Mescaline, Psilocybin, and Creative Artists
Stanley Krippner
an excerpt from "The Psychedelic State, The
Hypnotic Trance, and the Creative Act,"
a paper
published in Altered States of Consciousness, edited by Charles T.
Tart,
copyright 1969, 1972 by John Wiley &
Sons.
A number of creative people claim to have
benefited from psychotherapy which utilized psychedelic drugs. Actor Cary
Grant attributed "a new assessment of life" to LSD (Gaines, 1963). Blues
singer Ronnie Gilbert, in 1964, was mired in a deep depressive state from
which she found it impossible to break free. In desperation, she entered LSD
therapy and, during the following six months, went through 20 psychedelic
sessions. Frequently, Miss Gilbert and her psychiatrist went for walks in the
park or visited art galleries and churches.
During one
stroll through the park, Miss Gilbert felt a "sense of life all around me; I
looked at trees for the first time, really looked at them." She recalled that
"everything seemed so rich and so intense." This spontaneous experience (which
was not chemically induced) hastened her progress and therapy soon terminated.
Several years later she remarked, "I've been turned on to life and have never
been so happy."
Miss Gilbert's psychiatrist commented.
"Ronnie was lucky. She was one of the people who have been able to work
through lifelong problems in a few sessions, and there is no reason why the
good results shouldn't stick. Not everybody gets as much out of the
experience. She was also lucky because she came into therapy before federal
restrictions clamped down on it" (Gaines, 1963).
Only five
major research projects in the area of psychedelic drugs and creative
performance have been reported and most of these have been described by the
experimenters as "pilot studies" rather than full-scale experiments with
conclusive results. L.M. Berlin et al., (1955) investigated the effects of
mescaline and LSD upon four graphic artists of national prominence. There was
an impairment of finger-tapping efficiency and muscular steadiness among the
four artists, but all were able to complete paintings. A panel of art critics
judged the paintings as having "greater aesthetic value" than the artists'
usual work, noting that the lines were bolder and that the use of color was
more vivid. However, the technical execution was somewhat impaired.
The artists themselves spoke of an increased richness of imagery and of
pleasurable sensory experiences. One said, "I looked out of the window into
the infinitely splendid universe of a tiny mauve leaf performing a cosmic
ballet." Another spoke of "light falling on light."
Frank
Barron (1963) administered psilocybin to a number of highly creative
individuals and recorded their impressions. One of Barron's subjects stated,
"I felt a communion with all things." A composer wrote, "Every corner is alive
in a silent intimacy." Barron concluded, "What psilocybin does is to...
dissolve many definitions and... melt many boundaries, permit greater
intensities or more extreme values of experience to occur in many dimensions."
Some of Barron's artists, however, were wildly enthusiastic
about their apparently increased sensitivity during the drug experience only
to discover, once the effects wore off, that the production was without
artistic merit. One painter recalled, "I have seldom known such absolute
identification with what I was doing nor such a lack of concern with it
afterwards." This statement indicates that an artist is not necessarily able
to judge the value of his psychedelically inspired work while he is under drug
influence.
McGlothlin, Cohen, and McGlothlin (1967) made an
intensive study of 72 volunteer graduate students following a preliminary
study (1964) which involved 15 subjects. (In the preliminary study, no
significant changes in creativity were noted following a 200 microgram LSD
session; a number of creativity tests were given before the session and one
week after the session. However, some significant changes were reported on
anxiety and attitude tests.)
A large battery of
psychological tests was administered prior to a series of three 200 microgram
LSD sessions, and again at intervals of two weeks and six months following the
third session. Among the tests in the battery were three art scales, a measure
of artistic performance, a test of imaginativeness, a test of originality,
four tests of divergent thinking, and a test of remote associations.
Three groups were created: an experimental group receiving
200 micrograms of LSD per session, a control group receiving 25 micrograms of
LSD per session, and another control group receiving 20 milligrams of an
amphetamine per session. As there were no systematic differences between the
two control groups at the end of the study, they were combined for purposes of
comparison with the experimental group.
The most frequently
reported change in the experimental group on a questionnaire filled out after
six months was "a greater appreciation of music"; 62 per cent of the subjects
made this assertion. The increase in number of records bought, time spent in
museums, and number of musical events attended in the post-drug period was
significantly greater for the experimental group. However, the subjects'
scores on the art tests did not show a significant increase; the authors
concluded that the data "do not indicate that the increase in aesthetic
appreciation and activities is accompanied by an increase in sensitivity and
performance."
On the questionnaire filled out after six
months, 25 per cent of experimental Subjects felt that LSD experience had
resulted in enhanced creativity in their work. However, the creativity tests
showed no evidence to substantiate this subjective report for the experimental
group as a whole or for those claiming greater creative ability.
The other tests in the battery produced provocative results in regard
to personality variables and the taking of LSD. The authors reported that
"persons who place strong emphasis on structure and control generally have no
taste for the experience and tend to respond minimally if exposed. Those who
respond intensely tend to prefer a more unstructured, spontaneous,
inward-turning (though not socially introverted) life, and score somewhat
higher on tests of aesthetic sensitivity and imaginativeness. They also tend
to be less aggressive, competitive, and conforming."
On the
one measure of artistic performance used (the Draw-A-Person Test), the LSD
subjects showed a significant decrease after six months.
Zegans, Pollard, and Brown (1967) investigated the effects of LSD upon
creativity test scores of 30 male subjects chosen from a group of volunteer
graduate students. Upon arrival, the first battery of tests was given and
certain physiological measures (blood pressure and pulse rate) were taken. A
dose of LSD equal to 0.5 micrograms per kilogram body weight was added to the
water of 19 subjects randomly selected to receive the drug; the other 1 l
subjects did not receive LSD. After ingestion (of the drug), the subject was
escorted to a lounge where he relaxed for two hours. Immediately prior to the
second half of the test battery (which consisted of alternate forms of the
same tests previously given), the physiological measures were repeated. The
battery of tests included a measure of remote association, a test of
originality for word associations, a test for ability to create an original
design from tiles, a free association test, and a measure involving the
ability to perceive hidden figures in a complicated line drawing. A
tachistoscopic stimulation task was also included; this determined speed of
visual perception.
When the creativity test data were
investigated, it was discovered that the LSD group did significantly better
than the control group on the re-test for originality of word associations (a
modified form of the Rapaport Word Association Test). Although most other
comparisons favored the LSD group, no other results were statistically
significant. The authors concluded that "the administration of LSD-25 to a
relatively unselected group of people for the purpose of enhancing their
creative ability is not likely to be successful."
A further
analysis of the data demonstrated that the authors were able to predict
physiological reactions to a significant degree of accuracy on the basis of
previously administered personality tests. It was also noted that the LSD
subjects (although doing significantly better than control subjects on the
word association test) made their poorest showing on those tests requiring
visual attention (e.g., the tachistoscopic task, the tile design test, the
hidden figures test). It was suggested that LSD "may increase the
accessibility of remote or unique ideas and associations" while making it
difficult for a subject to narrow his attention upon a delimited perceptual
field. As a result "greater openness to remote or unique ideas and
associations would only be likely to enhance creative thought in those
individuals who were meaningfully engaged in some specific interest or
problem."
The Institute of Psychedelic Research of San
Francisco State College employed mescaline in an attempt to facilitate the
creative process (Fadiman et al., 1965; Harman et al., 1966). The subjects
were professional workers in various fields, who were instructed to bring a
professional problem requiring a creative solution to their sessions. A number
of them had worked for weeks or months on their chosen problems without
success. After some psychological preparation, subjects worked individually on
their problem throughout their single mescaline session. Virtually all
subjects produced solutions judged highly creative and satisfactory by
practical standards.
Two of the five cited studies suggest
that unselected graduate students cannot expect an increase in creative
ability as a result of their participation in an LSD experiment. On the other
hand, creative workers in three studies utilizing psychedelic drugs showed an
enhancement of creative functioning. The results must be regarded as tentative
until additional work has been done in this field and until a greater control
is exerted over the many variables present. (footnote)
NINETY-ONE ARTISTS
During 1967, in an attempt to
discover the types of psychedelic drugs being used illegally by artists, as
well as the subjective opinions of the users, Krippner (1967) surveyed 9l
artists who were reputed to have had one or more "psychedelic experiences."
Among the 91 were an award-winning film-maker, a Guggenheim Fellow in poetry,
and a recipient of Ford, Fulbright, and Rockefeller study grants in painting.
A remarkably large number of the artists surveyed (93 per
cent) agreed with a broad definition of the "psychedelic artist" and 8I per
cent felt that the term could be applied to them personally. It was concluded
that the "psychedelic artist" is one whose work shows the effects of
psychedelic experience usually, but not necessarily, chemically induced. The
work may have been produced as a result of psychedelic experience, during
psychedelic experience, or in attempt to induce a psychedelic experience. In
addition, the work may remind someone of a previous psychedelic experience or
it may be used to facilitate psychedelic experience brought about by something
other than the work of art.
Of the 91 artists in the survey,
100 per cent reported having had at least one psychedelic experience. When
asked if they had ever taken a psychedelic substance, 96 per cent answered
"yes" while 4 per cent answered "no."
Of the chemical
substances, LSD was mentioned by more artists than any other drug, followed by
marijuana, DMT, peyote, mescaline, morning glory seeds, psilocybin, hashish,
DET, and yage. A few artists had tried Kava-Kava, ibogaine, bufotenin, Ditran,
the amanita muscaria mushroom, and the Hawaiian wood rose. One artist reported
experimenting with STP, a powerful and long-lasting drug manufactured by an
"underground chemist" in California while several others had toasted and
smoked the inside of banana skins, usually with extremely mild and
inconsequential results. A few artists claimed to have obtained psychedelic
effects from substances generally not considered psychedelic benzedrine (an
amphetamine or psychic energizer), opium (a narcotic), ritalin, kinotrine,
amyl nitrate, and nitrous oxide.
The artists surveyed were
asked if their psychedelic experiences (chemically as well as non-chemically
induced) were generally pleasant. An unqualified "yes" response was given by
91 per cent of the group while 5 per cent gave a qualified "yes" response. In
the latter cases, it was stated that some of their initial "trips" were
unpleasant but that their later experiences were pleasurable. One artist
answered this question negatively and three others did not respond.
When the artists were asked, "How have your psychedelic experiences
influenced your art}" none of them felt that their work had suffered as a
result of psychedelic experience, although some admitted that their friends
might disagree with this judgment. Three per cent of the artists stated that
their psychedelic experiences had not influenced their work one way or the
other, The others cited a number of effects which fell into three broad
categories: content, technique, and approach. In most cases, the artists
reported effects that fell into more than one category.
Seventy per cent of the group stated that psychedelic experience had affected
the content of their work, the most frequently cited example being their use
of eidetic imagery as subject matter.
Fifty-four per cent of
the artists surveyed said there had been a noticeable improvement in their
artistic technique resulting from their psychedelic sessions; a greater
ability to use color was the example mentioned most frequently.
Fifty-two per cent of the artists attributed a change in their creative
approach to the psychedelics. Frequently made was the claim that psychedelic
experience had eliminated superficiality from the artists' work and had given
them greater depth as people and as creators. Some referred to their first
psychedelic experience as a "peak experience," as a turning point in their
lives. "My dormant interest in music became an active one," said a musician,
"after a few sessions with peyote and DMT." Another said that a psilocybin
experience "caused me to enjoy the art of drawing for the first time in my
life."
The impact of psychedelic experience upon an
individual was illustrated in the case of Isaac Abrams, one of Krippner's
subjects. In an interview, the artist stated that "psychedelic experience has
deeply influenced all aspects of my life. It was an experience of
self-recognition, under LSD, which opened my eyes to drawing and painting as
the means of self-expression for which I had always been seeking. During
subsequent experiences, many difficulties, personal and artistic, were
resolved. When the personal difficulties were solved, energy was released for
the benefit of my art."
Upon graduation from college, Abrams
got married, toured Europe, and went to work selling furniture. "I had been
taught," he said, "that the most important things in life were to look neat,
act nice, and make money. Yet, I knew that something was missing. There was
something to do that I wasn't doing. I had a sense of mission but no idea what
the mission might be."
Abrams was offered mescaline by a
friend but turned it down. Several years later, in 1962, he was offered
psilocybin and decided to give it a try. On Washington's birthday, Abrams and
his wife took psilocybin. Abrams watched the ceiling whirl, turned off the
lights, and realized for the first time that during all the years of his life
he had been behaving "like a person who had no mind."
Abrams
enjoyed his psilocybin experience and a few months later had another
opportunity to try mescaline. "We took it in the country and it was
beautiful." His next psychedelic experiences were with marijuana; once again,
these were pleasant and positive in nature.
The inner life
having been opened up by these episodes, Abrams thought that he might discover
his "life's mission." The search was in vain. He sold more furniture. He wrote
a play. He entered graduate school, but this was not for him and he dropped
out.
Early in 1965, Abrams took LSD. During his session, he
began to draw. "As I worked," he recalled, "I experienced a process of
selfrealization concerning the drawing. When the drug wore off, I kept on
drawing. I did at least one ink drawing every few weeks."
Abrams attended art classes to learn about technique and materials. His wife
went to different classes, took notes, and passed on the information to her
husband. The skills developed quickly and he began to paint.
Abrams entered psychoanalysis with a well-known psychoanalyst who specialized
in the creative process. The artist mused, "Analysis helps me to mobilize the
psychedelic experience and externalize it. I think any individual can go just
so far on his own. At some point he needs a spiritual teacher or guru. A good
psychoanalyst can be a guru.
"For me," Abrams continued,
"the psychedelic experience basically has been one of turning on to the life
process, to the dance of life with all of its motion and change. Before 1962,
my behavior was based on logical, rational, and linear experience. Due to the
psychedelics, I also became influenced by experiences that were illogical,
irrational, and non-linear. But this, too, is a part of life. This aspect is
needed if life is to become interrelated and harmonious.
"Psychedelic drugs give me a sense of harmony and beauty. For the first time
in my life, I can take pleasure in the beauty of a leaf; I can find meaning in
the processes of nature. For me to paint an ugly picture would be a lie. It
would be a violation of what I have learned through psychedelic experience."
Abrams continued, "I have found that I can flow through my
pen and brush; everything I do becomes a part of myself an exchange of energy.
The canvas becomes a part of my brain. With the psychedelics, you learn to
think outside of your head. My art attempts to express or reproduce my inner
state." Abrams concluded, "Psychedelic experience emphasizes the unity of
things, the infinite dance. You are the wave, but you are also the ocean."
Krippner noted that he rarely had found artists among the
casualties of illegal drug usage, suggesting that an artist must stand
somewhat apart from his culture in order to create. "To invent something new,"
Krippner concluded, "one cannot be completely conditioned or imprinted.
Perhaps it is this type of an individual the person who will not be alarmed at
what he perceives or conceptualizes during a psychedelic session who can most
benefit from these altered states of consciousness."
Cohen
(1964) summarized the research data on creativity and the psychedelics by
stating, "Whether LSD does or does not increase creativity remains an open
question. No systematic research is available to help in finding an answer.
All that can be said at this time about the effect of LSD on the creative
process is that a strong subjective feeling of creativeness accompanies many
of the experiences."
(footnote) An additional study
(Janinger, personal communication, 1967) is being evaluated at the present
time. Fifty prominent artists painted a picture of a standard object (an
American Indian doll) before ingesting LSD. During their psychedelic sessions,
they again painted the doll. The 100 paintings are being evaluated on the
basis of several artistic criteria in an attempt to determine what type of
change took place as well as the artistic merit (or lack of merit) reflected
by the change. (back)