I'm with the general conscesus here ... weed and alcohol. I DO have a question, though ... and bear in mind that I'm not really the creative, artistic type. Anyway, if it takes drugs to explore the mind and bring new things to his art (whatever that may be), how is somebody supposed to understand that work when: a) the creator's head is not in the same place as when he created the work b) the observer of the artwork more than likely has not experienced said drug and, if so, it doesn't mean that he was "there" where the artist was and is, therefore in no better position to understand the work. Does my question make sense to anyone? Maybe it will after you ingest a lil' sumpin' sumpin ... fo' shizzle.
Threaded Mode
