Drugs and creativity?

Catari Jaguar · 20-11-2011 03:25PM

Metallica and RHCP both suck after getting clean.

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 03:26PM

cherub rock wrote: »

Metallica and RHCP both suck after getting clean.

RHCP sucked BEFORE getting clean dude.

parrai · 20-11-2011 03:30PM

Bass players and drummers are funky on junk
:cool:

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 03:36PM

minidazzler wrote: »

My apologies, when I read that first I thought it meant 20 people who were creative and weren't on drugs.

Well that's what I meant.

Drugs could POSSIBLY help the creative process and a lot of famously creative minds were under the influence at the time of creating, i acknowledge this.

But at the end of the day, for every 1 person you could name who was under the influence of drugs when being creative there are 20 people who were also being creative but not on drugs.

minidazzler · 20-11-2011 03:39PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

Well that's what I meant.

Drugs could POSSIBLY help the creative process and a lot of famously creative minds were under the influence at the time of creating, i acknowledge this.

But at the end of the day, for every 1 person you could name who was under the influence of drugs when being creative there are 20 people who were also being creative but not on drugs.

Yeah, they weren't being creative, but were they being creative to the point of greatness? You could probably not even name a 1:1 for the last hundred years on that front.

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 03:43PM

minidazzler wrote: »

Yeah, they weren't being creative, but were they being creative to the point of greatness? You could probably not even name a 1:1 for the last hundred years on that front.

Well when you're talking about art, it's all subjective anyway!

Snowie · 20-11-2011 03:49PM

I'm creative.

I can't spell for **** but when it comes to still or moving pictures I've a gift foresight for ideas that can and do work I was brought up in a creative house hold..

I wouldn't say drugs nesscerlly help you beome more creative they can certainly give you a different persecutive as well as a more I guess imaginative or locked down approach ill site at a computer for a week working on photoshop with out speaking to any body smoking waterfalls and just focussed on the task at hand no interest in anything else.. other then sleep being stoned and finishing what it is Im doing...

when Im out taking pictures i just like having music in my ears its how i work being stoned is nearly to much you need to be aware enough on the street when you shooting junkies and scumbags... But also traffic. I really think it depends on the medium i wasn't stoned taking this

I think drugs has its place with creativity but theres a point were things begin to get a bit messy and you become just a drooling mess of to much though and need some down time..

I think some people may understand what I mean bye that

Logical Fallacy · 20-11-2011 03:49PM

I used to quite enjoy taking a little bit of acid and sitting down and working on a track. Not a huge amount, just enough for a tingle. If anything i had some major breakthroughs in understand the elements of genre's like Garage (particularly the swing in the beats), DnB, Jungle and Funk and Jazz.

However , it would be foolish to put all the sudden realisations down to the fact that i was on acid at the time...there was countless hours of work already put in for each type of music...so it was really a combination of hard graft and the odd inspiration that can sometimes come from being on a drug.

It's also not something i was keen to do very often but in my personal experience from music, photography, painting etc while under the influence of something it can definitely enhance your work upon occasion.

Snowie · 20-11-2011 03:50PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

Well when you're talking about art, it's all subjective anyway!

Yep and lets not fogrt personal agenda

:)

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 03:52PM

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

Yep and lets not fogrt personal agenda :)

I prefered their early stuff!

Snowie · 20-11-2011 03:56PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

I prefered their early stuff!

some say the same thing about floyd mannnnnn:cool::pac:

Brain Stroking · 20-11-2011 04:04PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

Naming people who were crative on drugs really doesn't prove anything. For every 1 person who was creative on drugs anyone can name 20 who weren't!

Not necessarily. I amnt famous or rich but i find that drugs have made me think outside the box a little better and this has assisted me at various points in my job which has a high workload and requires a lot of decision making.

We are taught from early childhood to think inside the box so anything that takes you outside, however briefly, can only be good because lets face it, recreational drugs taken rarely or in moderation do not cause any more harm to our health than a weekly binge on alcohol.

I feel that the above comment has come from someone who hasnt taken drugs and, if they have, the drugs made them feel ill or basically didnt agree with them (this happens to some). The above poster's first comment on page 1 refers to being found dead in their own feces. This betrays an ignorance of drugs that is prevalent in Ireland. The OP isnt talking about heroin, crack cocaine or crystal meth which can end up in those tragedies. The OP is referring to marijuana, lsd etc which, for example, the Beatles took and helped transform them from a Westlife teen idol prototype to one of the most important groups musically of all time (my opinion).

A serious conversation needs to be had about drugs and drug awareness in this country. They are everywhere and all young people know about them. It seems that most adults in this country over the age of 40 wouldnt be able to differntiate between the effects of a spliff and a rock of crack. And it is the policy makers and those tasked with dealing with social problems that are in this (generally) ignorant demographic.

My two cents and obviously based on personal experience and things i have observed along the way.

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 04:17PM

Brain Stroking wrote: »

Not necessarily. I amnt famous or rich but i find that drugs have made me think outside the box a little better and this has assisted me at various points in my job which has a high workload and requires a lot of decision making.

We are taught from early childhood to think inside the box so anything that takes you outside, however briefly, can only be good because lets face it, recreational drugs taken rarely or in moderation do not cause any more harm to our health than a weekly binge on alcohol.

I feel that the above comment has come from someone who hasnt taken drugs and, if they have, the drugs made them feel ill or basically didnt agree with them (this happens to some). The above poster's first comment on page 1 refers to being found dead in their own feces. This betrays an ignorance of drugs that is prevalent in Ireland. The OP isnt talking about heroin, crack cocaine or crystal meth which can end up in those tragedies. The OP is referring to marijuana, lsd etc which, for example, the Beatles took and helped transform them from a Westlife teen idol prototype to one of the most important groups musically of all time (my opinion).

A serious conversation needs to be had about drugs and drug awareness in this country. They are everywhere and all young people know about them. It seems that most adults in this country over the age of 40 wouldnt be able to differntiate between the effects of a spliff and a rock of crack. And it is the policy makers and those tasked with dealing with social problems that are in this (generally) ignorant demographic.

My two cents and obviously based on personal experience and things i have observed along the way.

You must've been at the Domestos when you typed this out?

You've said people can't name 20 people not on drugs because you took some drugs and because you've formed the notion that I am anti-drugs?

How is any of this relevant to there being a lot of people who were creative but not on drugs?

By the way, i'm not Anti-Drugs. But people HAVE been talking about the types of drugs like heroin, crack etc. One poster used 3 people as examples, Burroghs, Hendrix and Cobain. 2 of these people diedas a result of their addiction to hard drugs.

I can understand your point of view, but to tell me my opinions are based on an Anti-Drugs viewpoint is wrong.

It works both ways you see. Your Beatles comment is obviously a product of YOUR pro-drug stance. The Beatles late work was no better than their early work, it was just different. To call them "Westlife teen idol prototype" is not entirely true and I bet that you know that, but it didnt stop you trying to use it as part of your argument.

20-11-2011 04:22PM

I think people are forgetting that the most highly regarded musicians, painters, poets, novelists etc were extraordinarily talented anyway.

They are not like 'normal' people, their brains work differently to 'normal' peoples. One poster said that some might use drugs to gain a different perspective and I totally agree with that. But the talent and creative foresight has always been there since birth.

board.eddy · 20-11-2011 04:27PM

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

It's well known that a huge number of famous and successful artists of all types used a lot of drugs. Writers, musicians, actors, painters, so many of them were and are heavily involved with, if not addicted to, some type of drug.

So the question is, do you think that art/creativity can be enhanced by drug use? Or is it the case that the likes of the Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, Stephen King, Charles Dickens, Van Gogh etc would have been just as creative and successful without ever using drugs?

Drugs are a massive hinderance to writing creatively imo, take a look at the stuff the beatles wrote when they were high, lucy in the sky, yellow submarine etc, not their best work at all.
i have often come up with guitar stuff when high, thought it was great then played it sober to realise its a whole heap of **** nothing

Logical Fallacy · 20-11-2011 04:28PM

board.eddy wrote: »

i have often come up with guitar stuff when high, thought it was great then played it sober to realise its a whole heap of **** nothing

This is very true...I imagine a lot of the greats, be they poets, writers or musicians had bundles and bundles of absolute dross that they produced while on drugs as well.

3ndahalfof6 · 20-11-2011 04:32PM

there is nothing like a drop of V blood to open up he imagination,

Dudess · 20-11-2011 04:33PM

Great pix Snow monkey!

In college I always wrote better essays after a few drinks - I wasn't drunk or anything, but just two or three and the ideas and words would flow out.

Latchy · 20-11-2011 04:35PM

If you include alcohol into the mix then the stats will show that many artists ,actors ,writers ,poets were alcoholics and died as a result .

The influence of some drugs can and does sometimes bring out a side of you that may differ from what you are really all about and can equally destroy what talent you may already have .Some mind altering substances can induce an egotistical state which if not kept in check , can do some serious damage in which many famous artist lost touch with reality ...permanently . Syd Barret - Pink Floyd , Peter Green - Fleetwood Mac , Brian Jones - Rolling Stones and Brenden Behan would be ones who spring to mind who's over indulgence led to early death or some permanent paraniod state .

Snowie · 20-11-2011 04:37PM

board.eddy wrote: »

Drugs are a massive hinderance to writing creatively imo, take a look at the stuff the beatles wrote when they were high, lucy in the sky, yellow submarine etc, not their best work at all.
i have often come up with guitar stuff when high, thought it was great then played it sober to realise its a whole heap of **** nothing

I think the Beatles did something they had to do experiment they more or less proofed one thing that had to be done. USC has no boundaries and is only as great as it's creators....

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 04:40PM

By the way, for everyone using The Beatles as an example of awesomeness on drugs, have you ever heard Revolution 9?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQal-lJrSLI

parrai · 20-11-2011 04:48PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

By the way, for everyone using The Beatles as an example of awesomeness on drugs, have you ever heard Revolution 9?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQal-lJrSLI

What's cool about this though, is that they recorded what they heard and followed through to give (for me) the listener an idea of what it was like to be in this frame of mind... From this perspective, I think that is quite cool.

True, to the sober mind, it's sounds like jibberish... but interesting nonetheless if is it is listened to with an open mind, which is what LSD, does, and, is this case, is demonstrating.

texidub · 20-11-2011 04:52PM

Artists aren't the type of people that will give the anti-drugs people pause for thought.

The following brief examples should help them though:

The gathering included a discussion of how early computer pioneers used LSD for inspiration. Douglas Englebart, the inventor of the mouse, Myron Stolaroff, a former Ampex engineer and LSD researcher who was attending the symposium, and Apple-cofounder Steve Jobs were among them. In the 2005 book What the Dormouse Said, New York Times reporter John Markoff quotes Jobs describing his LSD experience as "one of the two or three most important things he has done in his life."

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/01/70015?currentPage=all

20 percent of scientists admit using brain-enhancing drugs:

Nature released the results of an online survey in which 20 percent of respondents, largely drawn from the scientific community, admitted to using brain-enhancing drugs like Ritalin (methylphenidate) and Provigil (modafinil).

Sixty-two percent of the scientists who had taken drugs used Ritalin while 44 percent reported using Provigil and only 14 percent had tried beta blockers like propranolol.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/04/20-of-scientist/

And Crick was on LSD when he conceived of the double-helix structure of DNA:

http://www.miqel.com/entheogens/francis_crick_dna_lsd.html

Intelligent people are more likely to be curious and experimental than others, which increases the chances of them taking drugs. Which is not to say that they will handle them any better than other people.. intelligence is one thing and character is another.

mikom · 20-11-2011 04:57PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

By the way, for everyone using The Beatles as an example of awesomeness on drugs, have you ever heard Revolution 9?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQal-lJrSLI

And this was recorded whilst drug free.... problem.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xD2p3JuPt4

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 04:57PM

parrai wrote: »

What's cool about this though, is that they recorded what they heard and followed through to give (for me) the listener an idea of what it was like to be in this frame of mind... From this perspective, I think that is quite cool.

True, to the sober mind, it's sounds like jibberish... but interesting nonetheless if is it is listened to with an open mind, which is what LSD, does, and, is this case, is demonstrating.

That's not "cool". It's sh*te! It gives an idea into the mind of someone on LSD maybe, but all it says about it is that it can make you think a song like this is a good idea at the time and then heard with sober ears, it's sh*te!

It's sh*te to the sober mind, it's sh*te to the drug fuelled mind, it's plain sh*te!

And i'm a massive Beatles fan by the way. But let's get real here!

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 04:59PM

mikom wrote: »

And this was recorded whilst drug free.... problem.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xD2p3JuPt4

Oh....

Brain Stroking · 20-11-2011 05:01PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

You must've been at the Domestos when you typed this out?

You've said people can't name 20 people not on drugs because you took some drugs and because you've formed the notion that I am anti-drugs?

How is any of this relevant to there being a lot of people who were creative but not on drugs?

By the way, i'm not Anti-Drugs. But people HAVE been talking about the types of drugs like heroin, crack etc. One poster used 3 people as examples, Burroghs, Hendrix and Cobain. 2 of these people diedas a result of their addiction to hard drugs.

I can understand your point of view, but to tell me my opinions are based on an Anti-Drugs viewpoint is wrong.

It works both ways you see. Your Beatles comment is obviously a product of YOUR pro-drug stance. The Beatles late work was no better than their early work, it was just different. To call them "Westlife teen idol prototype" is not entirely true and I bet that you know that, but it didnt stop you trying to use it as part of your argument.

Your stance on this issue was made clear by your first 2 posts on page 1. That is what i'm referring to. Your first comment to a question on whether drugs aid creativity was to bring up someone dying in their own feces.
I also note that you havent challenged my assumption that you have never taken drugs. If this is the case (i'm assuming again of course) then you can only come to your conclusion by using third party anecdotes and objective observations based on statistics. I'm giving you a third party anecdote by saying that i feel it has made me more insightful at times. I had a lawyer friend point this to be his experience also in a conversation we had only the other night.

You say that others on this thread have referred to crack and cocaine but, again, i was not referring to their comments. I was referring to the question at hand and your immediate black and white "drugs are bad m'kay" response. There is nothing totally black and white in this world and this issue is no different. Some people will not be any more creative but some will. And if this is the case then the answer to the OP's question has to be yes.

As for you saying you are not "anti-drugs" then fair enough. I dont know you and all i have to say is based on your posts. Of which there are more on this thread than any other poster. The more politically incorrect response to the OP's question is to obviously answer yes. You arent challenging the status quo by answering in the negative. So if you arent anti-drugs as you say then why such interest in pushing your opinion? You made your opinion known on page 1. The lady doth protest too much me thinks.

As for whether i am pro-drugs, well i refer you to the experience i have had with marijuana and (very rare) dalliances with LSD, mushrooms and ecstasy. I wouldnt say i am pro as i see faults with them all and like alcohol and cigarettes these drugs when abused cause people problems. But do they aid creativity in my opinion? Yes.

As for the Domestos comment, i've never heard of consuming domestos. Can you explain what that entails? Or will i refer you to my comments in my previous post about the general population's complete ignorance to the drug issue?

parrai · 20-11-2011 05:03PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

That's not "cool". It's sh*te! It gives an idea into the mind of someone on LSD maybe, but all it says about it is that it can make you think a song like this is a good idea at the time and then heard with sober ears, it's sh*te!

It's sh*te to the sober mind, it's sh*te to the drug fuelled mind, it's plain sh*te!

And i'm a massive Beatles fan by the way. But let's get real here!

Depends on the perspective and imagination of the listener, it's shyte to you, but to me, it's an interesting insight... My mind is open to it, and I can relate. I feel enlightened to be able to understand this type of idea.

MrStuffins · 20-11-2011 05:07PM

parrai wrote: »

Depends on the perspective and imagination of the listener, it's shyte to you, but to me, it's an interesting insight... My mind is open to it, and I can relate. I feel enlightened to be able to understand this type of idea.

Possibly. But as a pop song on a pop record it's sh*te!

Latchy · 20-11-2011 05:11PM

Revolution no 9 is a combination of recorded backward loops with the repeat of 'no 9' coming from the studio technician and the dark end does suggest revoloution so in that sense it was different and showed where the Beatles heads were at the time which they had already experimented with in 'tomorow never knows ' from the revolver album in 1965 .

Drugs and creativity?

Comments