic Loop. Also, Chicago was and is home to some of the most extensive urban parks in the United States. The Lakefront was saved from the industrial fate of other Great Lake cities, mostly due to the work of Daniel Burnham. These parks served as native inspiration to the dizzies, who could live in a highly populated area but also enjoy the wonders of nature.
Of course, diztricts sprung up like daises across the United States. Communities could be found in any and all cities. The most profound effect though occurred to the smaller metros of the era. These cities, although small when compared to the major centers of the day, such as Cleveland or Baltimore, were far more affected by the dizzies specifically because of their small size and rapid growth. The dizzies could have a greater impact on the community at large. Cities like Seattle, Cincinnati, Denver and Kansas City all show a great influence by the dizzies which exists to the present day. Cincinnati today is still home to the largest percentage of cooperative businesses. These cities are often seen as the progressive success story, being some the least affected metropolitan areas by the Great Depression (although they were of course affected, like all peoples, just to a lesser degree). Even the relatively conservative city of Los Angeles had a dizzie element present, although it tended to stay away from the Hollywood neighborhood...
------
Work started again for me and so that is first part of "Chapter 5", with it being concluded in a second post.
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair
If you're going to Kansas City
You're gonna meet some gentle people there”
Chapter 5: Dizzie-Go-Lucky
Dizzies are a nearly mythological part of American culture. A popular outfit for costume parties, dizzies are seen as the quintessential people of the 1920s. This is believed in the face of overwhelming evidence that they made up a rather small minority of the population. They were not even in the majority of youths during the 20s and 30s. They were rather a group of individuals who were easily identifiable due to their uniqueness and, in many cases, the extremity of their ideas. This allowed them to have a far greater impact on the world at large, since their ‘new’ ideas were rather powerful and so influenced those who were not even remotely connected with ‘the movement’.
Although I have previously hinted at and briefly mentioned dizzies, I have not directly addressed it. I have buried the chapter on dizzies, the one that would be most appetizing to many readers, for two reasons. The first is to make people read the rest of my book and do some searching for it. The second is that dizzies were not who we now think them to be. People think of the dizzies as these idealistic, carefree people who had a very interesting sense of style. This is, of course, a whitewashed version of who dizzies were. They would likely be offended by the generalization of them as dizzies as well, thinking that to be a simplification of them and to not address them as peoples in their own regard.
Then, with the realization that our conceptions of who dizzies were (some would argue that the past tense is improper and we should say ‘are’) is false, we must ask, then who are the dizzes?
It is not entirely accurate to say that dizzies came to be because of drugs like LAD. Their origins can be found prior to the creation of ‘euphoria’, as they preferred to call it. It is more proper to think of the dizzies as a new generation of Bohemians. It seems to be a historical truthism that through history there is an ebb and flow of movements and beliefs. Just as their have been several ‘Great Awakenings’ during American history, it is also possible to see a pattern of liberalization of social norms as American history progressed, with several periods of rapid changes happening during ‘Great Liberalizations’, if you will.
The dizzies should be considered a manifestation of the Third Great Liberalization, occurring roughly from 1910 - 1940. It would seem that the Third Great Liberalization might be a generalization or perhaps secularization of the ‘Social Gospel’ that was popularized during the Third Great Awakening (this is not to say that their is a connection between all Great Awakenings and Great Liberalizations, but just in this particular instance). The modern reader tends to forget that all of the progressive movements of the late 18th / early 19th century were, for the most part, religiously motivated. These were not often simply secular motivations, at least by the people at large. Most of the common folk desired to be the catalyst of social change for religious reasons (although there was the occasional freethinker amongst them). These progressive reasons were an obvious genesis for the origins of the dizzie movement.
Another obvious influence on the dizzies of the was the members of the Second Great Awakening, the bohemians. The argument can in fact be made that the dizzies movement was a rebirth, or revitalization, of Bohemianism. If we look at the literature of the early 1920s, news sources who bothered to first notice the dizzies were often referred to as ‘neobohemians’. There are, of course, many parallels between the two groups. Both the bohemians and dizzies share a reverence for nature, an appreciation of arts, and displayed social norms which were more communal and open when compared to society at large
The differences between bohemians and dizzies show that the dizzies were a unique phenomenon and not just a revitalization of the by-then very much dead bohemian movement (the only remnant being the Bohemian Club in San Francisco, which was only frequented by the rich, powerful and famous). While Bohemianism, in the United States although not necessarily Europe, was a way of life truly limited to a select few educated peoples, most notably journalists, a connection so strong that bohemian was often used as a synonym for journalist during the mid-19th century. On the other hand, dizzies were not just those who belonged to the elite but rather reflected a membership which came from a wide variety of backgrounds.
During and following WWI, a great shift in demographics was occurring. Many of Americas young adults flocked to the cities in an attempt to find work, and perhaps a life more exciting than what existed for them on Uncle Henry and Auntie Em’s farm. Many of them flocked to the excitement of jazz, speakeasies and the flapper lifestyle. A strange brew was being mixed. America’s cities were composed of upper crust socialites, fresh immigrants, farm-fresh innocents, organized laborers, aspiring African-Americans, awakened Pentacostals, crusading Progressives, corrupt councilmen, and vocal Catholics. There was inevitably friction. Between gang violence, labor struggles, race riots, and political machine clashes, America’s urban melting pot was burning hotter than ever. It may be strange that the dizzies were born out of such a violent state, but as Newton’s most famous law says, “To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
It is because of this insanity that many young folk found in the cities that they flocked to dizzie culture. Whether or not dizzies would have come to be without the substance LAD is unknown. All of the other social reasons for their development existed but LAD is seen as a very critical aspect of the dizzies. This, and other ‘What If?’ questions, are best left to speculative historical fiction. The fact of the matter is that LAD existed and was an integral part of the dizzies.
Dizzies, like most social groups in U.S. cities, came to be associated with a neighborhood, sharing a community together. Along with Chinatowns and Little Italies, dizzie districts or ‘diztricts’ began to form in cities across the U.S., often near college campuses (especially if they had done LAD trials like John Hopkins University or the University of Chicago). Their expansion was facilitated by the secretive nature of the entertainment culture nature of the Prohibition Era - ‘dizzie only’ speakeasies soon arose, renamed as ‘live-easies’ by their patrons. The first and most famous diztrict was, of course, Hyde Park, the center of the Chicago Renaissance
Hyde Park was the perfect breeding group for the dizzies, at its core was the University of Chicago, the child of John D. Rockefeller. This provided a large pool of intelligent, but still impressionable, young people. Also, it was overbuilt. Hyde Park was the site of the World’s Columbian Exposition in 1893. The fair had covered hundred of acres. By 1920, there was plenty of large and inexpensive housing available for the dizzies to occupy. It was on the South Side of Chicago, far from the hectic Loop. Also, Chicago was and is home to some of the most extensive urban parks in the United States. The Lakefront was saved from the industrial fate of other Great Lake cities, mostly due to the work of Daniel Burnham. These parks served as native inspiration to the dizzies, who could live in a highly populated area but also enjoy the wonders of nature.
Of course, diztricts sprung up like daises across the United States. Communities could be found in any and all cities. The most profound effect though occurred to the smaller metros of the era. These cities, although small when compared to the major centers of the day, such as Cleveland or Baltimore, were far more affected by the dizzies specifically because of their small size and rapid growth. The dizzies could have a greater impact on the community at large. Cities like Seattle, Cincinnati, Denver and Kansas City all show a great influence by the dizzies which exists to the present day. Cincinnati today is still home to the largest percentage of cooperative businesses. These cities are often seen as the progressive success story, being some the least affected metropolitan areas by the Great Depression (although they were of course affected, like all peoples, just to a lesser degree). Even the relatively conservative city of Los Angeles had a dizzie element present, although it tended to stay away from the Hollywood neighborhood...
------
Work started again for me and so that is first part of "Chapter 5", with it being concluded in a second post.
Last edited:
