What do you think?
Rate this book
Waiting For The Man: Story of Drugs and Popular Music
Drugs counsellor and rock journalist Shapiro documents the favoured drug of each era of pop history and studies in detail the most famous casualties-Charlie Parker, Hendrix, Keith Moon, Jim Morrison et al-while examining the disturbing collusion between two billion-dollar industries. First published in 1988, this new edition features over 100 pages of new material on Tupac, Cobain and the rise of Acid House.
256 pages, Paperback
Published July 1, 2001
9 people are currently reading
139 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
May 24, 2025
Not a bad read. The author jumps all over the place and makes some rather obvious errors, like calling Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, and Jim Morrison methedrine addicts. It's well known that Janis was a heroin/alcohol abuser, Hendrix and Morrison were more into acid, alcohol, and even cocaine. Methedrine was there but it certainly wasn't their drug of choice. "The Crystal Ship" is certainly a drug song, but it's not methedrine. It's clearly a hallucinogenic trip the ship is taking the listener on, not a speed one. Normally none of this would matter. But in a book about popular music and drugs, the devil is in the details.
Another glaring error was the author's claim that John Lennon's LSD abuse was the cause of the Beatles break-up. Um, no? Sure they all did LSD at one time or another, which positively impacted their music. But it's pretty well-documented that Yoko's constant presence in the studio coupled with Paul's ballooning ego were the main causes of their breakup. Apparently, Paul started to re-record Ringo and George's parts on their later albums. For evidence, just check out the "Let it Be" film which still hasn't seen a DVD release. Paul refuses to sign off on it probably because it makes him look pretty bad.
For some reason the author kept claiming everything in the 60s had to do with speed/methedrine. For example, he claimed that the Velvet Underground's "Heroin" mimicked a methedrine high. While it's definitely true that many people in 60s New York were taking speed, the title alone should be a clue as to what the song was about. Shapiro cites a part of the song where the music speeds up and the lyric is, "when I'm rushing on my run,. " Shapiro claims the rush is from methedrine pills. Rush is actually a term used by heroin addicts to describe the drug coursing through your body when shot intravenously. The music speeding up is another depiction of the same feeling. It has absolutely nothing to do with speed or methedrine. As a long time heroin addict, composer Lou Reed was pretty clear on all this.
On a positive note, Shapiro did cite a bunch of statistics from credible sources. Unfortunately, he often followed them up with generalizations not supported by his own evidence or backed up by any sources. His rave culture chapter is filled with inconsistencies and misleading assertions. It was pretty clear that his aim was to defend rave parties from accusations of widespread drug dealing. He draws comparisons between drug use at discos and at raves, finding no real difference. Then he says that it's a myth that raves are drug supermarkets because, "most drug users take their drugs before they arrive." Um, no. I was a member of the 90s Chicago rave scene and know from experience that very few people took anything beforehand. Some people would even go to raves just to buy drugs and then leave. I suspect Shapiro knew he was wrong since he didn't bother to even try to back it up with facts.
Considering the author's bio says that he has "been in the drugs field since 1979," it's surprising that he got so many things wrong, particularly about effects of certain drugs. What's weird is that it's not specified what exactly he did in the "drugs field." The drugs field?" Based on the the fact that there isn't any further information about his background in the drug field, my guess is he tried drugs for the first time in 1979. Perhaps he and his editors had a good laugh when they wrote the bio. It's just the kind of tongue in cheek, sarcastic humor we might expect from Shapiro. Unfortunately, I don't think having tried marijuana or cocaine a few times qualifies you as a drug expert. In fact, the argument could be made that it's just the opposite.
Another glaring error was the author's claim that John Lennon's LSD abuse was the cause of the Beatles break-up. Um, no? Sure they all did LSD at one time or another, which positively impacted their music. But it's pretty well-documented that Yoko's constant presence in the studio coupled with Paul's ballooning ego were the main causes of their breakup. Apparently, Paul started to re-record Ringo and George's parts on their later albums. For evidence, just check out the "Let it Be" film which still hasn't seen a DVD release. Paul refuses to sign off on it probably because it makes him look pretty bad.
For some reason the author kept claiming everything in the 60s had to do with speed/methedrine. For example, he claimed that the Velvet Underground's "Heroin" mimicked a methedrine high. While it's definitely true that many people in 60s New York were taking speed, the title alone should be a clue as to what the song was about. Shapiro cites a part of the song where the music speeds up and the lyric is, "when I'm rushing on my run,. " Shapiro claims the rush is from methedrine pills. Rush is actually a term used by heroin addicts to describe the drug coursing through your body when shot intravenously. The music speeding up is another depiction of the same feeling. It has absolutely nothing to do with speed or methedrine. As a long time heroin addict, composer Lou Reed was pretty clear on all this.
On a positive note, Shapiro did cite a bunch of statistics from credible sources. Unfortunately, he often followed them up with generalizations not supported by his own evidence or backed up by any sources. His rave culture chapter is filled with inconsistencies and misleading assertions. It was pretty clear that his aim was to defend rave parties from accusations of widespread drug dealing. He draws comparisons between drug use at discos and at raves, finding no real difference. Then he says that it's a myth that raves are drug supermarkets because, "most drug users take their drugs before they arrive." Um, no. I was a member of the 90s Chicago rave scene and know from experience that very few people took anything beforehand. Some people would even go to raves just to buy drugs and then leave. I suspect Shapiro knew he was wrong since he didn't bother to even try to back it up with facts.
Considering the author's bio says that he has "been in the drugs field since 1979," it's surprising that he got so many things wrong, particularly about effects of certain drugs. What's weird is that it's not specified what exactly he did in the "drugs field." The drugs field?" Based on the the fact that there isn't any further information about his background in the drug field, my guess is he tried drugs for the first time in 1979. Perhaps he and his editors had a good laugh when they wrote the bio. It's just the kind of tongue in cheek, sarcastic humor we might expect from Shapiro. Unfortunately, I don't think having tried marijuana or cocaine a few times qualifies you as a drug expert. In fact, the argument could be made that it's just the opposite.
July 29, 2022
A well-researched and written history of the confluence of drugs and musical artists. Starting with the "Jazz Age" of the 1920s and winding up in the "Rave-y" 1990s, Shapiro covers a lot of ground, taking in the llives of the artists, legislation and (sometimes) the tragedies. The only drawback is that he touches on a lot of subjects very lightly - but that is understandable, given the scope of the book. I also think the 1960s deserved more than a single chapter - but again, a minor complaint. Excellent read - i highly (fnarr fnarr) recommend "Waiting For The Man".
October 5, 2017
All in all, an interesting read. I have to say that there seems to be no narrative flow whatsoever. What I had to do was look up all my favorite artists in the index, then page back to the sections surrounding them--all in order to keep my interest up. The writing also very much required a proofreader. Snoop Dogg's real name is not Tim Dogg--no matter how many times the author keeps ramming into the ground that it is!
January 7, 2020
Fantastic summary of available knowledge for like 1990 or whenever this dropped. It goes through all sorts of drugs in an objective AF kinda way.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews