Milos Forman’s adaptation of Hair is most notable for the year in which it was released: 1979. In his 1979 State of the Union speech to Congress, President Jimmy Carter opined “we cannot resort to simplistic or extreme solutions which substitute myths for common sense.” From the vantage point of the late seventies, the late sixties seemed to be such a time of “simplistic” and “extreme” solutions to the political, cultural, and social problems that the United States faced. Indeed, this cynical perspective of the popular movements for social justice, which pervaded Forman’s adaptation of Hair, irked the original authors of the play, James Rado and Gerome Ragni who remarked that “any resemblance between the 1979 film and the original Biltmore version, other than some of the songs, the names of the characters, and a common title, eludes us.” They were particularly perturbed by the film’s characterization of hippies as “oddballs,” for this characterization belies the hippie movement’s connection to the wider peace movement. And while Hair is a pleasure for the auditory and visual senses, I would have to agree with the sentiments of Rado and Ragni.
    By portraying the sincere spiritual and political struggle of the hippies as some ‘cheesy’ feel good acid trip, Forman frames the movement in cartoonish and tragic terms. In some sense, the ironic twist at the end of the film in which Berger is mistaken for Claude symbolizes the supposed failure of the hippie movement to end the war in Vietnam. However, Forman’s metaphor seems to have a short memory, the war ended in 1975.  Furthermore, the legacy of the hippies has had extraordinary effect on future generations; they have served as example of what is possible if one takes the risk that future can be more just, loving, and happier than present and the past. And for that, I am truly grateful.