![]() ![]() He merely commented upon them from his own standpoint. That does not mean he did not grant others the right to their beliefs. His non-belief in religious illogic was true to his own philosophy. One cannot adhere to two contradictory ideas at the same time. Sackett: Diversity and religious belief are entirely different areas when it comes to tolerance. I’m not defending what he did, just trying to realize what might have driven him to do things the way he did. ![]() ![]() It had to have been maddening to be so creative and to have the product of your blood, sweat and tears hung out there for the world to love and the critics to tear apart… to have to defend yourself against the inevitable onslaught of nay-sayers. He had that kind of genius that people of his generation dealt with by turning to drug use such as alcohol and cocaine (oddly, for a long time in this country, cocaine was legal and alcohol wasn’t!). And I wouldn’t use the term “darker side.” I think he had some of those Hemingwayan demons that drove him to “self-medicate.” He might have benefited from prescribed drugs such as anti-depressants, but at what cost? Would it have dulled his mind? Was he an addictive type personality? I leave that to the psychologists to decide (although I do offer some of his doctors’ commentary in my book, for the record, to show that he was chemically challenged). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |