On Drugs

by David Lenson

Unlike Thomas Szasz, who argues forcefully for the legalization of drugs in Our Right to Drugs (Praeger, 1992), Lenson tackles this subject by meditating on the national consumerist paradigm, the way the war on drugs closed avenues for heterogeneity, the lack of a vocabulary to describe changes in a user's consciousness, the senselessness of talking about "drugs" indiscriminately, and the differences among the users, the drugs, and the effects of psychedelics, cannabis, stimulants (cocaine, crack, amphetamines), depressants (heroin), opiates, and alcohol. He contrasts drugs of pleasure to drugs of desire and believes that "to legislate against drugs of pleasure is like legislating against music, chess, golf...." Lenson says that nothing in his professional life qualifies him to write about drugs, but his style and his literary and philosophical references would pinpoint him as an academic even if he were not identified as a University of Massachusetts professor of literature, albeit one who surveys his students' usage habits. Lenson's credentials as a user were probably the impetus for this work, but they are not much evident in the text. In the national debate and reevaluation of attitudes toward drugs, this is a different kind of contribution, one that is speculative, discursive, and visionary. For academic collections.?Janice Dunham, John Jay Coll. Lib., New York
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Philosophy, Addiction, Drugs

256 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

David Lenson (1945–2020) was a poet, essayist, musician, and legendary professor. His father Michael Lenson was the New Jersey director of the Works Progress Administration murals project. David went to Princeton University and completed three degrees there, including his doctorate in Comparative Literature. He was the author of two books of poetry as well as three scholarly works, and best known for his last, On Drugs. He was head editor of the Massachusetts Review for eight years, host of the magazine's radio show on WMUA, an inspiration and mentor to several generations of UMass students, and an accomplished sax player, having performed with many of the greats, including Buddy Guy and Junior Wells, and locally with the Reprobate Blues Band.

Reviews

[Angelique Simonsen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating reading

[Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

his description of an LSD trip reminds me of what it can be like to take photographs:
"The object's focus becomes more than a spatial matter. The arbitrary nature of what is focused on at any given moment assumes the proportions of a miracle. The object becomes a marvel by virtue of its being singled out from such an enormous field of possibilities. Stripped of all function, revealed in the most minute details of its surfaces, it can seem to be lit not by lamps or the sun but by an interior luminescence. Its existence is no longer contingent upon its background, its social uses, or the interest of the viewer ... Attributes like texture and color become more important than size. ... As Huxley put it, 'It would seem that, for the Mind at Large, the so-called secondary characters of things are primary. Unlike Locke, it evidently feels that colors are more important, better worth attending to, than masses, positions and dimensions.'"

[Harry Barnett · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author lays out in his introduction his approach to the topic. He admits that he is not a biologist or historian or a psychologist although he does have academic degrees. The focus is on the illegal drugs that some people choose to use to achieve an alternative consciousness. According to David Lenson this should be allowed by society for those who want to escape our consumerist culture. The tone of the book is high brow academic. It is written as if his only exposure to drug use and abuse was among fellow privileged academics such as Timothy Leary. Lenson would like to see governments, the medical profession, and drug companies step aside and allow individuals to pursue pleasure with drugs if they choose to. The book was written in the 90's. There is no mention of the methamphetamine abuse so common today. If you like authors who throw around words like quotidian and heterodoxy and who choose to ignore the damage done by drug abuse to the lives of so many people in this country you might like On Drugs. David Lenson has written a treatise from an ivory tower that speaks to elites and ignores the grim realities of drug abuse.

[Sebastian RRm · Rating 5 out of 5]

Without doubt, one of the best books written about the understanding of drugs. A magnificent read.

[I · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was interesting.

Lenson basically argues that drugs are an alternative to consumerism, and that’s part of the reason why they are so legislated against and vilified by the government. Cannabis, for instance, can be grown for ‘free’ without having to rely on pharmaceutical companies, so it can be seen as a threat to big pharma and the government. He makes the claim that drug use - just like homosexuality - is an inherent part of human nature, and there is no use fighting against it. Thus he also supports the dismantling of much of drug legislature.

I agree that Nixon’s War on Drugs appears to have exacerbated America’s drug problem rather than solving it, as the movement intended. Lenson seems to stray away from admitting that drugs are the cause of societal problems - according to him, it’s the people, not the drugs. It is a natural human impulse to seek highs, so I can agree that it’s a problem that millions of people are imprisoned because they decided to follow their impulses. However Lenson doesn’t seem to acknowledge the distress that drug use or abuse can bring, and at times he seemed a little optimistic about drugs.

For instance: “People for whom drugs have deadly consequences are usually those… whose choice of drugs [are] based on… someone completely different from whom they wish to become.” (64) In other words, if you’re taking a drug that aligns with your personality, you should be fine. I don’t think it’s a problem for people to use drugs for recreational purposes, but I don’t think Lenson touches enough on addiction. He admits at the beginning of the book that he isn’t qualified to write such a book in drugs - he’s a professor of comparative literature - and it shows. As per Lenson’s background, much of the beginning of the book centered about drug literature, which to me was an interesting and unique - albeit not completely trustworthy - perspective. Literature does not accurately convey reality, so I don’t think that drug literature is a credible source to base one’s viewpoints on when it comes to the reality of drug use and addiction.

I also thought it was weird how Lenson claimed that ‘drug culture’ doesn’t exist - or if it does, it is just synonymous with culture itself. Maybe his university is different, but at my university there’s an undeniably evident drinking culture. Drug culture in universities is often so bad that it kills students. Drug culture is not the same as regular culture - drug culture places prime importance on drugs, whereas regular American culture may have other priorities. It’s a little sad how describes these both as the same thing.

I also thought it was weird how Lenson was so insistent that you can still be a functional drug addict - for instance, look at Winston Churchill, who led Britain to victory despite his alcoholism. I felt there were too many positive examples of drug addicts, and not enough negative ones. It’s also important to note that pretty much all (or maybe even completely all) of Lenson’s anecdotes about drugs were drawn from his circle of academics or peers. All of the literary quotes might actually have been from esteemed, white academics (Aldous Huxley, Andrew Weil, etc). Experiences with drugs vary significantly among different demographics, and educated white writers are a tiny subset of drug users. Lenson definitely promoted the idea that people take drugs recreationally, for fun, because they want to try something new. That’s certainly true for some people, but I don’t believe that’s the subset of people to whom drugs leave the bulk of their wrath. Lenson dismisses things like ‘drug culture’ when in reality that is how so many people are introduced to drugs. There’s definitely a privileged point of view to this book, but that’s what you have to expect given the author’s identity as an educated, well-off, white, university professor.

Some little things I learned or found interesting:

-Cannabis is used to treat glaucoma because it lowers the internal pressure of the eyeball (that’s why peoples’ eyes become bloodshot after smoking cannabis) (pg. 65)
-I also did not know that choline, which is found in eggs, is a nootropic drug used to enhance memory and promote logical functioning (pg. 79)… good reason to eat eggs before an exam
-I liked Lenson’s comparison between alcohol and religion on page 139. It is so true that “[d]rinking bonds millions of otherwise dissimilar people together, just as Catholicism does.” (140)
-I didn’t know that the Persian Gulf War was the first and only conflict in American history in which troops were not allowed alcohol. (171)

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting look at the pharmacological, political and sociological treatment of various legal and illicit substances. Made me think, especially about sugar.

[Andrea Laragan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Learnt so much. Highlighted everything 😂

[Sebastian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ok, so I didn't finish it as it reads like a doctoral thesis and it just too damn hard to plough through. That said, I read enough to get the gist and he's got some great ideas. Too bad he makes them so hard to understand.