Professional Documents
Culture Documents
com
Research paper
Abstract
Background: The pleasures associated with the use of illicit drugs are rarely acknowledged in contemporary drug policy debates. Where they
are, these pleasures are almost always attributed to the specific physiological and/or sensory effects of individual substances.
Methods: Drawing on qualitative research recently completed in Melbourne, Australia, this paper argues that the pleasures associated with
illicit drug use extend well beyond the purely physiological to include a host of properly contextual elements as well.
Results: These contextual pleasures include the corporeal experience of space, such as the feeling of electronic music in a large night-club
space, or the engagement with natural and wilderness environments. Also important are a range of corporeal and performative practices, such
as dancing and interacting with strangers, which were reportedly facilitated with the use of different drugs.
Conclusions: This emphasis on the dynamics of space, embodiment and practice as they impact the contextual experience of pleasure, has the
potential to open up new ways of thinking about pleasure and its place in the mediation of all drug related behaviours. Greater understanding
of these relationships should also facilitate the emergence of new, context specific, drug prevention and harm reduction initiatives.
2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Pleasure; Drugs; Space; Embodiment; Practice; Youth
Introduction
Critical examinations of the nature and experience of
pleasure abound in the social sciences, yet remain strangely
uncommon in contemporary drug policy debates (OMalley
& Valverde, 2004). Whilst the pursuit of pleasure might stand
as one of the most obvious explanations for recent increases
in the incidence and prevalence of illicit drug use in many
parts of the world, attempts to understand the shifting phenomenology of these pleasures remain at the margins of most
drug policy discussions. Indeed, those who consume such
drugs routinely cite pleasure among their abiding motivations for use (see Fitzgerald, 2002; Levy, OGrady, Wish,
& Arria, 2005; Maclean, 2005; White et al., 2006), just as
researchers routinely prefer the more conventional analysis of drug related harms. To study the pleasures associated
with illicit drug use appears to remain too disreputable, too
unscientific, to merit systematic and sustained attention.
Where scholars have defied this trend they have almost
always deferred to the grim calculus of perceived risks
0955-3959/$ see front matter 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.07.003
and benefits in the instrumental analysis of marginal utility (Coveney & Bunton, 2003). Pleasure is here conceived of
as a good that is consumed only in those instances where
putative benefits outweigh any real or imagined risks; pleasure is thus the utility that describes the difference in these
calculations (Boys, Marsden, & Strang, 2001). Confined to
this instrumental logic, those few studies that have attempted
to clarify the positive value individuals derive from their
drug use, typically recast pleasure as benefit (White et al.,
2006), function (Boys et al., 2001) or felicity (OMalley
& Valverde, 2004). Drug use is, in this way, understood or
explained in functional terms as an ends oriented behaviour
rationally planned in order to achieve some discrete good,
for example, staying awake, enhanced sociability, closeness
with others and increased confidence (White et al., 2006,
p. 139). Yet such functional explanations fail to describe the
distinctly pleasurable elements of these moments the corporeal and sensory joys that are experienced in and through
the enhancement of sociability, closeness or confidence. This
focus on benefits and functions actually reveals very little
about pleasure and very little about the sensory experience
of illicit drug use.
This approach also tends to essentialize pleasure in treating it as the distinct outcome of distinct acts for example the
incidence of social interaction or the consumption of a single white tablet (Coveney & Bunton, 2003). With respect to
this single tablet, any sensate pleasure that might be derived
from the consumption of this pill is conventionally assumed
to obtain in the pharmacological constitution of the substance
itself (Malbon, 1999; Measham, 2002). Hence, to consume
3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in the form
of the street drug ecstasy is to experience the intense psycho physiological pleasures associated with the temporary
alteration of the function of the neuro-transmitters serotonin,
dopamine and norepinepherine and the series of sympathetic
reactions associated with this sudden increase in neural activity (Morton, 2005, pp. 7981). Pleasure, in a sense, resides
in the tablet and is activated as the tablet is metabolized in
the body and the brain.
As Coveney and Bunton (2003) argue, this approach
presents two enduring challenges for those interested in
the study of pleasure, each deeply inter-connected. First it
presents a seemingly exhaustive account of the nature of
pleasure framed as an epiphenomenal outcome of some temporally prior act of commission or consumption. Pleasure is
a fleeting state produced as the direct result of some other
activity like eating, walking, drinking, love-making and so
on. Pleasure thus follows from the prior action in a simple relationship of cause and effect. With the temporal and
instrumental logic of this relationship so seemingly straightforward, further explanations regarding the nature of pleasure
become redundant. Second, and more significantly, conventional understandings of pleasure regard the experience as
wholly subjective and corporeal in nature pleasure is something that is felt and experienced and so exists beyond the
reach of language and/or cognition. We cant in effect talk
about pleasure as it is actually experienced and so its more
scientific analysis becomes moot. Whilst some psychologists
have attempted to overcome this problem with the development of various hedonistic scales, the subjective nature of
these self-report data attracts sustained criticism (Mellers,
1995). Together these two factors continue to frustrate efforts
to develop more sophisticated understandings of the nature
and experience of pleasure.
These factors presumably account for the paucity of sustained attempts to examine the various pleasures associated
with the use of illicit drugs. Meanwhile, a seemingly endless
stream of scholarly papers is produced each year documenting the myriad risks and harms associated with this drug use,
with few scholars pausing to consider the obvious conundrum thrown up by this work why is the prevalence of
most types of illicit drug use continuing to rise in the face of
an overwhelming scientific consensus regarding the putative
harmfulness of this behaviour? Given the wide coverage this
evidence typically receives in the mainstream media and its
inclusion in the curriculum of school based drug prevention
programs and population wide public health initiatives, it is
difficult to sustain the proposition that most people remain
385
386
387
you feel like your whole bodys just connected. Like every
part is fitting together with the music.
Whats important here is the understanding that drugs
like ecstasy and cocaine are rarely the focus of ones recreational activities in these settings, but rather are consumed in
order to facilitate or enhance some other activity like dancing, social interaction, conversation, sex and so on (see also
Duff, 2005a; Malbon, 1999). Social interaction was found
to be particularly important with many participants speaking
of the manner in which ecstasy use tends to open one up
with peers and strangers. When consumed among friends,
participants agreed that ecstasy use often encourages deeper
and more intimate conversations, sometimes on topics that
friends rarely if ever discuss together. One young man from
another focus group noted:
You feel so much closer to the people that youre friends
with. Like when Im out and because Ive taken drugs I feel
so much more comfortable saying I love you and its like
in my family its not the easiest thing to say. But I feel that
I can say to really good friends of mine now, even when
Im straight, I love you so much as a friend and thats
because of pills.
One participant even went so far as to describe ecstasy
use as a means of express bonding with friends. She added
that,
Like everyones so busy now with work and boyfriends and
whatever and no ones ever got any time to talk. Like we
never just catch up. We dont go out so much anymore but
we still like getting high so the drug thing is really about
that connection that we have. Like now well have a pill
and just really talk and have fun. Its like were cramming
a months worth of conversations into one night.
Other participants noted that they typically felt more
spontaneous, more up for it whilst using ecstasy or
amphetamines and that these drugs make social interactions
with friends and strangers more fluid and dynamic. The
appeal of connecting with random strangers in bars and
clubs was reported to be a particularly enjoyable part of
ecstasy and amphetamine use:
Like, I love being able to, just going into a club and talking
to, you know, random people. Like you just come up and
sit next to them and go, hello, how are you? Theyll be
like, youre pilling arent you? and youll be like yeah
and theyll be totally cool just talking. I mean you cant
normally do that just going out you know?
This sense of connection was common to many participants accounts of their own use of these drugs: connecting
with friends, connecting with strangers and often-times connecting with oneself. Indeed, many youth described taking
388
Whats important here is the idea that club spaces are experienced as intensely energetic and uplifting spaces, but more
importantly, that the use of illicit substances provides a means
of more effectively connecting with this energy.
Mostly I think the high with drugs like ecstasy is the way
it enhances the environment youre in, like if its a club or
someones house or the beach whatever. Pills just help you
to connect with your surroundings which a lot of clubs, um
like the decor is really set up for that you know.
389
390
lasting some 23 h, in which ones sensations and perceptions remained in a heightened state of arousal (see also
Beck & Rosenbaum, 1994). Many described this plateau as
more pleasurable than the initial rush, given that it was less
intense and so one was able to function more normally and
engage in a wider range of activities. One respondent stated:
Like sometimes when youre peaking you feel like you
cant get off the couch right! Like youre just feeling too
good and too wasted. So after that parts finished thats
when you normally feel like you can do things again like
dance or chat or whatever.
These qualitative reports reveal once more the rich array
of distinctly physiological pleasures associated with the use
of party drugs like ecstasy, cocaine and amphetamines.
Yet at the same time, they also reveal the limitations of a
strictly physiological account of such drug related pleasures.
Research respondents spoke again and again about the contextual elements of these pleasures. In each instance, settings
and contexts were described as somehow enhancing or intensifying the experience of these drug related pleasures.
Yeah, Summer Daze (festival event) 2004 was amazing, we
had this really great coke. And it was sunny and the park
looked so good with the city behind it and all my friends
dancing around me. The DJ was playing these really great
party tunes and I felt just complete clarity listening to the
music and hearing every detail of it, feeling it rush through
my body.
This quotation highlights the intrinsically contextual element of many drug related pleasures. Its not just the use
of cocaine that describes or explains the nature of this young
mans experience on this day it is clearly part of a richer and
more intensive complex of sensations and experiences (see
also Fitzgerald, 1997). This conclusion, once again highlights
the need for a more expansive understanding of the spatial
and performative dimensions of all drug related pleasures to
compliment conventional physiological understandings.
391
References
Beck, J., & Rosenbaum, M. (1994). The pursuit of ecstasy the MDMA
experience. New York: State University of New York Press.
Becker, H. (1953). Becoming a Marihuana user. American Journal of Sociology, 59(3), 235242.
Boundas, C. (2005). Intensity. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary. New
York: Columbia University Press.
Boys, A., Marsden, J., & Strang, J. (2001). Understanding reasons for drug
use among young people: A functional perspective. Health Education
Research, 16(4), 457469.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of Sex. New
York: Routledge.
Coveney, J., & Bunton, R. (2003). In pursuit of the study of pleasure: Implications for health research and practice. Health: An Interdisciplinary
Journal for the Study of Health, Illness and Medicine, 7(2), 161179.
DeLanda, M. (2005). Space: Extensive and intensive, actual and virtual.
In I. Buchanan & G. Lambert (Eds.), Deleuze and space. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Duff, C. (2003). The importance of culture and context: Rethinking risk and
risk management in young drug-using populations. Health, Risk and
Society, 5(3), 285300.
Duff, C. (2004). Drug use as a practice of the self: Is there any place for
an Ethics of Moderation in contemporary drug policy? International
Journal of Drug Policy, 15(5/6), 385393.
Duff, C. (2005a). Charging and Blowing Out: Patterns and cultures of
GHB use in Melbourne, Australia. Contemporary Drug Problems, 32(4),
605653.
Duff, C. (2005b). Party drugs and party people: Examining the Normalization of recreational drug use in Melbourne, Australia. International
Journal of Drug Policy, 16(3), 161170.
Duff, C. (in press). Towards a theory of drug use contexts: Space, embodiment and practice. Addiction Research and Theory.
Fitzgerald, J. (1997). An assemblage of desire, drugs and techno. Angelaki:
Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, 3(2), 4157.
Fitzgerald, J. (2002). A political economy of Doves. Contemporary Drug
Problems, 29(1), 201239.
Fitzgerald, J., Louie, R., Rosenthal, D., & Crofts, N. (2000). The meaning of
the rush for initiates to injection drug use. Contemporary Drug Problems,
26(3), 481503.
Fox, N. (1999). Postmodern reflections on risk, hazards and life choices.
In D. Lupton (Ed.), Risk and sociocultural theory: New directions and
perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fox, N. (2002). What a risky body can do: Why peoples health choices are
not all based in evidence. Health Education Journal, 61(2), 166179.
Levy, K., OGrady, K., Wish, E., & Arria, A. (2005). An in-depth qualitative examination of the ecstasy experience: Results of a focus group
with ecstasy using college students. Substance Use and Misuse, 40(12),
14271441.
392
OMalley, P., & Valverde, M. (2004). Pleasure, freedom and drugs: The
uses of pleasure in liberal governance of drug and alcohol consumption.
Sociology, 38(1), 2542.
Petersen, A., & Lupton, D. (1996). The new public health: Health and self
in the age of risk. Sydney: Sage.
Thrift, N. (2000). Still life in nearly present time: The object of nature. Body
and Society, 6(3/4), 3457.
Thrift, N. (2003). Space: The fundamental stuff of human geography. In S.
Holloway, S. Rice, & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key concepts in geography.
London: Sage Publications.
Thrift, N. (2004a). Performance and performativity: A geography of
unknown lands. In J. Duncan, N. Johnson, & R. Schein (Eds.), A companion to cultural geography. London: Blackwell.
Thrift, N. (2004b). Intensities of feeling: Towards a spatial politics of affect.
Geograska Annaler Series B, 86(1), 5778.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). (2005). UNODC
Annual Report 2005. Vienna: UNODC.
White, B., Degenhardt, L., Breen, C., Bruno, R., Newman, J., & Proudfoot, P. (2006). Risk and benefit perceptions of party drug use. Addictive
Behaviours, 31(2), 137142.
Zinberg, N. (1984). Drug, set, setting: The basis for controlled intoxicant
use. Yale: Yale University Press.