Drugs and Creativity

Mike_E · Mar 2, 2008

C_Lawrence, I think you missed the point. Sure there have been people who could do it, But that is no reason for everyone to think that they are one of the few to be able to function and produce Great work while stoned.

Out of all the people you named, how many were actually 'blitzed' while producing their master work? Could it have been that they were merely following a 'stoned' thought from their experiences to its conclusion while 'straight'?

Recreational introspection is far different than trying to work while impaired.

There is a caveat though, If your work is in the emotive arts- read that music and the like where the motor skills needed are practiced to the point where they are automatic- the influence of drugs in moderation is not much of a hindrance.

But, for the most part in photography, sloppy minds make sloppy photos. (see Ansel Adams for the fuzzy quote)

m

Double H · Mar 2, 2008

I am able to zone out for long periods and sink myself into my work via a specific substance, whether it's design, photography, or something creative. Did it make me more"creative?" Perhaps, but I'm already oozing with talent, so it's hard to say.

When I was in art school, living at home, I spent 99% of my time in my room working on projects. My mom could always tell what stage of a project I was on by the music I played. In the early, developmental stages of a project, ie; thumbnails, reference research, beginning an illustration, etc, I would play very mellow music, lots of new age stuff. I am really into David Sylvian. During the later stages of a project, when I was nearing finish, I played more upbeat music like techno, house, anything electronic with a good beat.

Alex_B · Mar 2, 2008

Most people think they are creating great art while on drugs, but later, when sober again, they consider it rubbish

Socrates · Mar 2, 2008

Alex_B said:
Most people think they are creating great art while on drugs, but later, when sober again, they consider it rubbish

Quoth the raven, "Nevermore."

c_lawrence · Mar 2, 2008

C_Lawrence, I think you missed the point. Sure there have been people who could do it, But that is no reason for everyone to think that they are one of the few to be able to function and produce Great work while stoned.

Out of all the people you named, how many were actually 'blitzed' while producing their master work? Could it have been that they were merely following a 'stoned' thought from their experiences to its conclusion while 'straight'?

Recreational introspection is far different than trying to work while impaired.

There is a caveat though, If your work is in the emotive arts- read that music and the like where the motor skills needed are practiced to the point where they are automatic- the influence of drugs in moderation is not much of a hindrance.

But, for the most part in photography, sloppy minds make sloppy photos. (see Ansel Adams for the fuzzy quote)

m

First, I didn't miss the point at all... I never implied that "everyone to think that they are one of the few to be able to function and produce Great work while stoned." I also never implied these people were "'blitzed' while producing their master work". The original question was "Do drugs help us enhance or inhibit creativity and our expression of such?" ... the question was not "are people more creative while 'blitzed' on drugs".

Let me re-quote "my sentiments exactly":
People who are skilled/talented are going to be so whether or not they're on drugs, while people who don't care about their art are going to suck no matter what. Being high just pushes a person further in whatever direction they were going anyway.

Secondly, although I do not use any drugs these days - and haven't in quite sometime due to the unfortunate consequences in the US and the fact that I like my job and my 'freedom' - I have definately used in the past. Being an artist in other mediums, I have had the wonderful opportunity to create some really great work while under the influence (not only my own extremely critical opinion, but also those of my professors, mentors, and peers). Additionally, much of that expanded imagination and creativity that 'oozes' during those intoxiated times for those of us with already 'creative talents' will stick as an experienced/learned creativity even after the drug effects fade away... so how many of those were 'blitzed' during their masters - I'd guess many... Armstrong, Beatles, Belushi, Carrol, Dali, Hendrix, Joplin, Dali, Poe... should I continue? However, even if they were not, their drug experiences are definately apparent in much of their work.

Any mind-altering substance will change one's perspectives and thus, has a large potential to increase creativity -- the exception... those who have zero creativity to begin with and those who have no motivation to make attempts at creativity... no mind altering substances will not assist with these types.

Lastly... I think "fuzzy concept" is a figure of speech for "lack of imagination" -- see my quote from Mark Twain below...

rob91 · Mar 2, 2008

Mike_E said:
C_Lawrence, I think you missed the point. Sure there have been people who could do it, But that is no reason for everyone to think that they are one of the few to be able to function and produce Great work while stoned.

Nobody here has suggested such a thing, in fact most people have been able to discuss the topic moderately while you are the one making outrageous generalizations.

Out of all the people you named, how many were actually 'blitzed' while producing their master work? Could it have been that they were merely following a 'stoned' thought from their experiences to its conclusion while 'straight'?

First off, that is probably unknown, and secondly that is not even the question. Abraxas asked how drugs affect the creative process, not whether the artist was "blitzed" (unnecessary hyperbole on your part) during the entire creation of the work. Drugs may not even be used during the creative process yet still have an influence. Read this passage in which William Butler Yeats describes how Hashish opened new creative avenues:http://www.veryimportantpotheads.com/site/yeats.htm

Yeats's writing is more about the drug and how it affects his thoughts on life, not necessarily implying that he is on the drug while writing. I think common sense also tells us his experience, at least among drug users, is not unique. If you want an example of someone "blitzed" while creating art, though, take Stephen King, who admits to being piss-drunk the entire time he wrote "Cujo" and barely remembers it.

There is a caveat though, If your work is in the emotive arts- read that music and the like where the motor skills needed are practiced to the point where they are automatic- the influence of drugs in moderation is not much of a hindrance.

Sounds to me like that's the caveat that destroys your argument. I'm not sure how you're using the term "emotive arts", maybe you think it's exclusive to music? Regardless, all art - painting, sculpture, photography - requires some degree of motor skills that are practiced, thus, by your own logic, moderate drug use shouldn't be an "impairment".

But, for the most part in photography, sloppy minds make sloppy photos. (see Ansel Adams for the fuzzy quote)

Absolutely irrelevant. You have no way of knowing how every person reacts to drugs.

For general amusement, here's a couple lists I dredged up. Not all are artists, but many are listed:

http://www.slatts.fsworld.co.uk/famous.htm
http://www.veryimportantpotheads.com/main2.html

eravedesigns · Mar 2, 2008

Someone should organize a TPF drug swap soon....lol

D-50 · Mar 2, 2008

It is ridiculous to think drugs enhance creativity. I feel thats just a myth and people think they are being creative when there high but really your just as creative when your sober as you are when your high, the only difference is your lowered inhibitions when high may allow you to say or do something you might have held back when sober.

Same with the idea that a movie is funnier or better when high or looking at he stars while high is wild.. Thats a load of crap! The only drug that actually makes things like staring at the sky interesting is LSD or for that matter any halucinagen. But smoking some dope does nothing except make you high dont get it confused with something else

Arch · Mar 2, 2008

please... lets try and not use phrases like 'It is ridiculous to think...'.... its like saying 'It is ridiculous that people should wear the colour red'... just because the colour red doesn't suit you.

I only say this because its this type of thing that gets people heated and ultimately ends in me locking the thread. =/

It is best to use the terms 'I think..' or 'imo'.

pm63 · Mar 2, 2008

Why on earth would that alter your perception of the work?

Because, as someone mentioned, it has been proven that drugs stimulate the creative sections of the brain. You could compare it to a sportsman using steroids. You wouldn't be so impressed by his achievements if you found out he was using drugs to achieve, would you? I respect people who can be naturally creative more than people who feel the need to boost their creativity using mind altering substances.

And how on earth would you know anyway?

Sorry, but I find that to be an ignorant viewpoint. Although, must be nice sitting up there on your perch above everyone else.

Oh course, I wouldn't know unless I was told that the artwork was created under the influence of drugs. I don't think my viewpoint is ignorant, see my analogy above. I'll ignore the jibe about my "perch" because attacking an arguer is a flawed argument.

BTW, has anyone seen the adverts at the bottom of the page for this topic?

Advice on finding the right private Rehab centre or Detox clinic.
Heroin Meth Subutex Opiates Free Trial Detox Offer Avail

Iron Flatline · Mar 2, 2008

Drugs is a creative stimulant for those people who want another justification for getting high.

Being creative isn't something you do occasionally on the weekend - it's taking a certain way of seeing the world, or a desire to express something specific, and working at that for years. It takes a long time to have real consistency in the creative process, much longer than it is possible to keep the same vibe going off a certain drug.

However, drugs might help drown out certain distractions. That doesn't fuel creativity, but I guess you could say it enables it.

Even then I wonder about the ability for any drug to provide that kind of relief on a continued long-term basis.

If I do drugs then it is to stop the brain from working so hard for a while, mine's running fine without additional stimulation. It's getting it shut up that's the trick for me.

c_lawrence · Mar 2, 2008

It is ridiculous to think drugs enhance creativity. I feel thats just a myth and people think they are being creative when there high but really your just as creative when your sober as you are when your high, the only difference is your lowered inhibitions when high may allow you to say or do something you might have held back when sober.

Same with the idea that a movie is funnier or better when high or looking at he stars while high is wild.. Thats a load of crap! The only drug that actually makes things like staring at the sky interesting is LSD or for that matter any halucinagen. But smoking some dope does nothing except make you high dont get it confused with something else

... I can't even comment on this...

Drugs is a creative stimulant for those people who want another justification for getting high.

Wow... such a close-minded judgment!

Being creative isn't something you do occasionally on the weekend - it's taking a certain way of seeing the world...

And a MIND-ALTERING SUBSTANCE wouldn't change the way you see the world??

It takes a long time to have real consistency in the creative process, much longer than it is possible to keep the same vibe going off a certain drug.

Maybe for you

If I do drugs then it is to stop the brain from working so hard for a while

.......?

Some of these posts remind me of the FALSE anti-drug PROPOGANDA from the 30's -- maybe some of you would enjoy the film "Reefer Madness".

Look, here's the deal (in my opinion) - and this is the last time I'm posting on this thread because nothing I write will open up a mind on lock-down and there appears to be plenty of that here; at least with regard to this topic... people are either creative or they are not. Studies have shown that "mind-altering" drugs, by definition, will enhance creativity in an already creative individual as this is controlled by our minds. (Again, this depends on the amount and type of drugs used - which was never specified in the original post -- For example, LSD, Opium, Psilocybin, Cannabis, ect. have been shown to enhance while many psychiatric drugs have been shown to inhibit)

Also, I think some of you might be getting a little revved up because you might think that recognizing that drugs may enhance creativity is the same as advocating drug use/abuse... it is not.

---------------------------

"A closed mind is not only closed to outside thoughts, it is often closed to itself as well. It is closed to new thoughts and anything that threatens the status quo. But if you can open the doors, maybe just a crack at first, the ideas that have been patiently waiting at your gates will flood in." - Unknown

airgunr · Mar 2, 2008

craig said:
When I was in college I swore up and down weed helped my creativity. As I look back I feel it inhibited it. Certainly killed my motivation. These days I need a clear head to be creative.

For me weed and beer is more for the mental relaxation. Tripping is a whole other story. Kind of gave up on that as well.

Love & Bass

I too did my share back in the late 60's & early 70's. With weed, at first it feels that way and I guess it did help to expand our outlook to begin with but it quickly turns around on you and you become much more lathargic. Especially with Skunk, the old Thai Sticks, sinsimilla (sp?), etc. You seem to have great ideas but rairly did anyone follow through on them.

The stuff like LSD, Mescaline, Peyote, etc. all effected us differently. Again, at first you definitely saw things differenlty.... but too much just made you paranoid and screwed up most people I knew who did it too much.

I'm sure there are the exceptions but I wouldn't recommend it. I kind of wish I hadn't ever done them in the first place now. As Craig said, "These days I need a clear head to be creative". He's right.

Personnally I think weed should be legal like alcohol. I'd rather deal with someone stoned on skunk than a roaring drunk. I think it does less damage than alcohol in the long run. All the prohibition on it (and other drugs) does is help fund gangs, crime and terrorism.

Take out the profit motive and the crime ceases. There wouldn't be anything to fight over. As a side benefit you could tax it like alcohol and the funds could help in the education and care of addics much better than locking people up. As always, follow the money!

Guess I digressed a bit. Sorry, if the mods want to delete I will understand.

THORHAMMER · Mar 2, 2008

Iron is pretty much got it in my view.

if you really need drugs to make your best work, your should really weigh the pros and cons.

Sure someone might be able to do something once or twice and be ok, maybe something more heavy once and be fine, but its just luck. You might get addicted (which is a lot easier then you think) and once that happens your chances of getting out alive are drastically cut down.

Just look at all the famous people that died of overdoses for crying out loud. Lots of these people were famous and had money and a good support group, they couldn't even see their way out. do you think you have a better system then they ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artists_who_died_of_drug-related_causes

My advice, don't even start on the trail.
It doesn't lead to a good place.

There place is in medicine, not to be abused. Not trying to sound might and mighty but seriously look up statistics, its not a winning game to play.
You usually do not get out alive once you are hooked. I cant think of anything else that has taken away so many peoples freedom, lifes, family money etc..... than drugs. lets not forget.

Arch · Mar 2, 2008

sure drugs can be bad... but this thread is not here to support the use of drugs, of course here at TPF we would advise against using them, but its only to answer the question of whether they ENHANCE creativity... many people are also starting to discuss whether they PRODUCE creativity, which is not abraxas original question.

Also its wise to remember that the drug that causes the most deaths by a long way is tobacco.... followed by alcohol. :mrgreen: