
Does music need drugs? While listening to Tool’s song “Third Eye” which opens up with a comedian joking about how drugs have done good things for the world and goes on to say if you don’t believe it than you should throw out all your records and CD’s because the artists who made those albums were really high on drugs, I wondered just how true this is. Unfortunately this fact is pretty hard to dispute, the greatest musicians of our time used drugs, a matter of fact probably 99.9% of the greatest musicians of all time experimented with drugs. When thinking about my favorite bands over the years I think of Pink Floyd, The Beatles, The Doors, Bob Dylan, The Who, Led Zeppelin, and Nirvana, all of which dabbled heavily in drugs. How can it be that all of the greatest bands in music history used drugs? Seeing that I am one who abstains from both drugs and alcohol I cringe thinking that maybe drugs are indeed the key to creating great music. The great John Lennon, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix and Bob Dylan delved in drugs like it was their job and what did we receive from them (Besides a short life)? GREAT MUSIC! It’s pretty difficult to actually think of bands that don’t or did not use drugs while creating music. Maybe I am thinking about this all wrong, maybe it is just the whole rock scene which drives the drugs to the artists and regardless of if they are drug users or not the music will still be great based on their talent. The problem with this is when looking at bands or artists that did not initially use drugs when creating music usually became better upon starting to use them, for example The Beatles. Now The Beatles were always a great band but to say that albums like “Meet the Beatles” and “Please Please Me” are better than albums like “Sgt. Pepper” and “Abbey Road” is a crime. Bands like Pink Floyd and The Doors experimented with drugs before their musical debut and for both Floyd and The Doors we had incredible debut albums, The Doors created what would be their best album and Floyd created what is arguably the best psychedelic album ever. This argument certainly seems to side with the fact that drugs create better music, I hope that this is not true because one, we just may be missing out on a lot of great music thanks to the lack of drug use compared to the 60’s and two, is the human mind just incapable of being that creative without the help of mind altering substances? Let’s just hope that grand and bombastic ideas can be assessed properly without the use of drugs, and if not then we just may never hear albums like “Tommy” and “Brain Salad Surgery” ever again.
12 Comments:
I think I've heard the comedian you speak of. That sounds like a joke from the act of the late great Bill Hicks. If it's the joke I'm thinking of he goes on to talk about the Beatles and how baked out of their mind they had to have been to think that letting Ringo sing was a good idea and then needing to scrape Ringo off the ceiling with a spatula because he was that high.
While I don't generally agree with the politics he espoused, I've always thought Bill Hicks was one of the best stand-up comics since the late Lenny Bruce.
Interesting thoughts on a question I've often thought about myself.
A thought just popped into my head - if a lot of these modern rock bands are on drugs (and I'm sure many are), why do they suck so much?
It would be sad indeed to discover that musicians need drugs to be creative. That would leave a choice between sober musicians with blander music or creative musicians who make great stuff but pay the price for it.
Maybe they aren't trying hard enough if they do need drugs to make good music. I'd like to belive that creativity can exist on its own.
Wow, I don't think this question will ever be answered unless we track the use or non-use of drugs during every bit of the creative process.
Drugs are to rock and roll what alcohol was/is to writers (F. Scott Fitzgerald, Edgar Allan Poe, Theodore Dreiser, and Jack London were all alcoholics-- and Hemmingway if not an alcoholic was quite the hard drinker). I don't think it's necessarily the drugs that fuel the creativity, the creativity is THERE. I think the drugs just create the experiences that unleash that creativity.
The Doors were named as such because Jim Morrison had once read that doors are what seperate the known from the unknown-- he wanted to be a Door. But I think, in his case at least, drugs were the key that opened the door.
Your question is kind of a chicken/egg question. Were rock and roll musicians creative because they did drugs or did they do drugs because they were creative? I honestly don't know. Honestly, I think for a lot of them they live or lived very hard lives and for many of them drugs offered the only escape they were able to find from the hardness of life.
Or another way to think of it-- a musician (or writer, or artist for that matter) puts a tremendous amount of energy and life into their art form (whichever it may be). They often get lost in that creative world. When they come out of that creative cocoon, the real world is still there ready to face them-- the bills, the worries, the stresses, mortgages, etc. etc. Some of them chose/choose to face those realities of life head on, and others instead sought to seek refuge from those realities by taking drugs.
Great post - I'm gonna link to it on Layla's!
You have an excellent post and so does Darrin about great writers commonly being alcoholics.
I used to use drugs so I know what its like to be high on acid, pot, uppers, downers, coke, PCP...you name it. I can see how being under the influence would bring some really amazing songs into being.
BUT
I don't think its the drugs that made the music. I think people like Jim Morrison, John Lennon, Bob Dylan, etc. etc. were already gifted with their talent when they were born. I think the drugs may have enhanced whatever was already there but that these guys would have made incredible music without them. (Maybe I just naively want to believe this since I am so anti-drug now)
Plus - what about all the great music that was made WITHOUT any drugs??? Bruce Springsteen comes to mind. The guy has a beer now and then but he's totally not a druggie and never has been. I am sure you can think of others too.
Love the topic and I commend you for not using drugs or alcohol. I admire that choice.
P.S. Wow, Jeff all your commenters are king of going off on this! I forgot to say that I also thought of what Russ brought up. If drugs were the key to great music - heck I would have been the next Janis Joplin!!!
Perplexio - I checked and it is indeed Bill Hicks. Also, good comparison with writers being alcoholics. I do agree that it is the chicken and the egg question.
Russ - Well I know I didn't mention this but I do think the talent has to be there initially but as Perplexio said the drugs help open up their doors.
Layla - I agree with you, I believe the creativity was there but the drugs helped sparked it. I know that there are a handful of artists that did not use drugs but the numbers that did seem to be pretty impressive, I really respect those who stay away from it and create fantastic music.
Just a PS: While lyrically he's not exactly "great" by any stretch of the imagination, Ted Nugent is and always has been a phenomenal guitarist and he's been drug and alcohol free his whole life. His vice is the ladies (which probably isn't surprising given his "love song" -- Wang Dang Sweet Poon tang).
Perplexio - I was actually going to note that but I didn't exactly think he was really one of the greatest artists of all time although he is an amazing guitarist. I was also going to list some "Straight Edge" bands like Minor Threat but as well I didn't think they were "creative" enough to get listed.
Yeah I think when it comes to the songwriting (both lyrics and music), that's where the effect of the drugs come in, not so much in the execution/playing of said music. I think when it comes to actual technique drugs do more harm than good, but when it comes to the songwriting-- the experiences one has on drugs are what helps the whole process (I wouldn't know first hand though).
Another strong example of drug's effects on the creative process-- both Brian and Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys. If you were to check out the Beach Boys song catalog-- it's the material written by Dennis and Brian that shows the most genius and incidentally they both tended to be the most mixed up with drugs. Brian is often recognized as a musical genius leaving his late brother, Dennis, sadly overlooked (I have Dennis's late 70s solo album and its probably one of the best long out of print albums I've ever heard). At any rate I think the drugs had a lot to do with both the positive aspects of their songwriting and the negative effects those same drugs had on their lives.
Perplexio - Very good point, I should have probably said more on the lines of song writing opposed to actual instrumental talent.
Hey there,
I'd like to use a few quotes from your article for my University Project, appropriately entitled 'The role and importance of drugs in music history'. The pitch is the following...
"Although society has undergone drastic changes in the 20th century, an inhabitant from the 1920’s would still feel as much at home reading the current media coverage of the drug scene as he did back then. To an extent, drugs and popular music have been inextricably intertwined since marijuana and jazz started flourishing. From the LSD soaked vision of the Summer of Love to the amphetamine-fuelled rage of punk, each new musical movement has coincided with a new fashion in drugs. This study will analyse the origins and progress of each new drug and its consequences on the music scene. It proposes to define how important the drug use is in the creation process from a socio-cultural point of view."
So yeah, in the hope you wouldn't mind...
I wouldnt go so far as to say drugs make great artists but drugs do attract creative minds, and produce inspiration. That, is for certain. I know from experiance. but obviously not everyone can just take some psychedelic drugs and start bursting with great creaitivity thats just foolish. It truly takes a creative mind in the first place to make somthing great of the drug experaince.
You cannot deny that things like LSD offer experainces like no other, and often bring out the best human beings including thier emotions which is the fuel of great art. Most drugs have thier own worthy perspective and experaince to offer but they'er just apart of life like any other experaince, like love for instance.
our emotions and perspective are basically reality per person, drugs give you the power to change that and improve it thats why i love them :)
But I still think that certain drugs are dangerous and do more harm than good, and if you ever try im sure your going to stay away from drugs like heroin whos effects are more core feeling good and less inspiration + the itch will most likley follow you for a very long time which makes it less desirable unless you wanna die with it.
Just do ample amounts of research.
I.E opium is the opiate i wanna try.
Post a Comment
<< Home