3 ms·

Sport is a much more objective measure than art. The drugs that are illegal for sports are all about pushing the body further, lifting that extra 20 pounds or

Sport is a much more objective measure than art. The drugs that are illegal for sports are all about pushing the body further, lifting that extra 20 pounds or shaving off that half-second. Art is very subjective though, so it cannot be pinned down in the same way. And there is no clear line on how “drugs” affect art, because “drugs” is a broad category that conflates a lot of different things under a single umbrella. Would Morrissey’s music have resonated with so many if he was on anti-depressants? Or maybe he is/was, and that’s what gave him enough drive to make the music he did/does. How did Lou Reed or Kurt Cobain’s harder drug use affect their music? Did the effects come from the drug or from their lived experience while taking it? Would you consider someone who uses caffeine to have a competitive advantage? What about cocaine or amphetamines instead? It’s not as simple as pointing to steroids or amphetamines in sports (and I’m not claiming that’s trivial to do), and it is not competitive in the same way. There is an element of training to making art, but someone with all the technical training in the world can still fail to make things that captivate people, with or without drugs. Art is made from experience. Some kinds of drugs are very good at giving some kinds of experiences. I cannot say for sure, but I suspect that someone with talent and deeply-affecting life experiences can easily match someone else with talent who has had deeply-affecting drug experiences. The commonality is in the talent and the depth of experience, not the method.

Fnoord 6y ago
I believe you hit the nail on the spot :-) I especially like your point on anti depressants. We can also take alcohol (in whatever amount) into the equation. I know, its called "alcohol and drugs", but alcohol is simply a [regulated] drug. It doesn't fit the narrative of 'drugs are bad, mkay' though, but I believe that narrative is even on mainstream on the way out. > How did Lou Reed or Kurt Cobain’s harder drug use affect their music? As a kid I read the book "Come As You Are" about Kurt Cobain (who was kind of a music idol to me, long before I could understand English well enough to understand the texts). He had severe back troubles, supposedly stemming from his choice of going left-handed guitar player. He was both left and right-handed, supposedly (elsewhere, from what I understood, people who are both are actually left-handed but partly adapted to right-handed world). As with Philip K. Dick, I can totally imagine a writer on amphetamines. I'm a former Ritalin (Methylphenidate) user (legal with subscription). Whenever that worked, I could finally focus. Uppers help you focus for a while.

Fnoord 6y ago

I believe you hit the nail on the spot :-) I especially like your point on anti depressants. We can also take alcohol (in whatever amount) into the equation. I know, its called "alcohol and drugs", but alcohol is simply a [regulated] drug. It doesn't fit the narrative of 'drugs are bad, mkay' though, but I believe that narrative is even on mainstream on the way out. > How did Lou Reed or Kurt Cobain’s harder drug use affect their music? As a kid I read the book "Come As You Are" about Kurt Cobain (who was kind of a music idol to me, long before I could understand English well enough to understand the texts). He had severe back troubles, supposedly stemming from his choice of going left-handed guitar player. He was both left and right-handed, supposedly (elsewhere, from what I understood, people who are both are actually left-handed but partly adapted to right-handed world). As with Philip K. Dick, I can totally imagine a writer on amphetamines. I'm a former Ritalin (Methylphenidate) user (legal with subscription). Whenever that worked, I could finally focus. Uppers help you focus for a while.