416
ROBERT COLES
two drugs that seem to inspire waves of panic and outrage in people
usually better able to control themselves and fall in line when it comes
to other matters, like war or poverty. The books are similar: each is a
compilation of essays by experts of one sort or another as well as
in–
terested observers; and each conveys an overall attitude of open-minded
interest and curiosity. Both offer space to writers who might be called
committed advocates of LSD or marihuana- and the latter drug has
had what might be called propagandists rather than advocates for a
long time. Yet neither of these books is without the serious, critical
analysis that in fact distinguishes them from a number of sensational or
hysterical books I have recently come across. (The "market" for books
and articles on drugs gets better with each police raid, each outburst
from a worried dean, doctor, politician or minister.)
The papers on LSD are primarily directed at interested psychiatrists.
The book has its origins in a conference held two years ago in Amity–
ville, New York. A number of physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists,
neurologists and psychoanalysts assembled from both sides of the Atlantic
to read and hear papers, then to discuss LSD as a hallucinogenic drug,
a pharmacological agent, a substance of interest to psychiatrists and one
used by them under a number of circumstances, from "ordinary" therapy
or analysis to the special kind of treatment usually required in the case
of alcoholics. The papers were edited by the well-known psychiatrist
Harold Abramson, and introduced by an eminently respectable and
thoughtful physician, Frank Fremont-Smith. (For years he headed the
Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation, one of the leading sources of support for
medical research in this country.)
In contrast,
The Marihuana Papers
are of much more diverse
origin. There are historical and anthropological essays that convey the
worldwide interest various forms of marihuana have been able to gen–
erate for centuries. There are "literary and imaginative papers" by
Rabelais, Gautier, Baudelaire, Paul Bowles, Terry Southern and Allen
Ginsberg, all enthusiastic spokesmen for the drug, though Baudelaire
had second thoughts toward the end of his life. Finally, a number of
doctors, pharmacologists and social scientists come forth to describe ex–
actly what marihuana does and does not do--and in the process show
how illogically and fearfully we in America have responded to the drug.
Both these books were published by the Bobbs Merrill Company, and
the mere fact that I must thank them for having the good sense and
willingness to make two books out of so many good and provocative
articles indicates the extent that intimidating and punitive scrutiny have
plagued the "drug scene"-and frustrated the honest efforts of those who
