The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0553  Thursday, 8 March 2001

From:           William Sutton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 7 Mar 2001 18:05:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 12.0501 Weed Noted
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0501 Weed Noted

So the discussion is open again.

Oxenford with his fields of dope, Shakes the dupe with his pipes (no
officer they don't belong to me) and no real talk about the subject.
Let's stay away from the 'whoa dude' personification (a bit too Cannabis
Cup for my taste), besides some of those dudes are professors, teachers
and other professionals. I've met a few in coffeeshops here in the 'Dam.

So my question is meant to be taken seriously. Is there any evidence of
recreational drug use in the Elizabethan era? Or is medicinal use the
standard explanation?

Hallucinogenic mushrooms still sprout and are harvested twice a year in
parts of England so I would add them to the list of coca and hemp (which
btw is useless to get high on, only the female plants contain THC the
active ingredient). Surely our fore-fathers used, but does anyone
anywhere rail against it or advocate it?

Also is Stephanie suggesting he who should not be named, even
allusively, knew and used the herb? I once had a Poetry in Acting
teacher who described Shakespeare as being an hallucinogenic. He meant
the language and its effect.

I don't give a hoot either way if Shakespeare used or not. I'm curious
to know if there are any indications of recreational use. This question
has bothered me since I first read the 'drugs poison him that so fell
sick of you' line (sonnet 118, final couplet) whilst smoking some
Afghani black hash back in 1991.

Soberly yours,
William Sutton.

PS: My website is up at www.iloveshakespeare.com

Subscribe to Our Feeds


Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.