Drugs and Writing

I don't do alcohol.

Writing on weed depends on the weed. I have used it for brainstorming. I work best in OneNote because I can flip around the tabs/pages and start a new section when I get a new brainfart. Great for plotting, but not so much for writing. I suppose a different strain might be better for writing though. Maybe I should try that to get myself writing again instead of just hanging around on writer forums chitchatting...

Become familiar with the story of Thomas DeQuincey, author of Confessions of an English Opium-Eater. DeQuincey was an early 19th-century English writer and friend of other major figures like Coleridge and Wordsworth. He was regarded as a brilliant talent, and much of that potential was squandered by drug addiction.

Or, more recently, the story of Frederick Exley. There are others. Along with plenty of creative musicians, like Jim Morrison and Amy Winehouse. There's a spectrum of substance use which may affect thinking and mental energy, ranging from coffee and chocolate to heroin and cocaine, but I'll go for the chocolate mainly. And the occasional glass of good Scotch whiskey. And remember that Hunter Thompson committed suicide.

caw

blacbird said:

He was regarded as a brilliant talent, and much of that potential was squandered by drug addiction.

Click to expand...

^ All of this.

Gonna have to agree with blacbird on this one. In my experience, it's more of a romanticized idea that drugs help with writing. They may be good now and again for generating ideas, or helping to think outside the normal margins, but using it as a spark to the muse? Definitely dangerous. Drugs eat away at a writer's ability to craft words, and all that time off high getting "inspired" could be better served actually working and improving your craft, figuring out what ideas work for you and what don't.

The only way I could see drugs helping the process is, yes, by giving you a different perspective on things. Personally, I've had a few epiphany level moments on drugs that have helped me rethink storytelling as a whole, but after that? Hurts more than helps. And you can always get that same perspective shifting inspiration in other ways, like visiting a new country or taking a class to broaden your knowledge or experience.

There are so many geniuses of music who either died or crawled out the other end of an addiction with their career destroyed that I really shy away from saying drugs can lead to great art.

I think a great artist leads to great art. Beyond that, they just need the good health and opportunity all of us need to thrive.

Recreational drugs, used wisely, might inspire an artist or ease them past the harder parts of creation. However, I don't give the drugs credit for that art at all. The artist still could have created a remarkable work without the drugs, but not necessarily that piece of remarkable work or that easily. Who is to say what they did create is more valuable than what they could have created?

The other issue that bothers me is that drugs are generally some kind of physical burden to your body, although not necessarily one you won't bounce back from. If they're doing any sort of harm to your brain, however, even a tiny one, then that damage is eroding the finest edge of your talent. If drug use incrementally shaves your abilities down from genius-level to merely very, very good, then whatever inspiration or entertainment you got from the drugs is perhaps not adequate trade-off. Talent isn't that rare, but genius is, and if you're trying to go somewhere with your talents, then that fine edge of true genius might be the only thing that has any hope of getting you there.

Thompson is a great example of it, as his early work was brilliant but the last 30 years or so of his career was complete garbage. The drugs work until they don't, that's kind of a cliche NA saying.

I'm a firm believer that addiction is a side effect of the creative mind, not the cause of it. I think all the great writers who were addicts probably would have produced the same work without their drug of choice, that the addiction was just the monkey they had to deal with apart from their writing.

I've been clean for a while, and my work is still pretty much the same as it was when I was using, but I can produce with much more regularity and output now, that's about the only difference.

To me, it reeks of insecurity. I don't have enough faith in my own abilities, I must prop them up or "enhance" them with mind-altering substances.

So you find that licking a green spotted frog makes you a better writer. What happens when you've built a career, but can no longer find green spotted frogs and you're reliant on your own unfogged brain, your own imagination, your own talent?

It also then can become a convenient excuse. I can't write well without green spotted frogs, so it's not MY fault I've never finished a book or submitted a story or {insert failed goal here}.

Anything can be a talisman or a crutch. Its power is all in your head.* Choose wisely to what (or whom) you give that power.




*Disclaimer - My opinions above are regarding recreational drugs of choice, not those that correct imbalances/illnesses/etc.

Stephen King doesn't remember writing Cujo, but he's clean now. He said in On Writing that every addict has a million and one excuses why they can't quit now, why they couldn't possible give up their addiction right now. If the addict happens to be an artist, then their art just becomes another one of the excuses.

blacbird said:

Become familiar with the story of Thomas DeQuincey, author of Confessions of an English Opium-Eater. DeQuincey was an early 19th-century English writer and friend of other major figures like Coleridge and Wordsworth. He was regarded as a brilliant talent, and much of that potential was squandered by drug addiction.

Or, more recently, the story of Frederick Exley. There are others. Along with plenty of creative musicians, like Jim Morrison and Amy Winehouse. There's a spectrum of substance use which may affect thinking and mental energy, ranging from coffee and chocolate to heroin and cocaine, but I'll go for the chocolate mainly. And the occasional glass of good Scotch whiskey. And remember that Hunter Thompson committed suicide.

caw

Click to expand...

^

caw

I think there's absolutely folks who can write while rolling. Rolling shitballz-insane fucking crazy.

Do I believe they can only write that way? No. I happen to believe those folks, given a brain not 3/4 fucked, could write every bit as well and very likely better.

Drugs and alcohol are a crutch, not a catalyst, and the folks who want to claim otherwise lie to themselves as well as us.



Just my opinion, and ymmv, but I don't buy into the notion drugs somehow offer a new version of you that does anything (writing, marriage, taxes, basketball....ANYTHING, in case I was somehow unclear) better....some folks survive them reasonably intact. Their success doesn't mean the drugs enabled it.

I crack open a beer before I do any writing. Usually I don't even finish the bottle before I reach the end of my work for the night, so it's more about the ritual of it than the effects of the alcohol.

For what it's worth, I do know writers who swear by the inspirational powers of drugs and booze. Most of them don't produce a lot of work, and none of them seem to produce any work of quality.

I almost always use caffeine when writing. Once upon a time I also ingested vast quantities of nicotine. Occasionally I might mix in a few minutes of viewing pictures of scantily clad women or relive a favorite amorous memory or maybe go for a run before or during my writing session. My body chemistry, thus, was always stimulated in all kinds of ways.

Was my process so radically different than the writer who took a few belts of whiskey or tokes of MJ or hits of narcotic?

I was FABULOUS when high, until I wasn't. Then I was real, real, real.

No weed or drugs here, but I drink now and then while writing. Sometimes it speeds up the process of putting words on paper - actually writing, never editing - because I relax enough to not analyze every single sentence right after I write it.

That said, although those sentences get written faster, they also tend to change when my sober self revises them later.

It might have its place now and then, but it's not like it's a panacea for writer's block, or some kind of magic pill. At the most, it makes it just a liiittle bit easier to access the power you already have as a writer. It doesn't give you anything that isn't already there.

I feel like I have kind of been around long enough to have some perspective on this now.

When I was in my teens and twenties I was a passionate advocate (when I say passionate I mean, I could go on about it in a pub for some time, rather than actually doing anything practical or political) for legalisation of drugs, and thought that on the whole altering mental states in this way was a pretty good thing that could lead you to a perspective quickly that would take a long time to find without them, if ever.

Now I think that yes, SOME creative people do come up with some great stuff when they are out of their gourd on substances, but its more in spite of what they have taken rather than because of it.

If you are relaxed and happy then ideas and creativity tend to come. If you are unhappy but focused and driven, then ideas tend to come. If you need drugs to get into those states then it can seem like the drugs are giving you the ideas, but they aren't. Really.

Cannabis and / or LSD will make mundane things seem very interesting. Things that aren't very funny seem hilarious. Box sets that would bore you when you are straight turn into an entire night of must see viewing.

I guess it depends what you are like on them too. I could barely write a birthday card after I'd been smoking, never mind a book.

Jack Kerouac reportedly was off his head most of the time, when he was writing and when he was finding things to write about. But he died an obese chronically depressed alcoholic being looked after by his mum.

No, just no. Even if drugs and alcohol made me a better writer, which they absolutely will not do, I still would go that route. I'm far more concerned with being a better husband, a better father, a better friend, a better neighbor, and a better citizen than I am with being a better writer. I'm also more concerned with just staying alive.

'Everything ain't for everyone' - I can't recall where I read or heard that. It could be as obscure as a quote from the new Battlestar Galactica, or it could be a Stephen King quote (which is funny, bearing in mind his own struggles with substance abuse as noted upthread).

I rarely drink alcohol, and if I were to have a drug of choice, it would be weed, which I smoke in school holidays (my job would be impossible to do if I were to smoke during term-time). But the thought of writing whilst smoking is hilarious to me, because I would not get anything done. As the first poster said, they just spent an hour editing. That would be me. And I enjoy entertaining friends at my house, chatting, cooking, gaming, or mainlining TV shows and films etc when I smoke.

What I have noticed, though, is that when I start back at work (having stopped smoking), I seem to have far more ideas than I did. I'm not sure if this just because weed may put you in a less hectic or anxious place, so it's easier to write, or just coincidence, but I'm not concerned about that, simply because I don't do it to write.

pH

I like alcohol, but I haven't observed that it helps with my writing at all. Actually, I think it makes me too relaxed to really focus on creative endeavors.

Addiction is going to be a hindrance and danger whether it "helps" someone's creativity or not. I don't have a problem with someone using recreational substances responsibly, but I think it's better not to get into the mindset that you need it to write/be creative.

I've only tried alcohol and weed. There is no possible way I can translate the images in my head to a keyboard while on either substance. Not at all. I tried, I really did. I failed.

Weed does get my brain to finally shut up, which is nice. When I'm not overthinking every aspect of my life I can let the creativity loose. I've learned to keep notepads and pens handy to write down my ideas after smoking so I can explore them further sober. It's like the weed unlocks what's already there.

TwistedTyping said:

Weed does get my brain to finally shut up,.

Click to expand...

Lots of other things can get your brain to shut up, too. Some of them permanently.

caw

I came to the conclusion that most of my favorite writers produced as much as they did and wrote as fast as they did because they were probably on something, most likely speed or weed. But, man, I just can't live like that. My brain is psychedelic anyway. I just have to ground myself a lot and use music as a means to the flow.

I'm in no way a teetotaler. Quite the opposite. So don't read anything that follows as moralizing or judging:

I think the myth of illicit substances accessing the muse is based on mistaking correlation for causation. Most of the world's greatest writers had issues with substance abuse. That doesn't mean their greatness was in any way positively affected by their habits. Writing at that level requires accessing painful memories and extremely strong emotions. It also requires confronting harsh truths about the world, humanity, and especially, oneself. Calling on those demons without chemical courage can be daunting, even terrifying.

When Hemingway was slinging back scotches while writing For Whom the Bell Tolls, was he doing it to rouse his muse or to manage the trauma of dredging up memories of his own time in a war zone? Which does raise the question: could his writing have hit the same raw emotions sober as it did when he was drunk? Probably, but there's no way to say for sure. Maybe he would never have attained the "greatness" he did had it not been for the bottle. Then again, maybe he wouldn't have died with a shotgun in his mouth. No way to know for sure. What I do know is that it was his life, the sum total of events and people in it, the things he did and the things he saw, that made him one of the greatest to ever put pen to paper. Not the booze. Muses can't be found in the bottom of a bottle, only on the business end of life. The greats who turned to the bottle did so because the Muse was too present, not too distant.

My point being, I don't judge writers who use alcohol and drugs as a crutch. Unless they're doing so because they think by adopting the stereotyped image of a tortured genius they can become one. That I tend to chuckle over.

To use a sports analogy: Babe Ruth routinely showed up to baseball games drunk, ate like a pig (sometimes during games), and was grossly overweight, yet in spite of all that, he became a legend. Does that mean all up and coming ball players should scarf down 4 lbs of bacon, a dozen eggs, a gallon of small beer and a fifth of whiskey before every practice? Of course not.

Jamesaritchie said:

No, just no. Even if drugs and alcohol made me a better writer, which they absolutely will not do, I still would go that route. I'm far more concerned with being a better husband, a better father, a better friend, a better neighbor, and a better citizen than I am with being a better writer. I'm also more concerned with just staying alive.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, although the right drugs would indeed help (in some situations), but the priorities are different now that I'm a boring old fart.

Would The Beatles or Eric Clapton or The Ramones or Led Zeppelin or Motorhead have become The Beatles or Eric Clapton or The Ramones or Led Zeppelin or Motorhead without the drugs and the booze? Of course not. The very idea is preposterous.

Would Philip K Dick or Michael Moorcock or Stephen King have written their most beloved stuff if they had been sober? Equally preposterous.

"Without LSD and weed Hendrix would have been twice as good!"--I dare someone of the "drugs are just a crutch" persuasion to say this out loud with a straight face.

There is, however a limited window of opportunity to be a pathfinder and innovator without side-responsibilities--beyond a point in their late twenties/early thirties musicians generally can no longer invent new stuff, nor writers, nor painters, although they can and do continue perfecting the results of the discoveries of their younger selves. So even if one truly believes one is destined do drugs in order to discover amazing new ideas and styles*--this can only be done at a certain point in life, beyond which it a) stops working anyway, and b) forces people around you to suffer (and not infrequently forces you to organize some sort of suicidal exit from life in order to not have to make the switch to adult responsibilities).

Which brings us also the question of the artistic temperament. Some artists believe that it's perfectly acceptable to sacrifice their happiness, health, and sanity for their art, as well as the happiness, health, and sanity of their friends and family. Perhaps I would have toyed with this at 20, but now, as a married adult, the whole idea is repulsive to me. Art is what you do in order to bring more happiness to yourself and those around you, not to make everyone's life hell.

Drugs have two basic functions for the artist: 1) muffle anxiety&depression and/or boost confidence, and 2) generate awesome ideas.

1) Many of the old-school writers like Fitzgerald or Hemingway or Chandler who subsisted on seas of alcohol and mountains of cigarettes used those to handle their anxiety and depression, and today would have been prescribed stuff to do the same but with hopefully more systematic results and less blackout rages. There's nothing wrong in managing your anxiety however you see fit, but the decent thing is to choose ways which screw up neither you nor those around you.

2) "Inspirational" drugs are not cartridges of new external data--they are triggers which force the already existing data in one's brain to shift and change and clash, producing novel and unexpected variations. Even when one is no longer hunting for the "revolutionary new thing", but simply trying to not be completely banal, these drugs can be useful, but with major caveats:

a) Weed and its cousins take what nervous and mental resources you've accumulated and releases them all at once, which can be very beneficial in the creative sense, but if you do this all the time, without letting the mental tank fill up again, you soon turn into a zombie running on empty. Better do this once a month or once a week, in order to let material accumulate, before you let it explode. If you've accumulated nothing but keep smoking daily and hourly anyway, you're just lost in an impotent haze of neurotic giggling, and giving weed a bad name**.
b) LSD and its cousins are the spiritual descendants of drugs Neolithic shamans used to speak to gods and spirits. They would prepare for this for weeks if not months, with fasting and other rituals, then would start the trip with total respect for it, and would then follow its lessons in order to not lose the goodwill of the invisible world. Any trip with magic mushrooms or anything else should be approached with this level of respect and commitment if it is not to be the start of a downward spiral into mental health issues and social inadequacy. Doing this once a year or once every few years or at most once a season should be OK and even maybe beneficial to anyone, including writers, if approached in a sane and adult manner***. But doing this all the time, and treating it as some sort of party drug can only end in tears. And possibly straitjackets.

Great ideas are overrated in writing as well as in music. How many times have I read a story or listened to a song, and seen so many potentially brilliant ideas completely wasted? Better to take 1 solid idea and through good technique craft it into a good story or a good song, than cram 30 potentially great ideas into a loose mess of a story or a song, where these potentially great ideas get into each other's ways and indeed lower each other's impact, undermining the quality of end product, and being ultimately a waste of effort and energy.

Having no great ideas is sad, but having 1 or 2 is more than enough. Everything else is for technique to take care of, and technique comes with patience and discipline, not with "inspirational" drugs--those can possibly help find the raw material to be shaped with patience and discipline. Patience and discipline may indeed be facilitated with "anxiety management" drugs like booze and cigarettes and speed and heroin and whatnot, but self-destruction is not a goal I can endorse.

There have been times when I've had to drink a beer in 30 seconds in order to achieve the euphoric boost needed to break through writer anxiety and start writing. But doing this every day (or every hour, for that matter), is not a system I'd like to see in the life of anyone I care about.

____________
* Which I am definitely not and quite content with this state of affairs...
** Unless it's precisely this empty blurred state that keeps you sane, then this becomes again a discussion on anxiety and depression management.
*** Although I rather side with Alejandro Jodorowsky, that once a lifetime is more than enough for most people.

Joseph Schmol said:

/,,,/Occasionally I might mix in a few minutes of viewing pictures of scantily clad women or relive a favorite amorous memory /.../

Click to expand...

Sexual arousal absolutely produces chemicals which dampen anxiety and depression and boost confidence and doing this instead of legal or illegal drugs sounds way healthier as a system to get the balls jingling ball rolling.

There are problems with ritualized behavior around writing, in that if for some reason, the ritual isn't practical, you're hosed, or your writer brain thinks you're hosed.

This includes alcohol or drugs or the favorite lucky pen (taken to extremes).

That glass of sherry when you write can quickly become two glasses, to the point where one long-term successful writer told me it became a bottle a night.
Maybe save the sherry or the smoke until after you've written, when you enjoy it on its own, for its own sake.