Drugs and creativity?

starbelgrade

Latchy wrote: »

Yes they are and so is alcohol in the wrong hands but I agree , nobody should endorse the taking of drugs to anybody but that goes without saying .

I was quoting Mr.Mackey from South Park!

Not sure about the whole not endorsing drugs thing though. I'd recommend that everyone tries everything in life at least once.

Latchy

starbelgrade wrote: »

I was quoting Mr.Mackey from South Park!

Not sure about the whole not endorsing drugs thing though.

Of course and people one way or another by acccident or design, come into drugs in some way shape or form , even if it's only briefly .

It's just I had younger ones in mind ,the ones you might sometimes come across and worry they might not be wise to the dangers so in a non condensending way , would like to think I could discourage them before they are old enough to decide for themselfs .

I'd recommend that everyone tries everything in life at least once.

Not everything ...not even once

Logical Fallacy

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'd recommend that everyone tries everything in life at least once.

Yeah, but no one really means that. They really just mean try the stuff that appeals to you.

ride-the-spiral

Devin Townsend was extremely creative on drugs, creating tonnes of great albums. He then stopped taking drugs and proceeded to make more creative music.

Also the Red Hot Chili Peppers are a band who have made great music both on and off of drugs.

skregs

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'd recommend that everyone tries everything in life at least once.

Enjoy sucking cock so

Deus Ex Machina

skregs wrote: »

Enjoy sucking cock so

Well I for one recommend it.

mikom

skregs wrote: »

Enjoy sucking cock so

Just a few more stretches and I'll be there.....

Ben Hadad

I think people who haven't taken drugs are in a terrible position to comment on the artistic benefits of taking drugs.

Jev/N

MrStuffins wrote: »

All I said was, for every 1 person you can name who was creative on drugs, anyone can nane 20 who weren't, It's simple!

You could say the same in the alternative: for every 1 person you can name who was creative, sober, you can name 20 who weren't (i.e. everyday joe public etc.)

I think you've actually validated my point by saying above that drugs don't create genius in the minds of users.

You've kinda lost the point of the whole thread though, as it was about whether drugs enhanced the creativity/genius of those who used them

Kanoe

I know I wasn't on drugs when I did my best work. I was much more capable, talented, eager and creative when I was younger and after I started taking drugs I didn't progress technically at all. I wrote what I thought was good stuff at the time though now to me it's just cringe worthy.
I think someone else said it best, we are trained to not step outside the box from a young age and drugs do loosen the boundaries but they don't in any way create geniuses. If anything they just make you believe you're better and often that's all people need.

MrStuffins

Jev/N wrote: »

You could say the same in the alternative: for every 1 person you can name who was creative, sober, you can name 20 who weren't (i.e. everyday joe public etc.)

I think you've actually validated my point by saying above that drugs don't create genius in the minds of users.

You've kinda lost the point of the whole thread though, as it was about whether drugs enhanced the creativity/genius of those who used them

I was replying to someone else.

My post was on topic.

utyh2ikcq9z76b

considering most artists use alcohol and cigarettes (statistically the two most destructive drugs) id say nearly 98% are drug takers....

DRUGS DO HELP CREATIVITY

Leftist

depends on the drug. Can't imagine composing anything or being inspired to write a novel etc while you're rushing on mishies or snorting bronsons.

John Doe1

ride-the-spiral wrote: »

Also the Red Hot Chili Peppers are a band who have made great music both on and off of drugs.

GET OUT

Wattle

I've tried writing stoned and it always seemed like genius at the time but cringeworthy in the morning. I'd say write and create sober when your critical faculties are intact and present.

Fishooks12

Darrell Famous Gambler wrote: »

considering most artists use alcohol and cigarettes (statistically the two most destructive drugs) id say nearly 98% are drug takers....

DRUGS DO HELP CREATIVITY

Ah I see how you won the argument, by pulling a made up statistic out of your arse, coupled with an assumption and some BLOCK CAPITALS TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW YOU'RE RIGHT

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Ah I see how you won the argument, by pulling a made up statistic out of your arse, coupled with an assumption and some BLOCK CAPITALS TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW YOU'RE RIGHT

wow your so smart

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2010/11/drugs_debate_hots_up.html

Brain Stroking

MrStuffins wrote: »

I was replying to someone else.

My post was on topic.

You were replying to me and i had to remind you a few times along the way about what the topic was

MrStuffins

Brain Stroking wrote: »

You were replying to me and i had to remind you a few times along the way about what the topic was

I always knew what the topic was. it was you who misunderstood what my points were.

Kinda like now, it wasn't you I was replying to. it was Minidazzler.

I won't get into a flaming war here though, or whatever the kids are calling it these days.

RDM_83 again

The problem with citing all these famous artists that were on drugs is that they had producers, sound engineers etc to do some quality control and as stated by others they were really creative anyway*.

Also wondering about which drugs, hallucinogens etc I can see giving the artist new experiences to work with but coke and speed etc not really.

though my (badly formulated) theory is that bands that do these drugs can create better/darker music when they're strung out once they have became succesfull, living in a Hollywood mansion isn't the same as striving to get ahead on pittance as unestablished artists, but the drugs cause problems which add an edge to music that would otherwise not be their because if they weren't doing them they would have a truly excellent standard of living

Hate the argument though that music that only sounds good when your on something can still be called good music, people do enough yolks and they'l dance to a car alarm!
ps not trying to flame I do actually like some dance music.

saywhatyousee

RDM_83 again wrote: »

do enough yolks and they'l dance to a car alarm!
ps not trying to flame I do actually like some dance music.

:pac::pac: so true!

Schapiro

Based on my experience, which is solely with visual arts (painting, drawing, printmaking, photo, etc) drugs don't enhance creativity. I've found that the reason a great deal of artists (such as Van Gogh, for example) end up taking drugs is as a coping mechanism for other things....Van Gogh, because he is a good example here, was pretty much loathed by the society he lived in. His work was extremely under appreciated (seen as 'juvenile,' 'talentless,' insert every-other-bad-art-adjective-here). He was also psychotic and suffered from severe depression. So in his case, and in the case of a great deal many other artists, it tends to be more of self-medication or a coping mechanism for some issue than a creative-boost.

I think the closest you can get to tying it to creativity would be taking them for the sake of loosening up thoughts or clearing the mind.

I can't think of any artists I know personally who consistently take drugs when they make work, or ever do it with the goal of being more creative. There are a few I can think of who do it from time to time, for craic, but the work outcome is very seldom serious, or good, so it just ends up being an inside joke "harrrr look at this shíte I did when I was knackered." Most of the time you either end up with something messy, or are too distracted to make work.

So, IMO, no. Drugs do not enhance creativity. The two worlds do seem to go hand in hand, but I think there are other reasons for this happening.

From my own personal experiences, and I can only speak for the effects of marijuana. Some of the thoughts that come into my head are very abstract and I definitely don't think they would come to me sober. But I have probably written a whole lot more when I was sober than stoned, maybe 70/30. One thing I can say for sure is that while it stems creativity, it doesn't do a whole lot to encourage productivity, not in my case anyway.