William morris: The original hippy

How William Morris’ Art and Socio-Political Views Label Him a Precursor to the 1960s’ Counterculture and related Psychedelic Art Movement

Upon researching for materials that link the most recognised wallpaper and textile designer of the Victorian era, William Morris (1834-1896), to the Hippie Counterculture and its Psychedelic Art Movement, that erupted in the late 1960s, it quickly became clear that this niche topic had not been widely nor publicly explored before. However, after investigating into each of the two areas separately, a plethora of almost identical parallels and links were discovered between them. Despite Morris and the Counterculture being active one-hundred years apart, they share similarities in their artwork, influences, backgrounds as well as their attitudes towards various social and political issues that were occurring during their eras. Therefore, this paper will explore and extensively analyse the numerous ways in which Morris’ wallpaper and textile designs, alongside his anti-Industrial and anti-Capitalist views, suggest that he was an uncredited precursor to the American Hippie Counterculture and its subsequent Psychedelic Art Movement.

Morris is remembered as a ‘designer, craftsman, poet and social activist,’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020) but he was, and still is, widely celebrated for his revolutionary, trend-setting wallpaper and textile designs which he sold through his famous interior design company, Morris & Co. He was born in 1834 into a wealthy, middle class family whose financial success provided him an extremely privileged childhood (Van Zandt, 2002). As a child he enjoyed exploring local forests and churches as well as immersing himself in the romantic stories and legends from the Middle Ages (Van Zandt, 2002). As a result of this, Morris developed a passion for nature, architecture and historical romance that inevitably inspired his work. Even as a boy, Morris was never afraid to rebel ‘against the age in which he lived in.’ (Kremer and Mason, 201-) and he used his rebellious nature and creative outlet to achieve radical things. Morris reflects: ‘with the arrogance of youth, I determined to do no less than to transform the world with beauty.’ (Morris n.d. cited in William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). His ‘golden rule,’ that one should, ‘have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to beautiful,’ (Morris, n.d. cited in Jahn. ed.,2014) epitomises his purpose and career. Morris worked so tirelessly for his various passions that when he died in 1896 at the young age of sixty-two, his doctor declared: ‘the cause was simply being William Morris and having done more work than most ten men.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020)(V&A, n.d.b)(Kremer and Mason, 2011?)(Morton, 1979)(Van Zandt, 2002).

The Hippie Counterculture was an international movement that invited young people, typically white middle class students, to reject the norms and standards of mainstream society. The movement exploded in San Francisco on January 14th 1967 when an event called the ‘Human Be-In’ invited all of the local youth subcultures were to gather at Golden Gate Park. The gathering was led by Harvard University professor, Timothy Leary (1920-1996), where he delivered his famous ‘Tune in, Turn on, Drop out’ speech- encouraging these groups to start their rebellion against mainstream society (Harvard University, n.d.). This ‘gathering of the tribes,’ (The Summer of Love: How Hippies Changed the World (SOL), 2017) caused the different groups to blend into what became the Hippie Counterculture and launched the rise of the movement. These young people aimed to live completely alternatively to how ‘mainstream American culture,’ (Pruitt,2018) expected them to. They demonstrated this through the way they dressed, lived and how they expressed themselves: ‘Their distinctive brand of rebellion- including their long hair and beards, colourful styles, […] and eco-conscious lifestyle- would leave a lasting impact.’ (Pruitt,2018). Aside from their flamboyant dress, ‘the hippie counterculture, more than anything else, was about taking LSD.’ (Rorabaugh n.d. cited in Pruitt, 2018). LSD was used ‘as a way of expanding consciousness,’ (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (EEB), 2002), and this had considerable impacts on the artists and creatives within the Counterculture. The hallucinogen-influenced artwork that was being produced by the Counterculture’s creative counterparts became labelled as ‘psychedelic’ and marked the dawn of the ‘Psychedelic Art Movement.’ The art from this time is recognised for its rare ability to use art as a way to express socio-political topics and culture: ‘Psychedelic art was at the forefront of the energising congruence of artistic experiment and dissenting politics that characterised the last century’s most tumultuous decade- the 1960s.’(Grunberg, 2005). Psychedelic Art is characterised by its ‘free-wheeling shapes, exaggerated acid colours and pervasive formal entropy,’ (Grunberg, 2005) but this, ‘over-indulgence in decorative surplus,’ (Grunberg, 2005) was able to soften the themes of political and social radicalism. Although 1967 saw the rise of the Hippie Movement, it also saw its decline: the movement began its slow collapse towards the end of the year which is what gives this movement its iconic nickname, ‘The Summer of Love.’ But even in its short lifespan, it was able to make such an impact to society in America and across the globe that is still remembered for its cultural and political impacts (SOL, 2017)(Grunberg, 2005)(EEB, 2002)(Pruitt, 2018).

The first reason why Morris is a precursor to the Hippie Counterculture is how both had strong relationships with nature that had big impacts on them and their abstractive art styles. Morris grew up in Walthamstow, London which neighbours the famous Epping Forest: a place where Morris would spend a lot of time as a child. It was during his visits to the forest where he first developed his deep interest in nature and it wasn’t long before Morris had memorised the names of various plants, flowers and birds (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). He developed a sensitivity towards the landscape and an analytical approach to viewing nature which, inevitably, became considerably influential to his heavily floral textile and wallpaper designs (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020).

Although floral textile and wallpaper designs were certainly not uncommon in the Victorian era, Morris’ abstract approach to the theme is what makes his designs so unique and distinguishable; he believed that, unlike the majority of designs at the time, ‘patterns should have order and structure, and lines should be strong and crisp.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). This principle was also applied when incorporating subject matters such as birds into his designs; he knew that by going against his meticulous studies of such birds and abstracting their form was key to giving his designs their bold structure: ‘they remind us of the outdoors without distracting us with too much detail.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). As well as birds and plants, Morris also takes inspiration from rivers: a group of his most sophisticated designs, including Wey (1883)(Fig.1) and Lea (1885)(Fig.2) are named after the tributaries of the river Thames. This is because Morris took inspiration from the flowing movement of the water as well as the meandering curves of the streams and incorporated these themes into his designs, he said: ‘even where a line ends it should look as if it had plenty of capacity for more growth’ (Morris, n.d. cited in William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020)(Van Zandt, 2002).  

(Fig.1) (Fig.2)

Similarly to Morris, the Hippie Counterculture, and related the Psychedelic Art Movement, also have a strong history involving nature. Hippies are remembered for their long-haired, vegetarian, nature-loving lifestyle which has now become a big part of their stereotypical image (EEB, 2002). However, this stereotype is deeply rooted in the history of the counterculture whose origins are linked to a German-based cult from the early 20th century. The cult, known as ‘Lebensreform,’ (which translates to ‘Life Reform’), ‘were a group of rebellious kids,’ (SOL,2017) who, instead of being drafted for the military, decided to head for the wilderness- eventually made their way to California in the early 1900s (SOL, 2017). The cult’s alternative and romantic lifestyle attracted members of the American youth who evolved into a subculture known as the Nature Boys and are widely believed to be the original Hippies: ‘they were a wandering group of back to nature devotees who rejected mainstream society,’ (SOL, 2017) and lived in the ‘Californian wilderness,’ on a vegan diet that consisted of raw vegetables, fruits and nuts. The Nature Boys were one of the many groups who came together to form the Hippie Counterculture in Summer of Love in 1967. Their love for nature remained and soon became a permanent characteristic for the Hippies.

Therefore, it is of no surprise that nature-inspired motifs appear frequently in Psychedelic Art, particularly in illustrations. Much like Morris’, many of the artists within the Psychedelic Art Movement also used abstractedinterpretations of natural subjects that were taken out of their usual context. However, for these artists, this was inspired by the abstract and mind-altering hallucinations that they would experience while under the influence of LSD. The influence that hallucinogenic drugs, such as LSD, had on the art of this era is what gave it the ‘Psychedelic’ label. This begs the question: was Morris under the influence of recreational drugs as well? Although there is no evidence to support this, it can be highly suggested based on Victorian Britain’s relationship with drug-use. The use of strong pharmaceutical drugs was a common practice in the 19th century. Many of the recreational drugs, that are illegal in Britain today, were being used as remedies ‘for the common complaints of cold, cough and toothache.’ (Crane, 2011). Opiates, and particularly the powerful painkiller, Laudanum, was often used by ‘many notable Victorians,’ (Castelow, 201?). Writers and poets such as Charles Dickens, Elizabeth Barret Browning and Percy Bysshe Shelley, who ‘suffered terrible laudanum-induced hallucinations.’ (Castelow, 201?), were often using Laudanum. With Opiates being so popular in Victorian society, specifically within the creative industries, it would not be beyond the realms of possibility for Morris to have experimented with them. This could give an explanation to where Morris got the inspiration for his abstractive approach. However, an alternative explanation is his belief that ‘it is the child-like part of us that produces work of imagination.’ (Morris, 1890 cited in Jahn. ed., 2014).

Regardless of Morris’ works being influenced by drugs or not, many similarities can be seen when his Wey(1883)(Fig.3) design is compared to Veeva La Mutation (1971)(Fig. 4), a poster by the Psychedelic graphic designer Lee Conklin (b.1941). Morris’ Wey design (Fig.4), much like nearly all of his designs were ‘printed using hand-cut woodblocks,’(V&A, n.d), which gives the design its sophisticated bold lines that build up its refined structure. His design is abundant in floral motifs, and spares almost no negative space. This could have resulted in an overwhelmingly flat and unclear design if it wasn’t for Morris’ deliberate use of shading: ‘shading, he insisted, must be used sparingly, for clarity.’(Van Zandt, 2002). In Wey, he has accomplished this by using small textural dots and lines which adds decorative detail and contours to the foliage, as well as clarity. The bold, smooth lines create a calm atmosphere which is further embedded by the cool blue tones. Contrariwise, the ever-varying sizes and shapes of the floral motifs give an energetic spontaneity to the design that mimics the rhythmic and never-ending flow of a river. Morris’ use of light and bright yellow tones contrasts against the rich blue to emphasise the focal areas of the design. This has also been achieved by his placement of leaf motifs which fill up the negative space while framing the dominant yellow flowers.

(Fig.3)(Fig.4)

Similarly, Conklin’s Veeva La Mutation (Fig.4) was made using lithograph printing: a process in which ‘a design is drawn onto a flat stone,’ or metal plate, ‘and affixed by means of a chemical reaction.’ (The Met, n.d.). This means that, in contrast to Morris’ hand carved blocks, Conklin was able to draw his designs by hand directly onto the plate. Consequently, Conklin was able to incorporate a lot more intricacy and small detail into his motifs- he achieved this by using small textural marks, much like Morris, except, Conklin was not as reserved when it came to shading. This is evident by the extremely dark and tonal areas within the design that give it a lot more depth and shape. Although they have different approaches to shading, both designers demonstrate a respect for high levels of contrast which they have both achieved using juxtaposing colours and shades. Additionally, both designs rely heavily upon natural motifs of flowers and foliage as well as a strong use of spontaneous, flowing lines and shapes that allow the subjects to intertwine.

In summary the Counterculture’s historical association with nature, that is reflected within their lifestyle as well as their art, mirrors the impact that nature had on Morris. Nature became a passion of his during his early childhood years which resulted in it being the leading subject matter in all of his wallpaper and textile designs. In addition, both Morris and Conklin (as well as a number of other psychedelic graphic designers) use similar abstractive approaches towards their motifs, as well as having similar styles of translating tonal areas. These almost identical similarities are one example of how Morris could be viewed as a precursor to the Hippie Counterculture.

The second reason why Morris is a precursor to the Hippie Counterculture is suggested by their shared attitudes towards Capitalism and Industrialism. The Hippie Counterculture’s anti-capitalist and anti-industrialist views stem from the economic boom that occurred in the US’ post-war society of 1945. After three years of rationing and hoarding basic resources, such as sugar, soap and money, American consumers ‘were eager to spend their money, on everything,’ (Pruitt, 2020). The demand and production for items such as cars, furniture, appliances and clothes skyrocketed, alongside the Gross National Product (GNP), ‘which measured all goods and services produced,’ (Pruitt, 2020). By 1950, the GNP had reached $300 billion which was an $100 billion increase from the previous decade. By 1960 it had exceeded $500 billion, ‘firmly establishing the United States as the richest and most powerful nation in the world.’ (Pruitt, 2020)(Tafoya, 201-). From this, spawned the Beatnik subculture, who coined the word ‘hip’ from which the name ‘Hippie’ is derived.  The Beatniks were a group of ‘Avant-guarde poets and writers,’(Deziel, 2018) who got their reputation from their strong rejection of ‘Prevailing social norms, including Capitalism, Consumerism and Materialism,’(Pruitt, 2018) that came with the post-war economic boom. Their writings were taught throughout universities in America and, much like the Nature Boys, began to have a big influence on the impressionable youth of the mid-to-late 1960s- from which emerged the Hippie Counterculture (Deziel, 2018).

Similarly to the attitudes of the Hippie Counterculture, Morris’ purpose for his designs are rooted in his strong disapproval of the soaring Industrialism and Capitalism that occurred during the late 19th Century. This welcomed mass production- of such things as furniture and textiles- and the exploitation of labourers in the working class. Morris explains: ‘apart from my desire to produce beautiful things, the leading passion of my life has been and is hatred of modern civilisation.’ (Morris, n.d. cited in Jahn. ed., 2014). The erection of the factory towns in Britain, which compromised the forests and nature that Morris admired so dearly, resulted in horrendous ugliness and ‘deadly squalor,’ (Morton, 1979). On top of this, Industrialism and Capitalism was creating a large divide between the rich Bourgeoise who owned the factories and the impoverished Proletariat who worked in them: ‘capitalism, he discovered, produced only pretentious luxury goods for slave owners and ugly, shoddy goods for slaves.’ (Morton, 1979). However, one key reason why Morris was so against Industrialism began when the romantic Gothic style had a revival in 1850s; he and his partners knew that, unlike the new, shabby Gothic style, what made Gothicism from the Middle Ages so remarkable was the passion and dedication that the craftsmen poured into their craft. Morris explains: ‘such work cannot be reproduced by the wage earner under capitalism who is required to be no more than a hand.’ (Morton, 1979). This statement summarises his belief that ‘modern techniques can imitate old forms’ but will never hold the same romantic and historic qualities while being produced by exploited labourers, rather than passionate craftsmen. In response to this, Morris decided to decorate and furbish his house exclusively with items that ‘were honest in substance and workmanship and good in design.’ (Morton, 1979) which also marked the dawn of the famous Morris firm. The firm’s goal was to produce furniture, textiles, wallpapers and more that were of extremely high quality and made using natural dyes and materials. It was this firm that gave Morris his international reputation as a designer and craftsman (Morton, 1979).

It was Morris’ pioneering response to the ‘damaging effects of machine-dominated production on both social conditions and the quality of manufacture goods,’ (V&A, n.d.c) that made him a crucial inspiration to the Arts and Crafts Movement of the 1870s-80s. The Arts and Crafts Movement were a group of craftsmen and designers who also believed that the manufacture of objects should be the role of craftsmen as opposed to exploited labourers. Although the Movement was structured more around their ideals rather than a specific style, many of the creatives involved in the Movement were heavily influenced by Morris- whose textile and wallpaper designs had become an international success (V&A, n.d.c).

The purposeful socio-political tone, that the Arts and Crafts Movement adopted from Morris’ work, proceeded to influence the Art Nouveau Movement which first appeared in the Western Europe in the 1880s: ‘deeply influenced by the socially aware teachings of William Morris and the Arts and Crafts Movement, Art Nouveau designers endeavoured to achieve the synthesis of art and craft.’ (Gontar, 2006). This is proven by the remarkable similarities that are made when the works of Morris are compared to those of Alphonse Mucha (1860-1939), a well-known artist from the Art Nouveau movement.

 Morris’ print, Pimpernel (1876)(Fig.5), features a lot of his signature elements such as the abstracted depictions of flowers and plants which appear to flow and intertwine seamlessly with the help of the rounded stems that guide the viewers eye and bringing structure and clarity by framing various elements (Van Zandt, 2002). One source specifically relays how these ‘sinuously curving stems [in Pimpernel] anticipate the Art Nouveau style of the later 1800s.’ (Van Zandt, 2002). Similarly to the majority of his prints, Morris has maintained a deliberately simple colour palette of greens and yellows in various shades with the stems being more warm in colour to catch the eye’s attention. The small yellow flowers, which give the design its name, are used to fill up the negative space using a contrasting texture but also to keep the design looking vibrant and energetic. While the larger, pale poppies contrast against the yellow flowers in colour, shape and size, they also give the design a dominating atmosphere of sophisticated femininity.

(Fig.5)(Fig.6)

To compare, Mucha’s poster design, Spring (1896)(Fig.6), includes a lot of Morris’ common features: the most obvious being how he has used abstracted and less detailed depictions of his subject matter, all of which being natural in theme. Furthermore, this poster takes abstraction to a new level as it is Mucha’s personified portrayal of the season, Spring. Mucha also uses very similar flowing lines that guide the eye of the viewer to various parts of the image, for example: the female figure’s long, flowing hair which is also used to frame the figure, identically to Morris’ flower stems. Additionally, his simple colour palette, which consists of various shades of warm yellows and oranges, very much so imitates the deliberate simplicity of Morris’ colour pallet.  Incredibly, this particular design also features small, playful flowers, which mirror Morris’ yellow flowers, as well as another layer of texture and interest. These small flowers are juxtaposing the woman’s extremely elegant, pale dress which appears to have a similar texture, shape and sophisticated femininity to the large, white poppies shown in Pimpernel. In contrast, Morris’ Pimpernel, along with all of his designs, relies heavily on a strong repetitive structure. In this design, he has used symmetry to give order to something that would naturally not have such a strict structure, which fuels the sense sophistication. Mucha’s Spring poster does not share this strict structure, its asymmetrical composition promotes a much more casual and effortless sense sophistication. However, this is a result of the two designers having very different purposes for their creations.

Art Nouveau became an extremely crucial link between Morris and the Psychedelic Art Movement. This is because, a large amount of posters by American Psychedelic graphic designers such as Conklin, Bonnie Maclean (1939-2020) and Wes Wilson (1937-2020) ‘often appropriated motifs from various precursors including Art Nouveau.’ (Tomlinson, 2005). This is because the ‘style’s fluid curvilinear,’ (Tomlinson, 2005) shapes and motifs resonated with the Hippies in Haight-Ashbury, San Francisco; ‘many of whom lived in its characteristic Victorian houses, architectural cousins to Art Nouveau.’ (Tomlinson, 2005).

Upon comparing Mucha’s Princess Hyacinth poster (1911)(Fig.7) to MacLean’s Eric Burdon and the Animals (1967)(Fig.8) and Wilson’s Chambers Brothers (1967)(Fig.9), the influence of Art Nouveau becomes clear. The most obvious parallel is how each poster depicts a powerful female figure as its focal subject matter: the sense of power is suggested in the three posters by the headwear that each figure is wearing- In Fig.7 and 8 the figures are wearing tall crowns which suggest they are figures of royalty or higher-power. Whereas, the figure in Fig.9 has a yellow circle surrounding her head, giving the impression of a halo, in addition to being framed by a cluster of smaller circles which suggests a celestial atmosphere. Similarly, in Mucha’s poster, the figure is almost completely framed within a circle which, alongside the repetitive star motifs, also suggests that the figure is some form of celestial or spiritual being. Mucha’s uniquely recognisable use of framing, with the image resembling a religious stain-glass window, has been mirrored in both Maclean and Wilson’s posters. This can be seen in the way that the designs are contained within a rectangular frame but also look as if the image is segmented, to various degrees, just like soldering iron that holds the stain-glass window in place. Furthermore, all three posters rely so heavily on natural, fluid lines and shapes that, upon closer inspection, not a single perfectly straight line can be seen within each frame. This includes the crucial part of the posters: the text. It is evident that Maclean and Wilson found inspiration from Mucha’s irregularly characterful, hand-drawn type; they have interpreted this way of creating text into their own posters with more of a psychedelic and fluid twist by embedding it further into the image.

(Fig.7)(Fig.8)(Fig.9)

To summarise, Morris could be considered a precursor to the Hippie Counterculture and Psychedelic Art Movement because of their shared anti-Capitalist and anti-Industrialist attitudes which helped shaped their reputations in and outside of the creative industries. Furthermore, Morris’ pioneering use of art as an outlet for these socio-political views were an influence on Art Nouveau- the art movement that became a direct influence on many Psychedelic graphic designers. This which suggests that he was a distant founding father of the Psychedelic Art Movement.

The third reason why Morris is a precursor to the Hippie Counterculture and Psychedelic Art Movement is through their similar approaches to using their work and middle class privilege to express their socio-political views. Morris is known for his activism against social causes, mainly Capitalism and the divide between the lower and middle classes, and ‘spent most of his life fighting the consensus.’ (V&A, n.d.b). He is widely remembered for his fiery passion and commitment to his causes: ‘he was an angry young man and an angry old man, but he always knew what he was angry about.’ (Briggs, 1962). His method of expressing his anti-capitalist and anti-industrialist opinions was through not conforming to the contemporary societal norms, primarily exhibited through his designs and attitude towards interior design. He first began to form strong opinions on social causes as a student at Oxford University (V&A, n.d.b). As a student, he became friends with a group of his peers, who called themselves ‘The Set’ or ‘The Brotherhood’, who opened his eyes to the reality of Victorian society which he was not exposed to as a sheltered, middle class child: ‘belonging to this group gave Morris an awareness of the deep divisions in contemporary society,’ which is what sparked his, abovementioned, hatred for Capitalism and Industrialism and his ‘interest in trying to create an alternative to the dehumanising industrial systems that produced poor-quality, ‘unnatural’ objects.’(V&A, n.d.b).

Morris’ first act of ‘consciously flouting the rules of class,’ (V&A, n.d.b) happened when he married Jane Burden, a local stableman’s daughter. Together they moved into their first home, Red House, where Morris executed his aforementioned anti-industrialist and pioneering approach to interior-decoration. With the help of the friends in his artistic circle, Morris spent two years furnishing and decorating the house with ‘huge murals and hand-embroidered fabrics.’ (V&A, n.d.b). The success of their efforts encouraged Morris and his friends to set up their own interiors company in 1861, officially named ‘Morris, Marshall, Faulkner & Co.’ but was commonly known as ‘The Firm’. As part of their collective ‘crusade against the age [of Industrialism],’(William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020) The Firm decided that everything that they sold was to be hand-made- ‘a principle that set the company firmly against the mainstream focus on industrialised ‘progress’.’ (V&A, n.d.b) (Van Zandt, 2002).

The company’s alternative ideas towards the interior design trends of the time, made it difficult to ‘win over the public.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). Morris and his partners ‘Disliked the clutter of many wealthy Victorian homes,’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020) which were typically abundant in garlands, glazed chintzes and gilt bows. Morris, in particular, was not shy about his unconforming tastes- he said: ‘I have never been in any rich man’s house which would not have looked the better for having a bonfire made […] of nine-tenths of all that it held.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). The difference between the traditional Victorian trends of the time and Morris’ alternative and revolutionary taste can be seen when the two styles are compared: One of Morris’ favourites of his printed designs, Snakeshead (1876)(Fig.10), gets its name from the smaller blooms that ‘complement the larger, more formal motifs.’ (Van Zandt, 2002). It is composed in a sophisticated structure with the ‘assertive, flame-like motif and alternating spiky clusters of foliage,’ (Van Zandt, 2002) that spare almost no negative space (Van Zandt, 2002). This allowed Morris to create a ‘superb fusion of drama and control.’ (Van Zandt, 2002). It also consists of a fairly simple colour palette made up of warm reds and cool greens of varying lightness which creates a strong contrast, thus emphasising the bold structure. On the other hand, the more typical Victorian design (Fig.11) is a lot more painterly, picturing dainty pink flowers framed by romantic gold leaves with the use of significantly more negative space than Morris’. Another stylistic choice that differentiates Morris’ designs from the trends from that time is how he often chooses to have ‘no dominating image.’ (Van Zandt, 2002). This is achieved with his deliberate lack of depth and dimension; every motif within Snakeshead stands at the same two-dimensional level and holds ‘almost equal emphasis.’ (Van Zandt, 2002). Whereas, the traditional chintz design’s three-dimensional, over-lapping motifs certainly suggest there to be a visual hierarchy within the design.

(Fig.10)(Fig.11)

After struggling to gain publicity for the first few years The Firm received two high-status commissions in the late 1860s, one for a dining room at the South Kensington Museum (now the V&A) and the other for the Armoury and Tapestry rooms at St. James’ Palace. These commissions were fundamental turning points for the company’s success and reputation. In 1875, the company evolved into ‘Morris & Company’ after Morris bought his partners out of the business. Although he was aiming to combat Industrialism and Capitalism through his designs and brand, it wasn’t long before Morris realised his brand was not coinciding with his anti-Capitalist morals: ‘Only the very rich could afford,’ to commission him (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020) and even his more affordable range of products was only within the price range of those in the middle-class. Knowing that the majority of his demographic were rich industrialists, and that ‘His high quality, handmade products were beyond the means of ordinary working people,’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020), caused Morris a great deal of dissatisfaction: ‘On one occasion he lost his temper [with a client], complaining that ‘I spend my life ministering to the swinish luxury of the rich’.’ (William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020). Regardless of this, Morris is regarded as the ‘true prophet of the 20thcentury,’ as it is because of his work that, ‘an ordinary man’s dwelling-house has once more become a worthy object.’ (Pevsner, 1936 cited in Jahn. ed., 2014).

Much like Morris, the majority of the Hippies demonstrated their unconventional views and opinions through proudly rejecting the societal norms. In parallel with Morris’ exposure to social issues, the Hippie Counterculture, and their activism, was initiated by middle class university students in California. These students ‘felt alienated from middle class society,’ (EEB, 2002) and resented the materialism, repression and ‘pressure to conform to ‘normal’ standards of appearance, employment or lifestyle.’ (Pruitt, 2018). As a response, they became dropouts and developed a lifestyle that rejected these concepts whilst encouraging unconventional casual dress- which typically included ripped jeans, flared trousers and tie-dyed clothing- flowers worn in their long hair and raw vegetarian diets. These people, along with their ever-growing number of followers, flocked to the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco which became densely populated with Hippies who all lived in ‘communal or co-operative living arrangements.’ (EEB, 2002). They also experimented with taking LSD, spirituality and holistic medicine as a way to ‘find more meaning in life.’ (Pruitt, 2018).

Most Hippies chose not to engage directly with socio-political issues via the traditional route: ‘Hippie politics was more a “politics of no politics,”.’(Rorabaugh, n.d. cited in Pruitt, 2018). However, there were a few subgroups, within the Counterculture, who used their collective power to protest for various causes, such as: civil-rights, racial and sexual discrimination and, most famously, the anti-war movement- which played a vital part in the rise of the Counterculture. The romantic idea of a revolution was extremely appealing to the ‘generation of young radical students,’ (SOL, 2017) which triggered students across the country to hold student sit-ins, protests and even riots in opposition of America’s increasing involvement in the Vietnam War and the ‘terrible bloodshed taking place in Southeast Asia.’ (Pruitt, 2018). Even those within the Counterculture who chose not to partake in the demonstrations supported their radically political counterparts in Anti-War movement, because ‘Hippies saw mainstream authority as the origin of all society’s ills, which included the war.’ (Pruitt, 2018). In addition, all Hippies were advocates of love and nonviolence- they coined the memorable slogan: ‘Make love, not war’. The anti-war movement even made its way into the Psychedelic Art realm as Wilson’s very first published poster (1956)(Fig.12) was an anti-war poster displaying the thought-provoking statement: ‘Are we next? Be Aware.’ In a retrospective passage about this poster, Wilson writes: ‘I visualised a jarring poster idea- our flag superimposed with a nazi-style swastika. So shocking it was instantly instructive.’ (Wilson, 2013). In the same passage, Wilson reflects on how he was proud to have used his creative skills to ‘significantly express my shock and anguish,’ towards the unethical Vietnam War (Wilson, 2013). Although his early death meant that he could not reflect on his life’s work and achievements, Morris would have felt similarly about his work to how Wilson does here. He once said: ‘if I have succeeded in some small way, if only in one small corner of the world […] then I shall count myself blessed, and blessed, and blessed.’ (Morris, 1896 cited in Jahn. ed., 2014).

(Fig.12)

The most recognisable political subgroups ‘The Diggers’ and ‘The Yippies’: The Diggers were an anarchist organisation, who take their name from the English radical group that formed in the mid 1600s. This group of political activists formed when the Counterculture began to fall and as ‘drugs, homelessness and crime had infested Haight-Ashbury.’ (Pruitt, 2018). The organisation was known for supplying free food as well as running a free store, ‘stocked of stolen goods,’ (Pruitt, 2018) for the members of the community. In October of 1967, in response to the commercialisation of Hippie culture, the Diggers ‘Held a ‘Death of the Hippie March,’ (Pruitt, 2018). During this demonstration, the group marched through the Haight-Ashbury district until they reached the ‘famed Psychedelic Shop, an early hippie hangout that was closing.’ (Pruitt 2018). The Diggers then proceeded to bury the sign of their beloved shop, ‘marking a symbolic death for the hippie heyday.’ (Pruitt, 2018). The Yippies, who were formed in the Winter of 1967 by Abbie Hoffman (1936-1989), were wildly more radical than the Diggers: ‘they were serious anarchists, revolutionary anarchists.’ (SOL, 2017). They gained their reputation by staging ‘spectacular stunts designed to attract maximum media attention.’ (SOL, 2017) The stunt that first exposed Hoffman and the Yippies was a message against materialism: ‘[they] scattered dollar bills onto the ground,’ outside the New York Stock Exchange, ‘And watched all these millionaires scurrying to pick up the dollars.’ (SOL, 2017).

Although the ‘psychedelic, utopian visions,’ (Maldonado, 2018) of the Hippies didn’t have the lasting impact that it was striving for, the Summer of Love was a valuable, mind-opening event for society to imagine better, alternative ways of living that was eradicated of such things as ‘social repression, racial and sexual oppression, conventional capitalist notions of ownership and property.’ (Blauvelt, 2015 cited in Maldonado, 2018). However, similarly to Morris, their morals and intentions didn’t always match with their actions. The majority of the Hippies were from privileged white, middle-class backgrounds who had the ‘undeniable luxury of being able to ‘drop out’.’ (Maldonado, 2018) Even though their intentions were honest while they were protesting for civil rights, they could only do so because they had so little at stake compared to ‘those fighting for civil rights so that they could fully participate in society,’ (Maldonado, 2018) an issue that the hippies only faced because they had the privilege of choosing to. Furthermore, their self-induced marginality is another example of their actions backfiring: they ignorantly appropriated and romanticised many marginalised and oppressed cultures by mimicking elements from their lifestyles (such as communal living and the way they dressed) without appreciating or acknowledging the suffering and poverty that those cultures experienced (Maldonado, 2018).

In summary, both Morris and the Counterculture became strongly provoked by socio-political causes after no longer wanting to identify with the noxious reality of their middle class lifestyles. Despite some members of the Counterculture being more overtly vocal and radical about expressing their opinions than Morris, both parties used their privilege to reject societal expectations and to make a statement. Furthermore, the resemblances between the two parties are also extended to the flaws in their intentions: Morris’ demographic being the rich industrialists that he despised so much and the Counterculture’s ignorance in comparing themselves to actual marginalised and oppressed cultures. Nevertheless, these similarities are what suggest that Morris is a precursor to the Counterculture.

In conclusion, the analytical investigation into Morris, as a wallpaper and textile designer as well as an activist for socio-political issues, uncovered many examples of how he is suggested to be an uncredited precursor to the 1960s Hippie Counterculture. The three most fundamental parallels that were discussed were their art, their views on Capitalism and Industrialism and how they used their privilege to express their socio-political opinions. Both Morris and the Hippie Counterculture had a connection and relationship with nature that was rooted deeply into their foundations (SOL, 2017). Furthermore, their alliances with nature are reflected in Morris’ heavily floral and nature-inspired wallpapers and in the works of many Psychedelic Artists such as Conklin, Maclean and Wilson. Parallels can be seen in their abstract approaches to depicting art however, the influences for each are different: the Counterculture’s psychedelic artists were being heavily influenced by LSD whereas, Morris was influenced by his deep analyses of nature and stylistic preferences (EEB, 2002).

Moreover, Morris and the Counterculture were both provoked to rebel by their similar attitudes towards socio-political issues. Morris’ socio-political approach to his work was provoked by the exponential rise of Industrialism and Capitalism that was a result of the Industrial Revolution (Morton, 1979). Similarly, the Counterculture’s precursors, the Beatniks, were provoked to reject mainstream society due to the increase in Capitalism and Materialism that occurred during America’s post-war economic boom. Furthermore, much like how the Beatnik’s notion of rejecting mainstream society went on to influence the Counterculture, the tone of social awareness, and appreciation for the arts and crafts, that was the basis of Morris’ work, trickled down through the art movements that came after him (V&A, n.d.b). The Art Nouveau Movement, was particularly inspired by this, which went on to directly influence the graphic designers of the Psychedelic Art Movement (Gontar, 2006).

Finally, Morris and the Counterculture share similarities in how they used their middle class privilege to reject the societal norms that were expected of them. Morris did this through building his company of the notions of rejecting the interior design trends and low quality, mass production. In comparison, the Counterculture did this by quitting their jobs and colleges, living in communes, dressing casually, experimenting with hallucinogenic drugs and expressing themselves through art and music (SOL, 2017)(EEB, 2002)(Pruitt 2018). Some members of the Counterculture and its Psychedelic Art Movement devoted themselves to radical activism but the majority chose to live free of politics (SOL, 2017)(Pruitt 2018). Additionally, both parties show flaws in their intentions and morals: Morris’ high quality, hand-made products became only accessible to the middle class Industrialists that he so despised. Likewise, the Counterculture became accused of appropriating and romanticising the real marginalised and oppressed cultures that they were comparing themselves to (Maldonado, 2018).

When these remarkable, and almost identical, similarities are analysed and compared, it becomes clear that Morris was an uncredited precursor to the Hippie Counterculture and its related Psychedelic Art Movement.

Referenced Artworks and Images

 Fig.1

William Morris (1834-1896)

Wey

1883

Woodblock; fabric

[image online] available at: https://jooinn.com/img/get [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig.2

William Morris (1834-1896)

Lea

1885

Woodblock; fabric

[image online] available at: http://www.voysey.gotik-romanik.de/Morris,%20Thumbnails/%27Lea%27%20textile%20design%20by%20William%20Morris,%20produced%20by%20Morris%20&%20Co%20in%201885..html[Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig.3

William Morris (1834-1896)

Wey

1883

Woodblock; fabric

[image online] available at: https://jooinn.com/img/get [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig.4

Lee Conklin (b.1941) 

Veeva La Mutation

1971

Lithography on card; poster

[image online] available at: https://comics.ha.com/itm/memorabilia/veeva-la-mutation-print-mint-1971-condition-vg/a/110093-13484.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515 [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig. 5

William Morris (1834-1896)

Pimpernel 

1876

Woodblock; wallpaper

[online image] available at: https://www.janeclayton.co.uk/morris-co-pimpernel-wallpaper-privet-slate-210389/ [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig. 6

Alphonse Mucha (1860-1939)

Spring

1896

Colour Lithograph; poster

103x54cm

[online image] available at: https://www.alfonsmucha.org/Spring.html [Accessed 31 December 2020]

Fig.7

Alphonse Mucha (1860-1939)

Princess Hyacinth

1911

Colour Lithograph; poster

125.5x83.5cm

City Museum of Art, Koriyama, Japan

[online image] available at: https://www.alfonsmucha.org/Princess-Hyacinth-1911.html [Accessed 31 December 2020]

Fig. 8

Bonnie Maclean (1939-2020)

Eric Burdon and the Animals

1967

Colour Offset Lithograph; poster

V&A, London

[online image] available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O108961/eric-burdon-and-the-animals-poster-maclean-bonnie/ [Accessed 31 December 2020]

Fig. 9

Wes Wilson (1937-2020)

Chamber Brothers

1967

Colour Offset Lithograph; poster

V&A, London

[online image] available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O108994/chambers-brothers-poster-wilson-wes/[Accessed 31 December 2020]

Fig. 10

William Morris (1834-1896)

Snakeshead

1876

Printed Fabric 

[online image] available at: https://www.fabricsandpapers.com/morris-co-snakeshead-velvet-fabric[Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig. 11

Kovi Fabrics

Rosemary

Woven Fabric

[online image] available at: https://www.kovifabrics.com/search/product_detail/1723 [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Fig. 12

Wes Wilson (1937-2020)

Are We Next? Be Aware

1956

Colour Offset Lithograph; poster

[image online] available at: https://www.wes-wilson.com/ww-writings/are-we-next [Accessed 31 December 2020]

Reference List

Briggs, A. 1962. William Morris: Selected Writings and Designs. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books

Chris Deziel, 201?. Hippie Values & Beliefs. [online] available at: https://www.theclassroom.com/hippie-values-beliefs-5594.html [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Cybele Gontar, 2006. Art Nouveau. [online] available at: https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/artn/hd_artn.htm [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Devon Van Houten Maldonado, 2018. Did the Hippies Have Nothing to Say? [online] available at: https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20180529-did-the-hippies-have-nothing-to-say [Accessed 2 January 2021]

Ellen Castelow, 201-. Opium in Victorian Britain. [online] available at: https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Opium-in-Victorian-Britain/ [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Grunenberg. C. ed., 2005. Summer of Love: Art of the Psychedelic Era. Millbank: Tate Publishing

Harvard University, n.d. Timothy Leary. [online] available at: https://psychology.fas.harvard.edu/people/timothy-leary [Accessed 5 January 2021]

Jahn, P. ed., 2014. William Morris: Words & Wisdom. 2nd ed. London: National Portrait Gallery Publications

Kremer, C., Mason, A. eds., 201-. William Morris: in 50 Objects. Peterborough: Hudson’s Heritage Group. 

Morton, A. L. ed., 1973. Political Writings of William Morris. 2nd ed. Lawrence & Wishart

Renée Claire Tafoya, 201-. Psychedelic 60s. [online] available at: https://visualartsdepartment.wordpress.com/psychedelic-60s/ [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Sarah Pruitt, 2018. How the Vietnam War Empowered the Hippie Movement. [online] available at: https://www.history.com/news/vietnam-war-hippies-counter-culture [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Sarah Pruitt, 2020. The Post World War II Boom: How America Got Into Gear. [online] available at: https://www.history.com/news/post-world-war-ii-boom-economy [Accessed 22 December 2020]

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2002. Hippie. [online] available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/hippie [Accessed 5 January 2021]

The Met, n.d. Lithograph. [online] available at: https://www.metmuseum.org/about-the-met/curatorial-departments/drawings-and-prints/materials-and-techniques/printmaking/lithograph [Accessed 16 December 2020]

The Summer of Love: How Hippies Changed the World. 2017. Series 1 episode 1. [BBC Documentary] Available through: Daily Motion https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6qzesy [Accessed 25 November 2020]

The Summer of Love: How Hippies Changed the World. 2017. Series 1 episode 2. [BBC Documentary] Available through: Daily Motion https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6tn9ek [Accessed 25 November 2020]

Tomlinson, S., 200-. A source of information. In: Grunenberg. C. ed., 2005. Summer of Love: Art of the Psychedelic Era. Millbank: Tate Publishing

V&A, n.d.a. William Morris and Wallpaper Design. [online] available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/william-morris-and-wallpaper-design [Accessed 23 December 2020]

V&A, n.d.b. Introducing William Morris. [online] available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/introducing-william-morris [Accessed 2 January 2021]

V&A, n.d.c. Arts and Crafts: an Introduction. [online] available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/arts-and-crafts-an-introduction [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Van Zandt, E., 2002. The Life and Works of William Morris. Bath: Parragon

Wes Wilson, 201-. Are We Next? [online] available at: https://www.wes-wilson.com/ww-writings/are-we-next[Accessed 31 December 2020]

William Morris Gallery: Main Collection, 2020. [exhibition] William Morris Gallery, London

Bibliography

Bahr Gallery, n.d. Lee Conklin. [online] available at: https://www.bahrgallery.com/artist-master/lee-conklin[accessed 22 December 2020]

Barber, J., n.d. Bringing the garden indoors: how nature inspired William Morris. [online] available at: https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/bringing-the-garden-indoors-how-nature-inspired-william-morris[Accessed 5 January 2020]

Carolyn McDowall, 2014. William Morris, the Arts & Crafts Movement – Art That is Life. [online] available at: https://www.thecultureconcept.com/william-morris-the-arts-craft-movement-art-that-is-life [Accessed 3 January 2021]

Google Arts & Culture, n.d. Alphonse Mucha. [online] available at: https://artsandculture.google.com/entity/alphonse-mucha/m0p_nx?hl=en [Accessed 16 December 2020]

Golby, J. M., 1986. Culture & Society in Britain: 1850-1890. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

History.com Editors, 2010. The 1960s History. [online] available at: https://www.history.com/topics/1960s/1960s-history [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Jacolbe, J., 2019. When Posters Went Psychedelic. [online] available at: https://daily.jstor.org/when-posters-went-psychedelic/ [Accessed 5 January 2020]

Jones, J., 2016. William Morris: a Victorian Socialist Dreaming of a Life in Symmetry. [online] available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2016/mar/24/william-morris-google-doodle-socialist [Accessed 5 January 2020]

Louise Crane, 2011. Drugs in Victorian Britain. [online] available at: https://wellcomecollection.org/articles/W87wthIAACQizfap [Accessed 22 December 2020]

Mark Harris, n.d. The Flowering of the Hippies. [online] available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1967/09/the-flowering-of-the-hippies/306619/ [Accessed 2 January 2021]

Realitysandwhich, 2013. The Nature Boys. Realitysandwhich, [online] available at: https://realitysandwich.com/214803/the-nature-boys/ [Accessed 17th November 2020]

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1998. Abbie Hoffman. [online] available at: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abbie-Hoffman [Accessed 5 January 2020]

Waggoner, D. ed., 2003. The Beauty of Life: William Morris & the Art of Design. Holborn: Thames & Hudson