WE TAKE DRUGS FOR TWO MAIN REASONS; EITHER
TO RESTORE ourselves to the condition we regard as normal
--to cure infections, and to take away pain; or to release
us from normality--to enable us to feel more lively,
or more relaxed; to alter our mood, or our perceptions. It
is with this second category (of drug use, not of drugs; the
drugs themselves may be the same) that I am concerned.
For some reason, there is no generally accepted colloquial
description. 'Narcotic' is quite familiar, but it has
acquired a pejorative tinge, and in any case it should properly
be used only about a drug used to induce drowsiness
or stupor. For a while 'dope' did service, but by the
time Tom Lehrer was singing about the old dope peddler
spreading joy wherever he went, it had begun to slip out
of favour, and is now more commonly used to describe
what is taken by athletes to improve their form, or given
to racehorses to upset the odds. I have stuck simply to the
term 'drugs'.
I have used words like 'addiction' in their colloquial
rather than their more specialised clinical sense; and I
have tried to avoid the jargon of the pharmacologists, except
when quoting it. Their term for the mood-altering
drugs, 'psychotropic', has established itself; but they have yet to agree on how best to describe a drug used to alter
perception. The term most often employed, 'hallucinogen', is both ugly and misleading, as the experiences are
not necessarily hallucinatory; but the commonest alternative,
'psychotomimetic', is even uglier and more misleading,
as the experiences do not often resemble psychosis.
'Phantastica', which Louis Lewin tried to
popularise, has not caught on; nor, mercifully, have 'psychotogenic' or 'psycholitic'; and Humphrey Osmond's
'psychedelic' has shifted its meaning, in popular usage. I
have preferred 'vision-inducing'.
There is another category of drugs which I had intended
to include; aphrodisiacs. I found, though, that virtually
all the drugs known to man, not to mention all sorts
of foodstuffs and drinks which are not ordinarily regarded
as drugs, have had the reputation at one time or another
of stimulating sexual appetite, or improving sexual performance.
As the same drugs, at other times, have often
had the reputation of diminishing desire, and spoiling performance,
it is doubtful whether the category of aphrodisiac
can be accepted, except subjectively.
I have also dealt only in passing with the economic consequences
of drug use. For centuries, a vast acreage has
been given over to growing the plants which provide the
raw material of drugs. Huge sums have been spent on processing,
distributing and retailing the finished products,
and on providing the accessories, from public houses to
hubble-bubbles. States have extracted immense revenues
from drug duties and used them to pay for everything from
social services to guided missiles. Obviously the influence
of drugs on the world's economy has been incalculable;
but to deal adequately with this aspect of the subject would
require another, and a very different, book.
The reasons for some other omissions will be found in
the section on sources. But there is also one inclusion,
which I find sometimes causes surprise. Alcohol is clearly
a drug; the drug, of our civilisation and many before. But it has also long been consumed, often primarily, as a beverage.
I have dealt with attitudes to drink, and legislation
designed to control drinking, only when they have been
inspired by fears of its effects when used as a drug.
Softcover, 5¼" x 8¼", 250+ pages
Perfect-Bound