I agree for the most part with both of you but I must make a clear distinction. Mr. Fama mentioned it is okay so long as it does not harm others. I agree. Yet... as so many people are social creatures, I think it is very hard to truly not harm other people by using drugs. Whether that be your friend, child, or relative, one is bound to harm someone if the usage is excessive or the usage is of the more "effective" drugs (i.e. heroin, cocaine, etc).

So well, when Dr. F mentions he avoided the pitfalls of drugs.. I think he is referring to one not being consumed totally by the often obsessive drug use as well as not affecting those around them and thus their environment.

Actually, I disagree that it mustn't harm others... it musn't have the potential to harm anyone.

Take the Australian Capital territory... marijuana is decriminalised, so I could grow up to five plants, or score some and smoke it, with no harm to anyone except, potentially, myself.

Marijuana has the tendency to trigger psychotic episodes in schizophrenics, so yes, it is harmful to some people, not all, but some. It's harmful to me, hence I don't take it. But I do take legal drugs, not criminalised drugs because I may need to -- Solian helps keep me sane and alert, which is a good thing, and I need my painkillers when I get migraines, which are relatively frequent at times.

So, by all means take the drug so long as doing so harms no-one, including yourself.

Like automobiles, etc., drugs--legal or illegal--will always have the potential to harm someone, including--or especially--the user. There are risks involved in many facets of life, and experimentation with illegal drugs certainly qualifies as such. One has to be willing to accept responsibility for, and the consequences of, one's actions. An exception to this, of course, is children in the custody of drug abusers. All the weight of the law must be brought to bear to aid such unfortunate and innocent victims. So far as I am concerned, however, everyone else is responsible for himself.

As for Dr. Farmer's meaning, here is his original quotation:

"Though there at the time I did not fall prey to the foolishness of drug use - Clark had had the experience ala George Sterlings's crowd in the early teens of the century, and recognized it as drag on his creativity".

This statement seems to me to be a rather blanket condemnation of illicit drug use, in general. To this, I would respond that CAS used and, at times, abused, alcohol, and he did so during an era (Prohibition) when the manufacture and distribution of alcohol was illegal in the United States. To each his own illegal drug, I suppose! As for those who might defend alcohol in relation to other drugs, I would reply that the documented ill effects of alcohol abuse so far and so obviously outweigh those of, say, marijuana abuse that I won't even argue the point.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12 Nov 04 | 11:30AM by Kyberean.

Dear friends,
I am about to board the plane for Galveston,Texas where I will undergo my 32 heart
biopsy and 17th catheterization - 42d invasive procedure in 9 years - I take
approximately $20,000 per year of necessary drugs to prevent rejection of my now
30 year old heart, and to deal with counteracting the side effects (some even counteract the counteractions' sideeffects. When (and if) I return, I would like to put in a little contribution to your current disputation -- you are largely off the mark as to my comments on drug use. The zero moment approacheth; I must away!

Best of luck with your upcoming procedures. I look forward to your return, and, more specifically, to whatever clarifications you may provide regarding your comment about illicit drug use. Your dismissal of it seemed pretty sweeping to me, but it was also an offhand remark, and such can easily lead to misunderstandings. Again, good luck!

I wish you all the best, Dr. F. I, for one, would be most upset if not all went well. This place -- and I mean this big round thing we waltz around on -- won't be the same without you, fer shure.

Have returned intact with the gigantic hickey (sans fun) one acquires when a heart biopsy is done, and a pain in groin from the left heart catheterization - a good friend returning from his annual exam once remarked that a few miles from the hospital he felt something warm between his legs, and decided after looking, that, since it was not his wife's hand, he must be bleeding from the artery - fortunately
mine stayed shut this time, although year before last they nearly lost me.
I am not sure I can help mr. Fama with his angst over my comments, since on re-reading I find them quite accurate - I spent a major part of my life during the middle and late 60's and early 70's helping mop up and mend lives torn to pieces by illegal drug use. I helped found "Huckleberry House" in the Haight-Ashbury to provide
free medical care and counsel to thousands of kids who obeyed the song and came to San Francisco wearing "Flowers in their hair" --The walls of the clinic in less than 6 months after it became known nationally were covered with thousands of photos from desperate parents looking for their children, who were busily acquiring a variety of STD's, lice, scabies, excema, and other illnesses which commonly accompany dietary and sanitary insufficiencies. I have only contempt for illegal drugs and those who distribute them. I have great compassion for those who have fallen prey to the stuff, and have heard all the lies they tell themselves, and the euphemisms even the media heap upon it to make it seem "cool", "IN", or somehow harmless. I have been the one with the absorbent shoulder too many times following the death of those who have lost themselves in this fashion - we perform no act entirely unto ourselves in my experience - not all repercussions are immediate. I am even now working with a man and his family in his mid-fifties who has liver and brain mets, and in the midst of this turned up with hepatitis -- he wailed "how could this happen while all this other is going on?" His nurse asked whether he had a tatoo - he said when he was a stupid 17year old -- and there was the answer. As I write, I have just finished the latest statistics showing a 450% increase in young people needing liver transplants entirely due to the tremendous increase in tattooing and body piercing. I would be the last to stop people from doing these things, but only because I treasure the freedom to make a fool of myself -- but I am willing to accept the consequences.
Of course, now, as in the 60's the financial cost is/was borne by the public treasury.
I'm sorry to go on so, because it sounds a bit preachy I suppose. You must understand that for people of my generation (barring some legitimate demand to commit acts of civil disobedience to rectify an injustice), laws are not made to be broken.
Where pot has been legalized its use is strictly constrained (or ought to be) -- even so, there are ample alternatives that are more effective. To those who think pot is not a gateway drug, I can only give them my pity -- desire will usually find a rationale -- even though under no degree of scrutiny by the classic standards of either logic or common sense can the arguments stand. Again, I realize that several generations now have not been schooled in logic - alas many wrong choices get made without it - Master 'n bosn's song, by de la Mare:

At dirty dick's and sloppy joe's
we drank our liquor straight.
Some went upstairs with Marjory,
And some, alas, with Kate...

Now dear ones, whether I have satisfied you or not is really not the point of this Forum, now is it. So pocket the pejoratives and return to discussing CAS - and on that note as regards much of the discussion in this thread -- may I suggest that those of you who are enjoying dissecting the whole experience read Clark Ashton aloud, whether tale or poem, and record yourself doing so -- play it back while reading - you may find that a change of tone or emphasis here and there can utterly alter your perception of his intent - that writer who wrote of the wry and ironic in Clark's work has heard it well indeed - as I have said before (and is found in "Poems and Apothegms") my favorite quote of Clark's and one which speaks volumes of his attitude is --- "Sweet are the uses of Obscurity!"
Drf

Dr. Farmer:

I'm delighted to hear that you have returned safe and well from your procedure.

Quote:

To those who think pot is not a gateway drug,I can only give them my pity.

You may save your pity in my case. Marijuana was never a "gateway drug" for me, not has it been for the vast majority of the populace who use it--an inconvenient fact, but a fact, nonetheless. Let me add that Mr. Fama is not the only one who finds your generalizations on this subject to be judgmental, narrow-minded, and absurd--athough there's no angst involved on my part, to be sure. Also, a discussion of drug use (metaphorical or actual) and the creative process is hardly off-topic in a forum devoted to a man who wrote a poem called The Hashish-Eater. As you imply, however, it seems that we've all said what needs to be said on this subject, and may as well "pocket the pejoratives" on both sides of the question.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19 Nov 04 | 10:34PM by Kyberean.

May voles everywhere squeak their praises unto Tsathoggua! Dr. Farmer is with us and well!

Although I don't agree that marijuana is necessarily a gateway drug per se, when it gets too prevalent, too commonplace, harder drugs tend to be taken to recapture the kick that marijuana once provided. I need only mention the fact that the decriminalisation of marijuana in the ACt has meant an increase in the problems associated with harder drugs.

Although I have used marijuana, I stopped after being diagnosed with schizophrenia and noting its ability to trigger a paychotic episode. When one has the facts, one can then make the informed decisions needed for effective living, and Dr. DFarmer's experiences certainly count towards his reaction.

Fundamentally, though, just as not all experiences are wonderful, not all experiences are hell-holes. It's a matter of knowing the risks and possible consequences, and acting appropriately as a result.

One of the difficulties with Dr. Farmer's generalizations is that they derive from a limited sample: The comparatively small perecentage of illicit drug users (I'm not referring to addictive drugs, such as crack or heroin, by the way; I never have been) who have the sort of extreme breakdown he describes. This would be akin to generalizing about alcohol use in the population as a whole based solely upon one's experience with alcoholics. The fact remains that, in the case of drugs that are non-addictive and non-dangerous when used moderately and responsibly (including alcohol), most persons will experience no difficulties, while a comparative few, due largely to some combination of of physiological susceptibility and personal immaturity, will abuse these substances and get into trouble with them. The general notion of marijuana as a "gateway drug", one that is equally dangerous to all, is simply silly, akin to saying that that glass of wine at dinner is a "gateway" to alcohol abuse for all.

By the way, I have eight tattoos, and also clean bill of health, based on a recent hepatitis panel. It's all a matter of using one's brain: Choosing a clean-looking and reputable tattoo parlor, making sure that there's an autoclave on the premises, seeing that the tattoo artist opens fresh needles from a sealed container, and that he opens fresh containers of ink, etc. I'm all for not protecting the stupid against the effects of their own stupidity, though, myself. The world is over-populated, as it is.

Hmm, all this really is starting to stray rather far afield of the subject of this forum, though, isn't it? Anyone for a discussion of altered states of consciousness (artificially and non-artificially generated) and their role in imaginative poetry? That seems rather more germane to CAS.

Thanks for the welcome back - as to most of the responses to my last, they are remarkably predictable, having heard all this BS before - folks you lack must not generalize from your own experience regarding the "gateway" concept -- If, as one writer says, you think the concept silly, it can only be because you have swallowed the media hype, and not actually been on the "front lines" - any percentage even so
of persons whose lives have been shattered by this tragic societal cancer is far too high. For better or worse I have seen it coast to coast and intimately - it is the effort to dismiss it that is silly, even banal -- although such an attitude brings a warm glow to hearts of many in the jungles of Columbia. I suppose I should encourage drug use much in the way I encourage cigarette use: It provides a steady flow of young and middle-aged clients to the Hospice program where my wife is a nurse and I do a great deal of "end of life" counselling and general hand-holding. As to Clark's use of drugs - his own experience with drugs has little or nothing to do with the writing of Hashish Eater - Clark had read numerous writings on the subject.

Clark was indeed a loner, but would have loved to have more recognition and all that goes with it. Clark enjoyed a little drink, but in my experience and in the memory of those who knew him from childhood on, he never achieved more than the "rosy glow" of good fellowship. You must all remember in your reading, that Clark unavoidably was first and always a Victorian as regards personal ethics and social standards of behavior. Obviously, neither the victorians nor Clark were inhibited in taking a
"romp in the Clover quilts" (borrowing briefly from Thomas' "Lament" - much loved by Clark and I both); however, to drink to excess? To risk public embarrassment and a night in the slammer? Never - Oscar Wilde observed that one should never drink alone since everyone will find out - in a town the size Auburn used to be, they knew when you used the outhouse and how many pages of the catalog you used. Clark maintained in the midst of his poverty the grace and dignity of the gentleman who raised him in the standards of the Empire - this fact permeates his writing - as well as the strong sense of justice which comes with inhaling the English common law from childhood on.

Keep reading Clark, read yet again, and once more read him - some of you have got it-
The less time you spend in vivesection, the more you will enjoy knowing this poet -
He would appreciate it, I can assure you.
On the other hand, pro or con, all writers love being the topic of conversation so
have at it.
I will not have many opportunities to visit for a while, since my Mother is nearing the end of her days, and caring for her affords little respite for the joys of the mind. I assure you I value each of you and respect the energy of your expression.
Small added note: to the apprentice critics among you - please take time to read
Dr. C.S.Lewis' collection of essays and lectures entitled "An experiment in Criticism" -- this is not one of his Christian apologetics but a posthumous collection of his astonishing and profound academic gifts - There have been few philologists who were his match - I regret that he died just before I was scheduled to take a class with him, though I did a seminar with Dr. Tolkien the same year, much to my benefit. Adieu for now dear friends.

Dr. Farmer:

Quote:

as to most of the responses to my last, they are remarkably predictable, having heard all this BS before - folks you lack must not generalize from your own experience regarding the "gateway" concept -- If, as one writer says, you think the concept silly, it can only be because you have swallowed the media hype, and not actually been on the "front lines".

Because you are incapable of specifically addressing even the most basic of points that are opposed to yours, and instead feel the need to resort to cheap vulgarity by dismissing these opposing points as "BS", I would suggest that the source of the "BS" here is you, not those who have countered your judgmental, subjective emotional outpourings with rational objections.

As for CAS, I certainly did not dream up the notion that, at a certain period of his life, he drank excessively, but I would defer to Scott Connors's knowledge and expertise in this matter, should he care to weigh in here. What is incontrovertible is the following: That CAS drank, that alcohol is a drug, that alcohol is demonstrably worse in its effects when abused than such illegal drugs as marijuana, that there is no solid scientific evidence that marijuana is a "gateway" for anything, and that CAS manufactured and drank alcohol at a time when it was illegal to do so--so much for that virtuous older generation for whom "laws were not meant to be broken", eh, Doctor? Dismiss these hard facts as "BS" only at the peril of your credibility.

Quote:

I assure you I value each of you and respect the energy of your expression.

Even us purveyors of BS? How awfully magnanimous of you!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 21 Nov 04 | 11:20AM by Kyberean.

Addendum:

"He drank, sometimes too much [...]".

from George F. Haas, "As I Remember Klarkash-Ton"

> "He drank, sometimes too much [...]".
> from George F. Haas, "As I Remember Klarkash-Ton"

Donald Sidney-Fryer adds: "Smith certainly had not eaten any hashish by the time he created the poem, although apparently he did experiment with drugs sometime in the latter part of his life, in addition to being an evidently lifelong devotee of assorted hard spirits and Californian wines, but rarely to excess."
Text taken from the leaflet of DSF's audio cd "The Hashish-Eater and other poems" <[donaldsidneyfryer.free.fr] >, if I may be allowed this promotional digression.
This gateway controversy, although slightly offtopic, is very interesting but a little embarassing. This notion is known to be a typical conservative prejudice (or propaganda argument), and I've always dismissed it as such, but my knowledge in the field being largely second hand my contribution to this controversy is very likely to end here. I'm sure that my deep respect for Dr. Farmer and my interest in his comments on the work of his friend are shared by all of us here, and as usual the old saying proves true: friends should never talk politics... :-)
Phil

Thanks for offering Donald Sidney-Fryer's observations on the subject, which are most welcome.
Like George Haas's reminiscences, the statement you quote reminds us, among other things, that Dr. Farmer is not the only friend CAS ever had, and that his opinions, while of interest and value, ought not always to be accepted with obsequious reverence. I'll not sit still for anyone dismissing my seriously intended arguments as "BS", especially when the counter-"arguments" on offer reek far more of the barnyard than anything I've written.

Quote:

I'm sure that my deep respect for Dr. Farmer and my interest in his comments on the work of his friend are shared by all of us here, and as usual the old saying proves true: friends should never talk politics... :-)

Well, in my case, you're right about the second point, but not about the first one. It is also wise to recall that acquaintances who share one common interest will not necessarily have anything else in common. Better, I agree, to stick to commonalities.

Regarding the "gateway" theory, it is, as you say, merely conservative propaganda. I've looked into it, and have not found an iota of respectable science to support its alarmist claims. Even if it were true, then should we ban alcohol for the same reason? It's amusing, in any case, to be dismissed as a media dupe by someone who so clearly is one himself, in this instance.