Does taking drugs enhance artist creativity?

[rhoelsch]

Something I've always wondered about the drug habits of musicians and singers, especially those who've died, and those who've lost their edge as they've gotten sober...

Hendrix
Joplin
Layne Staley
Syd Barrett
Beatles
Steven Tyler & Joe Perry
Scott Weiland
Cobain
pretty much anyone from the 70s that's still around...
(Elvis being the exception, as he was fine until he started popping those pills)

any additions or arguments?

[Dartful Dodger]

You forgot:

Whitney Houston, Britney Spears, and every other singer at your local karaoke bar.


Their drug habits could have been their reason for them losing their edge when they were sober.

These musicians had talent before drugs.  Like with anything else the more experience one gets the better they get.  Their drug habit could have hindered their true potential.

If you don't have any talent when your sober, you won’t get it high(although you may think have it).


*Technically drug use took the edge from Hendrix and other musicians/comedians/actors permanently.

[shardian]

I look at it this way:

For TRUE musical talents, drugs will destroy them.

For hacks with moderate or no talent, drugs are the only reason they are on the map.

[Ginsu Victim]

In the words of Denis Leary, "Drugs don't lead to more drugs, they lead to f'n carpentry."

[RayB]

I've heard plenty of testimony from musicians saying that when they were high they THOUGHT they were playing amazingly, but later, sober and listening to such times over again, they found out they played like crap when high.  It's like putting on pink sunglasses. Just because the world looks pink to you, doesn't mean it is pink.

[TOK]

I would say drugs hurt live performances, but definitely enhance the writing and riff making.
Listen to Nine Inch Nails. The stuff with Reznor straight is all crap. All his demons are gone.

[leapinlew]

I would say drugs are the only thing that make Nirvana, Pearl Jam or nearly anything from the "Grunge" scene palatable.

 

[Ginsu Victim]

I would say drugs hurt live performances, but definitely enhance the writing and riff making.
Listen to Nine Inch Nails. The stuff with Reznor straight is all crap. All his demons are gone.

Heard the new free album? Horrible. I haven't liked NIN since the EP "Further Down the Spiral"

[danny_galaga]

syd barrett was schizophrenic. i think the only drugs he took were for that problem. (edit: oops, i musta been thinking of the rest of the band. barrett was loaded most of the time it seems!) and i think cobain only took serious drugs AFTER nirvanas initial success (but i could be wrong). out of that list i would say only the beatles actually created something new BECAUSE of drugs. people like hendrix were just freakin talented. drugs probably took some of the edge off them, rather than enhanced them.

on the other hand, nick cave is a whole lot less interesting now that he has no drug demons to fuel the fire...

[rhoelsch]

There's no question that drugs have left most in a downward destructive spiral that's been too difficult for many to overcome. It's a shame the talent the world has lost. However, I will say that I think that there's some who've creatively benefited from being slightly out of their gourd, regardless of how it may have effected ability. Youth, frustration, angst... can't beat 'em for some of the best stuff... until the suits start meddling, and that NEVER seems to feed the muse. Not many have proven strong enough to corral all the beasts that suddenly appear with success...but there does appear to be a sweet spot that's hit just before everything comes down on them, or sobriety, for some...and I'm still not sure if it's a product of the process, or if the drugs add fuel to the creative spark.

[Jdurg]

This is a debate that has been going on for years, and there is no correct answer to it.  I wholeheartedly believe that drugs do inspire the creativity and imagination of the artists.  It provides an alternative view on normal things and allows them to write and create music and stories that they never would have thought of before.  However, drugs aren't going to take a talentless whore and turn him/her into a legend.  They just enhance what is already there for these individuals so the good artists tend to get even better.

The problem is that there is a lot of stresses and difficulties in the music/art industry, and these drugs become a way for the artists to escape from all that.  For many, it is a downward spiral that they can't get away from, and drugs become their only "escape".  One way or another, these folks were going to destroy their lives and the drugs just made it happen a bit quicker.  Those who die from their drug abuse were going to die anyway.  The drugs just, ironically enough, enhanced the tough times they were going through and they weren't strong enough to overcome those addictions.

[shmokes]

Yeah . . . it's not like it has to be an either-or proposition.  There's absolutely no question that drug-Beatles are significantly better than non-drug Beatles.  Not that you want them to be high while they're playing a concert, but they were writing better music.  Same goes for Everclear.  Once that guy sobered up he wrote nothing but utter crap.  I think part of it may also be angst.  People with perfect lives have very little to write about.  Most great artists, whether musicians, writers, stand-up comics, etc., are pretty miserable in one way or another.

[danny_galaga]

People with perfect lives have very little to write about.  Most great artists, whether musicians, writers, stand-up comics, etc., are pretty miserable in one way or another.

i think thats the important part. look how freaky heironomus bosch or salvador dalis  paintings were, how beautiful van goghs were. or how amazing mozart and beethoven were. all they had to console their angst was booze...

[TOK]

People with perfect lives have very little to write about.  Most great artists, whether musicians, writers, stand-up comics, etc., are pretty miserable in one way or another.

i think thats the important part. look how freaky heironomus bosch or salvador dalis  paintings were, how beautiful van goghs were. or how amazing mozart and beethoven were. all they had to console their angst was booze...

Opiates were also available and uncontrolled. There is no telling what these guys may have been using. For sure, neither was a stranger to personal struggle and depression, even after becoming famous.
Check this out. This is after Motzart and Beethoven's era, but is still rather jarring to see.

Got a headache? Insist on genuine Bayer Heroin! 

[Dartful Dodger]

There's absolutely no question that drug-Beatles are significantly better than non-drug Beatles.

Here's a question...

The non-drug Beatles were younger less experienced/less talented.

The drug Beatles were older more experienced/more talented.

My question is could the more experienced/more talented Beatles have been even better if they stayed away from the drugs?

People with perfect lives have very little to write about.

The young Beatles grew up in a poor neighborhood in England.
The older (drugged) Beatles were rich and famous.  It seems like the better Beatles had perfect lives.


You either have talent or you don't.  A bad life might motivate you to use your talent, but it all comes down to talent.

[shardian]

And then you have people like Michael Jackson - he doesn't even need drugs to ---fudgesicle--- up his career! 

[Dartful Dodger]

And then you have people like Michael Jackson - he doesn't even need drugs to ---fudgesicle--- up his career! 

...and now his life is miserable and he can't create a hit.

[Jdurg]

People with perfect lives have very little to write about.  Most great artists, whether musicians, writers, stand-up comics, etc., are pretty miserable in one way or another.

i think thats the important part. look how freaky heironomus bosch or salvador dalis  paintings were, how beautiful van goghs were. or how amazing mozart and beethoven were. all they had to console their angst was booze...

Opiates were also available and uncontrolled. There is no telling what these guys may have been using. For sure, neither was a stranger to personal struggle and depression, even after becoming famous.
Check this out. This is after Motzart and Beethoven's era, but is still rather jarring to see.

Got a headache? Insist on genuine Bayer Heroin! 

Those aren't all that shocking.  They were developed in a timeframe where long term testing and safety studies on medicines and OTC compounds were not required.  Now a days, any medication intended for Human Use must be clinically tested and approved by the FDA, or various other regulatory agencies.  So these days, you aren't going to see new medicines come out without severely long, and expensive, testing.  Creating medicine ain't cheap.   

[danny_galaga]

People with perfect lives have very little to write about.  Most great artists, whether musicians, writers, stand-up comics, etc., are pretty miserable in one way or another.

i think thats the important part. look how freaky heironomus bosch or salvador dalis  paintings were, how beautiful van goghs were. or how amazing mozart and beethoven were. all they had to console their angst was booze...

Opiates were also available and uncontrolled. There is no telling what these guys may have been using. For sure, neither was a stranger to personal struggle and depression, even after becoming famous.
Check this out. This is after Motzart and Beethoven's era, but is still rather jarring to see.

Got a headache? Insist on genuine Bayer Heroin! 

i know what you are saying, but yeah-nah....

bosch died in 1516...

those arty people who used opiates are well chronicalled because there was less stigma attached than now. samuel taylor colleridge for instance. there is absolutely no suggestion that mozart or beethoven took opiates to enhance creativity...