Fun Stuff > BAND
drugs: visual art versus audible art
Phrozen:
KharBevNor,
Your weed sounds like it might be a bit more natural than the shit my friends would smoke. Also, some of the ex-hippies I know have confirmed this for me. They've smoked old weed and newer weed, they say there's definately a difference.
DynamiteKid,
Anything in excess will kill you. Like I said before, I enjoy this on occaisons and not all the time. Also, I DON'T SMOKE CIGARETTES. So nyah. :P
Aneurythmia,
You're right. That is a bit of a double standard. I suppose I should consider them a legitamate form of inspiration.
I think this discussion has gotten a bit off track...[/code]
onewheelwizzard:
Regarding the old-weed-vs-new-weed question, the real crux of the matter is breeding. Before the 1960s weed was just weed. Now there are designer strains of it. Weed ended up getting bred and domesticated the same way corn did ... look at what corn looks like now, compare it to wild maize from 50 thousand years ago, and you can't even recognize it. Weed hasn't been chemically altered except by a select minority of growers ... for the most part, the change in weed has been caused by selective growing and breeding that has been done with an eye towards potency. The vast majority of weed today is just as "natural" as the weed of many many years ago ... but trying to say they're the same thing is like trying to say a German shepherd is the same as a Yorkie.
Aneurhythmia makes an excellent point ... in a lot of ways, drugs are no different at all from any other form of experience. They're a shortcut, but they're as natural a shortcut to their corresponding chemical experience as sex is to the chemical experience of endorphin release (and whatever else happens during sex). Humanity has ALWAYS used drugs, same way it has always had sex and always shared experience through communication and always [insert some other universal human experience here]. In fact, an extremely good case has been made for the idea that psychedelic mushroom use in Africa was the foundation for human culture and civilization as we know it (interestingly enough, the point in history in which some archeologists believe that civilization stopped mushroom use is concordant with the Biblical myth of the expulsion from Eden, both geographically and chronologically ... and considering the shamans were probably all female, who's to say that Eve's "fruit of knowledge" wasn't actually a fungus that early religious zealots demonized in an attempt to keep people in line?)
I'm going off on a tangent again (if you want to explore the ideas I've been talking about, read "Food of the Gods" by Terrence McKenna.) I have a couple other points to address.
First off, this quote:
--- Quote ---If someone writes a story that sounds personal and passes it off as such but, in fact, has no actual experience with the subject I consider him a fraud. This is probably influenced by the decision I made to not publish any of my own writing, its all fake. I haven't had the experiences necessary to write honestly about life. This is, again, opinion, but I really don't think people should write personal sounding things and pass it off as their own experience.
--- End quote ---
Whatever happened to inspiration? What happened to empathy, putting yourself in the shoes of another? If one needs personal experience in order to write "honestly" about life, then 99% of all fiction written in history is completely bogus and nobody should ever write anything but autobiographies. I think anyone with an appreciation for creativity can see the problem with this idea. Anything that someone feels enough to express creatively is legitimately personal regardless of whether or not it has basis in physical life experience, and I would posit that this includes drug experiences. Your writing isn't any more fake than [your favorite writer]'s.
Secondly, "I really need to try some herbal alternatives"??? How about weed, the viable "herbal alternative" to the poison of alcohol? Just pointing out the obvious. "Responsible" alcohol use isn't as responsible as similarly moderated marijuana use.
Regarding the difference between hallucinogens and hard drugs/alcohol/nicotine/anything else that addicts you to it and can kill you, well, I won't say that casualties like Roky Erickson and Syd Barrett don't happen. But there are responsible ways to use hallucinogens as well, and there are irresponsible ways of backing out of your driveway in the morning that can endanger yourself and others.
I guess my bottom line is, don't let the legal or illegal status of mind-altering substances convince you that they somehow behave on a set of different rules than the rest of human experience. Learn about them first. Forming opinions without knowing what you're talking about is a bit like ... well, what would you say to a 10-year-old whose dad was injured in a car accident and wanted to outlaw driving?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version