A Sudden Impulse: Drug Use and 20th Century Music

Defining what music is seems rather pointless. It is just one of those things that can have a different meaning to each person. To some it is just a commodity, like a car or television set. For others, it falls into the same category as food and shelter; becoming, in the end, a necessity. The role of a musician, however, can be discussed. As a musician, it is one’s destiny to conduct an inward search, and to document it with his or her music so that others may benefit. As we listen to the music coming through them, we too are inspired to look within. Light is being transmitted and received from soul to soul. Gradually, the planet moves from darkness to light (Werner, 1996). While some have been able to dig deep inside and pull out something for the world to examine, others fall victim to a life of excess and exuberance. Falling deep into the world of drug use, they forget that music is the icing on the cake; not the cake.

It is my intention in this paper to research and present information regarding the use of drugs—especially marijuana, heroin, and cocaine—and their role in 20th century American music. This investigation will provide: a brief history of drug abuse in rock ‘n’ roll, drug use and its effect on music production, a musician’s possible motivation for doing drugs, a discussion on inspiration and creativity, followed by a financially successful musician’s account on his drug addiction, and lastly, what is being done about drug use in the music industry.

Italian fabulist Italo Calvino observed that there are two kinds of artists—those who are prolific and successful, and those who are tortured yet geniuses, each gazing at one another in deep jealousy and admiration. The documentary DiG! is constructed around this premise. On the side of the tortured geniuses is the American rock band the Brian Jonestown Massacre. They are the band most willing to start a musical revolution but incapable of taking it further than the underground scene. Portland Oregon’s the Dandy Warhols fulfill the spot for musicians that, while unable to measure up to the artistry of their friendly rivals, achieve popular acclaim and are thus considered prolific and successful.

The Brian Jonestown Massacre, led by the highly volatile and entertaining Anton Newcombe, is quickly regarded as the band with high potential but unable to capitalize on it. And with being lumped as tortured geniuses comes the assumption that something was holding them back from attaining the same amount of success as their contemporaries: the Dandy Warhols. Newcombe, being the volatile lead singer, is made-out to as being a manic-depressive musical genius. According to Richard Smale (as cited in Jamison, 1996), however, labeling as manic-depressive anyone who is unusually creative, energetic, intense, moody or eccentric both diminishes the notion of individuality within the arts and trivializes a very serious, often deadly, illness. Although Newcombe was documented as ceasing production, or showed deterioration in his work, after quitting the use of drugs, he returned to being as artistic and productive as before; a career that includes recording twelve albums.

The genre of rock ‘n’ roll has often been portrayed as one colored by a quest for fun and rebellion against conventional middle class boundaries. This theme is well captured in its official trademark of “sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll,” a generational call for celebratory excess and exuberance. But excess and exuberance are two mighty dangerous words when discussing drug use and musicians. Indeed the long list of artists who have died of drug overdoses or drug-related accidents include some of rock ‘n’ roll’s icons. From the Doors’ Jim Morrison, the Who’s Keith Moon, the Sex Pistols’ Sid Vicious, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin and the Rolling Stone’s Brian Jones, to contemporary artists such as Sublime’s Bradley Nowell. Furthermore, when band members die the band typically disbands. Such was the case in the story of John Bonham.

John Bonham was an English drummer and member of the rock band Led Zeppelin. In September 1980, Bonham and the band moved into Jimmy Page’s new house in order to rehearse for another American tour. On the 24th, Bonham went out to a local pub and drank four quadruple vodkas before returning to the house, where he drank some more and passed out on the sofa. He was then dragged to a bedroom so he could sleep it off. By the next morning, however, he was dead. Although he had choked on his own vomit, his death was later diagnosed as a drink and heroin overdose (Driver, 2001). Led Zeppelin disbanded soon afterwards.

Unlike rock ‘n’ roll, whose theme of excess and exuberance dominated headlines, the role played by drugs in the making of Jazz functioned differently. According to Merrill Singer (2006), the use of marijuana and heroin had two distinct roles in the development of jazz.

The use of marijuana had two important impacts on jazz. First, from the perspective of the early jazzmen, it helped them to cope with the structurally imposed burdens of discrimination, poverty, and oppressive working conditions. Second, it helped them to define themselves not as unappreciated artists whose creativity, energy, and hard work helped to make others rich, but as hip social outlaws, who lived on the edge and successfully and stylishly exploited the margins of society (Singer, 2006).

The second drug encounter in the development of jazz involved the use of heroin. Singer says, “Many of the social motivations and cultural meanings embedded in marijuana use among jazzmen diffused into the use of heroin. In a new era in which Black resistance to oppression was rising, heroin use represented a radical break with mainstream society, just as bebop—the strain of jazz favored by those who embarked on heroin use at mid century—represented a break with previous conventions in jazz.”

Of the many ways drugs can influence a musician, quite possibly the strangest have to be when musicians are able to produce profoundly successful recordings. While it is assumed the warning label of drug use involves not being productive in anything, when musicians are able to create financially successful recordings while under the influence, it creates the notion that drug-inspired music just may be the best kind. For example, it has been argued that David Bowie produced his best music while in the doldrums—face down in the gutter, drinking skid-row wine (Minnis, 2007).

The use of drugs in successful music could lead some to believe that musical creativity is somehow enhanced through drugs. According to Lapp (1994), creative artists are notorious for their use of psychoactive substances to enhance their perceptions and the novelty of their creations, but objective evidence regarding the accuracy of this supposition is meager. The question in the minds of artists and other creative people is not so much whether great musicians owe their success to psychoactive substances; instead, it is centered on whether or not alcohol and other drugs promote the creative impulse.

Part of the fun in being a musician is having others listen to your sounds. What many do not initially recognize is the amount of time and energy required in accomplishing that goal.
“Today, there is a lot of demand for an artist’s time. Artists must perform at the top of their game at all times. Working under these circumstances, it quickly becomes apparent that drug use is seen as a means to cope with the pressure. Los Angeles-based addictions specialist Bob Timmons says there is a correlation between addiction and the incredible pressure artists are often under to create. He says in reference to Steven Tyler of Aerosmith, “You have this wonderfully creative guy. The record label sends him to a recording studio and says, “Come back in three weeks with three hits.” Artists like Tyler feel this pressure. Timmons later adds, “And people with a history of addiction will feel the need to get high to alleviate their feelings (Paoletta, 2004).”

But the lifestyle of today’s musicians is not just filled with the anxiety of creating; they are also faced with having to deal with the turmoil their art creates. According to Sturges (2004), when it came time to tour the new album John Frusciante of the Red Hot Chili Peppers resolved to smoke as much marijuana as possible.“I just did it all day long, every day, non-stop,” he says blithely. “I guess there was too much brain activity going on for what I was doing in life. When your life is plane-gig-bus-plane-gig-bus, your brain goes into overdrive.”

Apart from alleviating feelings of anxiety and possible sources of inspiration; drug use among musicians has also been documented as a means of self-medication. According to Michael Azerrad (1994), throughout most of his life, Kurt Cobain battled depression, chronic bronchitis, and an intense physical pain due to an undiagnosed chronic stomach condition. The last condition was especially debilitating to his emotional welfare, and he spent years trying to find its source. However, after none of the doctors he consulted were able to pinpoint the specific cause, Cobain self-medicated with heroin.

A final reason for a musician seeking to use drugs could be they believe drugs are a catalyst for music production—drugs as a source of inspiration. One possible reason for an increase in cannabis, cocaine, and other hard drug use is that individuals who expected enhanced creativity from drugs experienced it and were thereby motivated to increase their substance use (Lapp, 1994).

It appears that in order to create art, one must first be inspired. But, what is inspiration? According to Harvey (1999), inspiration may be defined as that which causes, provokes, and/or forces the artist to create—the catalyst of the creative process. For many, the hardest part comes after finding the initial idea when they must harness their skills to convert their vision into a finished piece of art. Still drugs, regardless of how inspirational they might be, do not make creating the finished work any easier. For although there is no doubt that drugs can, very temporarily, give access to the unconscious source of inspiration that lies buried deeply in one’s minds, their habitual use is adverse to creativity, and even a comparatively harmless drug as cannabis impairs the will so that, although it may encourage the appearance of inspiration, it will prevent constructive (i.e. organized and prolonged) use of the imagination (Wilson, 2001).

Inspiration can come by more means than through drugs. According to Duchesneau (1986), the occurrence of inspiration can be identified to come from three sources: from above, from inside, and from outside.

From above inspiration is experienced as a metaphysical event from above—such as heaven. The process is thought of as superhuman. From inside inspiration occurs as a result of unconscious mechanisms such as dreams, visions, or physiological particularities such as synesthesia—a condition in which one type of stimulation evokes the sensation of another (as when hearing a sound produces the visualization of a color). In fact, romantic writers of the 18th century thought there was a strong link between dreams and the process of literary creation (Smale, 1998). The last form, outside inspiration, is a collection of objects, influences, and ideology that are retained as stimulus for works of art.

According to Richard Smale (2001), artistic achievement must be seen as two-fold. First, there is the inspiration and secondly the creation of the artifact in whatever art form that is favored. In other words, unless both parts of the artistic achievement happen, the experience of traveling to the creative zone has not been completed. Thus, if drugs only inspire but do not allow one to complete a work of art, getting inspired was pointless.

Unlike inspiration, creativity defies a simple definition. This is mainly because it is hard to determine when or how much creativity is evident (Lapp, 1994). It is difficult to say just how creative someone is; rather it is easier to say that someone is creative. According to Richard Smale (as cited in Storr, 1976), for creative work, access to the inner realm of the psyche is essential. Also essential is a strongly functioning ego; capable of judgment, inhibition of immediate impulse, persistence and control. Drugs and alcohol, however, do not facilitate this. For example, marijuana has often been referred to as a “gateway” drug because, even though most people who try it do not go on to use more powerful and physically addicting drugs, those who do come to consume such drugs as heroin and cocaine almost always use marijuana before moving on. Such was the case of John Frusciante.

After leaving the Red Hot Chili Peppers during the aftermath of their 1991 mainstream breakthrough BloodSugarSexMagik, Frusciante plummeted into whirlwind of depression. It was not until he quit the band, however, that he became a full addict; there he stayed for roughly five years. Degrading to the point where his upper teeth had been replaced by slivers that peeked through rotten gums, fingernails blackened by blood, and flesh that consisted of bruises, scabs and scars (Wilonsky, 1996).

When asked why he became an addict he said, “I did it because I was so unhappy… taking drugs like heroin and cocaine made me act like myself rather than just a guy staring off into space. I found I could enjoy art again, which was really important to me.” Frusciante had become another gifted musician who plunged needles into his arm every few hours.

Nonetheless, Frusciante managed to quit his addiction and rejoined the band in 1997. “For the first time in my life I felt very clear about who I was,” he recalls. “Even though I was on a good path artistically when I was 21, I still felt I was doing it by the skin of my teeth, like I was barely getting away with it. But after coming off drugs I felt very confident.” Now, Frusciante eats healthily, practices yoga and has a shiny new set of teeth. He also works on music constantly; he cannot remember the last time he spent a day doing anything else.

John Frusciante’s story seems quite unlikely now given that an industry revolves around making icons out of rock stars whose lives have been wrecked or ended by drug abuse—from the time of Janis Joplin to Kurt Cobain and beyond (Collins, 1996). Although the blame could be placed on outside sources for encouraging a lifestyle of drugs, in the end it is the artist who makes the decision to start using. According to Sloane (1996), the most basic and difficult problem in stemming drug use, of course, is the fact that a drug user must be willing to stop using drugs. That is something he or she must decide alone. A person bent on self-destruction cannot be stopped from succeeding, short of instituting undesirable police-state measures to force that person to alter his or her habits.

A musician’s inability to seek professional help has been addressed in the music industry. Such programs as MusiCares, Musicians’ Assistance Program, and Road Recovery have all been founded around making sure musicians do not end up as some of their predecessors. Other initiatives that have been discussed include a zero tolerance of drug use being incorporated into business dealings in the music industry. Clauses in band recording contracts, for example, requiring the suspension of drug users, would create an added incentive for drug users to seek help. These provisions could be coupled with mandatory attendance at drug rehabilitation programs. Although it is the drug user who must be willing to stop using drugs, the possibility of losing the opportunity to do what he or she loves the most should play a very important role in their decision.

Drug use in 20th century music played an important role in its development, marketing, and eventual success as a dominant form of entertainment. Musicians who participated in the drug use, however, were most often the victims. With success of their music came a lot of pressure to create the next best thing, but once addicted it was their personal life that laid in shambles and not their music. Furthermore, the music industry is a business that relies heavily on the artist. This can lead to changes in their lifestyle and/or personality. With the mounting pressure to create also comes the search for a muse. The search for inspiration is often thought to be something quick and easy. That, however, is not always the case and the use of drugs as a means of enhancing inspiration and creativity has had its ups and downs.

From this assignment it can be asserted that the ability of being inspired is dependent on being able to take the inspiration and create something tangible that others can enjoy. The hardest part of the creative process then is not being inspired but rather being able to use the inspiration to its full potential. Drug use, however, does not allow the process of converting inspiration into creativity to function at its full potential.

In the book, Effortless Mastery, by Kenny Werner, the author points out: Jazz, as well as other types of music, has always been about the search for inspiration and the inner connection. Throughout the history of drug use players were in search of the “space.” The place where you accept everything that comes out without worry or pain. The great sin of all drugs is the feeling does not last. You always have to do more, getting less and less out of it. The folly of human history is the search for this state in things outside us. The ultimate security one seeks can only be found within (Werner, 1996).








Drug Use & 20th Century Music

Reference List