Artists Using Drugs?

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

Lots of people claim that there are references in famous works to whatever drugs the artist was supposedly taking when s/he made it. There are also many suppositions as to what drugs caused what references, but for the purposes of this OP, we'll just say "drugs."
Two of the more popular stories (and by "more popular," I mean "my favorites,") are "Alice in Wonderland and Her Adventures Through the Looking Glass" and "The Wizard of Oz."
Now, as an aspiring writer and competent draftsman, I personally feel that using drug references in stories and artwork is deplorable. It is to creativity what sticky notes are to studying - a nice, ambiguous way to cheat those who actually did the work.
Discuss:
-Use of drugs as a creative stimulant
-Ethics of drug use
-Common references to drugs in literature and art

Alice in Wonderland links:
1
This person is actually pretty sad; look over to the right and you see a bunch of other Disney movies they've tried to read things into.
2
This one also doesn't have any citations, but it does give an example of what I'm talking about in the list of references/claims of drug use.
3
Now, this one isn't technically cited, though it does have an impressive "links" page that leads to similar sites with matching information.
4
This site doesn't have any citations either (mostly because it's an informal essay,) but I tend to agree with the author's points (even if they are made in poorly-constructed run-on sentences.)

Wizard of Oz links:
1
This one is pretty well-cited, though most of the sources are books or magazines (and so are a little harder to get your hands on.)
2This one has very little actual citation, but it seems that the author has been using credible sources because of the multitude of links to other pages with similar information.
3
O_o This one gave me a headache. It explores possible links between mysticism and theology to the story. It's pretty interesting, if nothing else.
4
This one is definitely my favorite. Having heard this myth several times, I was not surprised to find a website dedicated to it. However, the detail that is goes into is really something else.  

[aretoo]

Heh... To be honest, Steph, whether or not an artist is on drugs is kinda beside the point; there's been plenty of people on drugs who don't go on to make anything of import. And it's actually quite likely those authors did do drugs of some sort; on the other hand, there was a somewhat different feeling about the drugs they may have been doing a century ago. Some were known as tonics, others as medicines. *shrug* And some WERE drugs, but our society now looks at such chemical abuse/dependancy/usage in a TOTALLY different way.  

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

I can see where you would think that, Aretoo. I can agree with you to an extent as well. But it's like the age-old question as to whether to tattle on someone you saw cheating on a test - is it right to put them on a pedestal and reward that behavior (even if, at the time, it was considered okay?)
Today, those writers would be considered addicts by most of society, but that's not to say that being high then is any better than it is now. I mean, would they have gone in the same directions and made the same observations if they hadn't been wasted?  

[Taeryyn]

I'm not sure I get what you're upset about.
The idea of artists/authors taking drugs? The idea of artists/authors referencing said drugs in their works? Or the fact that some people claim that there are drug references in many famous works?

I don't like some of these people's assumptions that drug use is inherently corrupt or evil. =/ Even if there are drug references (intentional or not), a person who has no knowledge of drugs or drug references is not going to be "corrupted" or want to go out and drop acid.

Quote:

Now, as an aspiring writer and competent draftsman, I personally feel that using drug references in stories and artwork is deplorable. It is to creativity what sticky notes are to studying - a nice, ambiguous way to cheat those who actually did the work.

Clarify? Apologies, since I'm obviously brain-dead, but I don't get your analogy.

sweatdrop  

[aretoo]

Hm... I don't know that it's actually cheating, any more than someone who has seen a forest and can remember the way light filters through the branches, the way the moss hangs off the bark, the way the undergrowth pokes up here and there, when asked to recreate these for a picture can do so, and the person who's never made it out to the woods can only approximate it. Those who have done drugs (and can actually recall what the sensations on it were) simply have an altered (or wider, if you prefer) perception of reality. As a matter of fact, some of the artists we most revere today are STILL in and out of rehabs, when they're not 6 feet under. (This goes with prescription, a la Heath Ledger, as well as psychedelic, like River Phoenix, and plain ol' alcohol [and whatever else he could get his hands on], like Robert Downey Jr.)  

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

Taeryyn

I'm not sure I get what you're upset about.
The idea of artists/authors taking drugs? The idea of artists/authors referencing said drugs in their works? Or the fact that some people claim that there are drug references in many famous works?

Well, I meant specifically artists/authors using drugs, but I prefaced my original claim with the rumors that circulate. I also included links to a few sites regarding my two favorite stories, the authors of which happen to be commonly accused of having been drug addicts or high while writing them.
Also, I'm not so much upset as I am intrigued by the possibility. Not that I want to get high or try using drugs to focus my creative energy, but like many ideas I'd never considered on my own, I am surprised and curious. I figured the ATG is a pretty diverse place to ask my question, and see what kind of answers I get.

Taeryyn

I don't like some of these people's assumptions that drug use is inherently corrupt or evil. =/ Even if there are drug references (intentional or not), a person who has no knowledge of drugs or drug references is not going to be "corrupted" or want to go out and drop acid.

I'm not disputing that in the slightest; I'm hardly a pillar of moral behavior. The only issue I'm addressing in this thread is whether or not using drugs is a valid and acceptable way to fuel artistic creativity. I know a lot of artists whose works are heavily influenced by music, drugs, and their personal lives. I personally am more inclined to appreciate those shaped by music rather than drugs. I brought this up on a lark to try to ascertain the ATG's thoughts.

Taeryyn

Quote:

Now, as an aspiring writer and competent draftsman, I personally feel that using drug references in stories and artwork is deplorable. It is to creativity what sticky notes are to studying - a nice, ambiguous way to cheat those who actually did the work.

Clarify? Apologies, since I'm obviously brain-dead, but I don't get your analogy.

sweatdrop

What I mean is that it seems to me that using a mind-altering substance to direct yourself into a creative state is the same as defining the key words in the back of every chapter in a text, and then skip reading the chapter. The end result is the same of those who took the longer, more difficult path, but do the individuals engaging in these practices really deserve recognition on par with the others?

@ Aretoo: I see the parallel there. It makes sense insomuch as those who've been somewhere have a better idea of what it looks like. I have little to no tolerance for addiction of any kind myself, having seen firsthand what it makes people into. However, my biases aside, I still don't know if you can call someone who get wasted and publishes the odd thoughts they wrote down while they were high a true poet.  

[aretoo]

Ah, but someone scribbling down incoherent gibberish is different than someone who "sees visions", so to speak, then translates them into an opus such as Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (both books), and that's where the artistry comes in. smile (And even fictional characters fall subject to this; Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's most famous creation, Sherlock Homes, used opium to sharpen his mind.)  

[Taeryyn]

I don't really have much of a problem with authors or artists using certain drugs as part of their creative process.

Taking drugs doesn't make one an artist or a poet. It might help you expand upon ideas or see things in ways that you wouldn't have before. But the talent is either there or it isn't. Whether you're affected by music or by a hit of acid, you either know your s**t or you don't.

As for the "cheating" analogy, I don't agree. It's not like, get ******** up -> produce work of art. Again: the talent is either there or it isn't. All the opium in the world isn't going to make me write a good novel, and a good artist can still paint without altering his mind. If you do not study thoroughly, you might pass the test. But in the long run, the knowledge just isn't there. That applies to creativity as well. But sticky notes? Definitely a helpful study boosters. ^^ Not necessary, but a completely valid tool to be used in moderation, in combination with other means.
 

[Phaeton]

There's a difference between a creative stimulant and an addiction. Not everybody used drugs, some use music, draw from real experiences, dreams, and other things. Drug use wasn't taboo until it became a problem for people who were addicted and people around them.

Now don't knock sticky notes. It's up to the diligent to cover their tracks if they don't want people with simpler means to get ahead. Don't bash the opportunist because they're smart.

Quote:

A "through the looking glass" Mickey Mouse cartoon was also made, in which Mickey passes through a mirror into an alternate reality and discovers that everything he believed was real is actually just a dream conjured in his mind by machines that hold all of humanity captive to be used as sources of bioelectric power. In the end, Mickey triumphs over the machines using a combination of mental mastery and dance.

Off topic but OMGWTFMATRIX!  

[wakusei]

Hey, if drugs are what those guys needed to each make some awesome stories that I still love to this day then it's fine with me...*looks over at Wizard of Oz calendar and various Alice figurines nearby*

I refuse to read waaaay too much into these children's stories to find "evidence" of drug use outside the obvious (like the hookah-smoking Caterpillar). You could really make any kid's story out to be more trippy than it is seeing as most of the popular ones involve children going to a magical other world. Kids like that kind of thing. It doesn't automatically point to the author dropping acid or some such thing. Even if they actually did... >.>;

 

[XxDarkMalicexX]

I have to agree with everyone else. 3nodding
Yes, drugs can be helpful and deadly, but if you use them in the correct way, then there's not a problem. Some people just can't get that in their head and that's why they are addicts. stare But then again, they are just human like the rest of us, you can't blame them.
But besides that, people can make-up a creepy/beautiful story just by their own original mind, no stimulants involved.
There are plently of references out there to choose from and so many things to learn, and if you have to experince them, to gain more knowledge in with/what you are writing/drawing, then you go ahead and take that own experience.

 

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

I can see the logic there as far as the knowledge has to be there in order for a work to actually be art (or literary.) I just don't know if I see where drawing inspiration from music, which has no discernible physical effect, is the same thing as getting high and focusing the effects of the drugs into the work.
I mean, music can definitely put you in a trance, but only in the mental sense - nothing actually happens to your body. Drugs are very different there. Drug use can actually distress your body at the same time. While most hallucinations are in the mind and aren't actually being "seen" so much as "perceived," drug use can cause physical damage to the artist.
Maybe I'm just not getting it. biggrin