Jon, For what it is worth, my 73 year-old memory, in the field since 1975, recalls the SHAD story as you present it. And for one who prefers to be known as "historian" rather than "addiction scholar," I very much appreciate your approach and that of the courageous scholars who formed it. Two cents, please? ernie kurtz On Mar 11, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Jon Miller wrote: > Regarding David Trippel's analysis of the SHAD website -- > > From the start, the Social History of Alcohol Review (now the Social > History of Alcohol and Drugs) was biased towards "Social History." > The history of this term extends back to before I was born, but it's > my sense that in the mid-1960s through the 1970s, "social history" > was often regarded as a kind of history that leaned into sociology > and primarily concerned itself with social structures and social > change. Temperance agitation in the U.S., as well as the practice of > drinking alcoholic beverages, with their long, shifting, and well- > documented history, looked like a pretty good subject for "social > historians." Perhaps some of the Alcohol and Temperance History > Group members on this listserv can correct my sketchy sense of what > was originally meant by "Social History" when the group newsletter > first appeared as the Social History of Alcohol Review. No doubt > that the term has always meant different things to different people, > especially in a group as international as the ATHG / ADHS. And I > also think that "sociology" is not always present in "social > history" when people think about the term today. Regardless, it > should be noted that, first and foremost, the unifying interest or > main "bias" of the group was a historical one. > > As for the categories on the website, I can't speak for Matt or > David, but when I was writing a lot of those, I filed whatever > historical scholarship and news that I found -- in some cases, news > reports that explained the recent history of something -- by region. > The idea was to emphasize the international scope of the > organization and the scholarship. Categories like "addiction" were > created for historical work that did not have a region, and then I > believe we continued to use the tag whenever the word was included > in the title of a work. So "Addiction in Ancient China" began to go > into both "Addiction" and "China," though at the beginning all such > work went only into "China." I believe that if someone were to look > at the entries, and not just at the categories or tags, they would > find information about the history of addiction, problem drinking, > and control in a whole lot of the regional categories. > > Jon Miller > >> On the addiction studies issue - >> Of the 270 or so "Categories" in the right-hand column of the ADHS >> website (albeit most are countries and substances), there are (I >> think, correctly) only 3 that nominally have to do with addiction >> (those 3 all start with the letter "a"), if you count Temperance >> that would make 4 topics. While this may just be a nominal >> feature, it seems the Social History of Alcohol and Drugs does not >> substantively incline towards "addiction" or "problems" or >> "control". A survey of the saved entries could prove this wrong, >> but that may be evidence of media bias, not ADHS blog editing biases. >> >> From within, the SHAD (and ADHS) discipline (research and teaching) >> seems influenced in the direction of an "addiction", "problems", or >> "control" overview by ideological preferences, accepting >> historiographical biases, addiction treatment beliefs, and getting >> WOD funding. >> >> From without, It seems growth of the SHAD discipline is influenced >> by material from various related disciplines including those >> mentioned before such as medicine, biology, psychology, political >> science, government, economics, religion, literature, as well as >> sociology and history. >> >> But there are also fields that don't come to mind as quickly that >> produce SHAD related material as research and teaching "intrude on" >> them, too, to use Robin's phrase, such as philosophy, marketing, >> business, retailing, wholesaling, international studies, various >> art disciplines, music, food sciences, agriculture, and chemistry. >> I wonder how many academics or professionals are members of this >> list who properly "intrude" into these areas? >> >> Here are three topics I find interesting: >> 1 - How SHAD weathers the various forces influencing it as it grows. >> 2 - Discovering and understanding the historiographical biases of >> the past and present SHAD. >> 3 - Deconstructing socially prevalent ideologies around alcohol and >> drugs, both past and present. >> >> Dave >> >> On Mar 9, 2009, at 4:37 AM, Robin G W Room wrote: >> >>> Dear Alan -- >>> I'm sympathetic with your general line, but you veer off-course >>> concerning >>> the new minimum pricing initiative in Scotland. the best evidence >>> is that a >>> higher price pushes down the amount of drinking by those who are >>> very heavy >>> drinkers or addicted at least as much as it pushes down drinking >>> by light >>> drinkers. The idea that addiction is so strong that of course >>> price will have >>> no effect is attractive but, on balance, wrong. >>> As for the place of an alcohol and drug subspecialty in standard >>> academic >>> disciplines, we are indeed marginal to all -- from sociology and >>> economics to >>> psychiatry and biology. Literary studies is just one more in this >>> crowd. >>> Kettil Bruun, an alcohol/drug sociologist, once remarked that this >>> opened great >>> opportunities for us as researchers -- we could intrude on other >>> disciplines' >>> territories without them feeling affronted. I myself have taken the >>> opportunity along the way, for instance, to revisit literary >>> studies (a field I >>> was in through an MA) to write about the famous generation of >>> American "literary drunks", and so on, without encountering >>> complaint. >>> But I recognise this is easier to do if you embark on a career >>> in the "soft >>> money" grant-writing mode, or can get a "hard-money" research job >>> in the field, >>> than if you are seeking a teaching job defined around a >>> department's teaching >>> needs. >>> Besides the shared stigma with the clients, the problem is that >>> alcohol/drug problems fall between the cracks of the major >>> professions and >>> social institutions in western societies. >>> Robin >>> >>> >>> On 2009-03-08, at 13:35, Alan Joyce wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Michael & John, >>>> This marginalisation of 'addiction studies' also impacts on the >>>> medical and >>>> related 'caring professions' with GP's in the UK who work with >>>> drug and >>>> alcohol users frequently incurring the unwarranted disciplinary >>>> attentions >>> of the >>>> General Medical Council, the odium of their peer's and fellow >>>> professionals. >>>> Sadly the marginalisation of drug and alcohol users is reflected >>>> in the >>>> marginalisation of those who work with them and- script- them. >>>> In the early 2000's for an all too fleeting, brief and heady >>>> period that saw >>>> the creation of the National Treatment Agency, the recognition >>>> of 'service >>>> user', drug user advocacy and other user/carer groups, it >>>> appeared that >>> health >>>> and harm reduction would finally be brought in from the cold and >>>> form the >>>> axis around which UK Gov drug and alcohol policy (albeit the >>>> alcohol policy >>> was >>>> very much an after thought- tacked on late in the day) - would >>>> turn. >>>> Groups such as the 'Substance Misuse Management in General >>>> Practice' working >>>> party started to train, support and create an ethos where drug >>>> and alcohol >>>> treatment formed part of general practice and 'normal' health >>>> care. One >>> could- >>>> ideally- get ones methadone script from your family GP at the >>>> same time as >>>> getting treatment for other health problems. It looked like >>>> users, carer's, >>> & >>>> drug and alcohol treatment would finally be released from the >>>> ghetto's to >>>> which they (post Brain 2) had been consigned. >>>> Sadly & in my view tragically this proved to be a false dawn as >>>> drug and >>>> alcohol policy became increasingly subordinated to the criminal >>> justice/social >>>> 'engineering' agenda's of the day as compassion fatigue set in and >>> politicians >>>> and rather un-civil servants found- to their surprise- that >>>> methadone was no >>>> panacea for grinding poverty, economic and educational >>>> marginalisation, >>>> teenage pregnancy, rising levels of poly drug(notably crack, >>>> cocaine ) and >>>> alcohol use, homelessness & the blight of post Friedmanite >>>> economic theology >>> that >>>> persists to this day. >>>> The multitude were becoming increasingly intoxicated and the >>>> spectre of the >>>> horde becoming truly revolting- as well as increasingly >>>> 'repugnant'- stalked >>>> the ruling caste & all who suckled at the manifold teats of the >>>> global >>>> leviathan. >>>> Anxiety's about the 'emergent' under class, the benefit prole's, >>>> became >>>> increasingly evident and political, media, social and other >>>> commentary from >>> the >>>> ruling caste betrayed not only anxieties but a deep loathing- >>>> disgust- >>> hatred- >>>> for this 'newly discovered' urban poor.(The rural poor were >>>> 'discovered' a >>>> little later). >>>> The media simulacrum created a land where crime and criminality >>>> was >>>> everywhere- no street-no home- no car- no property- no person- >>>> was safe from >>> the >>>> avarice of the non working poor. >>>> Further- the children of this new 'caste' of 'ZEK's were a demon >>>> brood- >>>> muggers, violent, illiterate, druggies, hoodies, knife wielding, >>>> 'shameless',(currently one of the best UK TV drama's- and one >>>> that re- >>> humanises those who >>>> have been de-humanised)- they epitomised everything that caused >>>> the middle >>>> classes and all 'decent' people fear, anxiety, loathing & >>>> distress. Sadly it >>> seems >>>> that Marcuse's maxim - that crime was a form of resistance to >>>> colonisation >>>> by Capital- albeit one without 'class consciousness'- was >>>> forgotten. >>>> What's more in a society where conspicuous consumption >>>> (Thorstien Veblan?) >>>> reigned supreme & celebrity 'culture' was the great levelleras >>>> well as the >>>> lifestyle to which we all should aspire, the 'new' poor wanted >>>> it all and >>> wanted >>>> it now! Deferred gratification- simply not possible on a minimum >>>> income-could be dispensed with- 'take what you want-take what >>>> you need- & >>> wait for no >>>> one' . Need a flash car- why not take one- no need for keys-just >>>> a sprung >>>> centre punch and that BMW is yours for the taking. >>>> In response to these anxieties a whole raft of legislation was >>>> enacted >>>> against the new 'enemy within'. The Prime Ministers son found >>>> drunk, >>> disheveled & >>>> disorderly in Trafalgar Square makes headline news but gets a >>>> police car >>>> 'taxi ride' home. A child born of lower parentage could expect >>>> no such >>> tender >>>> mercy- instead the evil spawn of the new poor could expect a >>>> drug test, >>> an 'Anti >>>> Social Behaviour Order', Drug Treatment & Testing orders, and >>>> the full >>>> majesty of the law to be applied to every minutiae of their >>>> waking, >>> sleeping, >>>> lives. >>>> The children of the Elite- the likes of David Cameron, Oliver >>>> Letwin, et-al- >>>> could run amok in Oxbridge restaurants- buying the acquiescence >>>> and >>>> complicity of the restaurant owners, abused minimum waged staff- >>>> etc- with - >>>> literally- showers of cash as they quaffed champagne, took >>>> cocaine, and >>> prepared for >>>> a life in politics and power.(Allegedly of course). >>>> Such behaviour on the part of the ruling elite, of the celebrity >>>> culture, >>>> was hi-jinks and jolly japes- good for a media story or three >>>> but no cause >>> for >>>> hand wringing, existential angst, or legislative might. >>>> But as for the children of those living in 'social housing', >>>> those whose >>>> parents, parents were the unemployed of Thatchers brave new >>>> Britain, whose >>>> parents were the children of that generation of the >>>> dispossessed, this was a >>> cause >>>> for crimminalisation and concern. So we have seen over the past >>>> decade the >>>> 'crimminalisation' of childhood, childhood is a problem to be >>>> controlled, >>>> cajoled, managed, teenagers a threat to be monitored, contained >>>> and >>> constrained, >>>> clinically and socially pathologised. >>>> Surplus to the requirements of Globalisation and transnational >>>> Capital these >>>> children of the poor are unwanted- of no value and therefore >>>> deemed to be >>>> valueless- to have no values- amoral- these kids were 'feral' >>>> and merited >>>> treating as such. This much the media pundits, the academic's >>>> and their >>> political >>>> masters could agree upon- what small comforts the new lumpen >>>> prole's could >>>> enjoy- cheap booze- fags-heroin-cheap cocaine-cannabis- was >>>> something 'they' >>> ( >>>> do I mean the ruling caste or the prole poor?) could not afford >>>> nor allow. >>>> So we have seen the revival of the same old litany & demonology >>>> of old- the >>>> 'Crack Epidemic', the 'Junky Scum', 'The Brew Crew', all are >>>> redolent of the >>>> 'whorey' old mythology of past times- when demon Gin was >>>> 'Mothers Ruin' and >>>> opium just a habit- but one that the ruling caste with their >>>> ether kits, >>>> silver syringes and morphine, afternoon teas for the 'lady's who >>>> lunch', >>> could be >>>> indulged in but one that spelt peril & ruination for the >>>> Victorian poor. >>>> Berridge and Edwards study of opium use in 19th century England is >>> illuminating- >>>> the intrepid investigative reporters who ventured into the >>>> 'fenlands' of >>> East >>>> Anglia, the public houses of the East End of London where the >>>> cheapest beer >>>> was one potentiated with opium, have an uncanny resemblance to >>>> the reportage >>>> of the 'dirty' habits and 'vices' of the modern day poor. >>>> Well- that's gone somewhat off topic and I've - in the words of >>>> Nietzsche : >>>> "Forgotten my umbrella"- that is the thrust of what I intended >>>> to convey- so >>>> I'll call it a day- and sign off by sounding my alarm at the >>>> folly of the >>> new >>>> Scottish Governments policy of Alcohol related Harm Reduction by >>>> pricing. >>>> Why my alarm- the idea- as I understand it- is to link the price >>>> of alcohol >>>> directly to it's 'strength' per UK measure. SO a 500 ml can of >>>> 'Carlsberg >>>> Special Brew' (despite it's association with the poor it is >>>> rumoured to have >>>> been made for Churchill & was a favoured 'tipple' of this well >>>> known boozer)- >>> >>>> which contains 4.5 UK units of alcohol will attract a higher >>>> 'levy' than a >>> 500 >>>> ml can of "Carlsberg Lager" which has about 2 UK units per can. >>>> The theory being that this will compel the urban and rural poor >>>> who favour >>>> strong alcohol and are therefore at greater risk of alcohol >>>> related harm to >>>> modify there alcohol use and induce them to drink weaker & >>>> cheaper booze & >>>> brands. >>>> Sadly- I fear that such measures will see those most at risk and >>>> those >>>> already alcohol dependent re-prioritise their budgets- with >>>> their favourite >>> tipple >>>> coming ahead of such trivial needs such as food, heating, rent, >>>> energy >>>> bills, clothing, health, etc. >>>> As for the 'binge drinking masses' - if they can afford to drink >>>> 'out on the >>>> town & tiles' then they will continue to be able to do so- de- >>>> facto- they >>>> are not the lumpen prole- but those who are relatively >>>> privelaged to be in >>>> waged or even well paid- employment- either that or they are >>>> pretty good at >>> crime >>>> with the attendant risks 'coming with the job's". >>>> I'm not aware of any evidence base that suggests pricing per >>>> unit will >>>> reduce alcohol related harm- indeed I suspect it may serve to >>>> aggravate it >>> as the >>>> cost of booze prohibits expenditure on a decent diet and other >>>> things that >>> in >>>> themselves serve to reduce the harm of alcohol and/or other drug >>>> use. >>>> Best wishes: Alan Joyce. >>> >>> >>>> Michael, >>>> I concur with the wisdom already expressed on this point. What >>>> you are >>>> missing is this: Alcohol and Addiction Studies does NOT share the >>> respectability >>>> of what might be called Diversity Studies, the political >>>> correctness of >>> which >>>> more or less guarantees space at professional conferences and in >>>> hiring >>>> pools. Nor does our field qualify as “Identity Scholarship,” >>>> another >>> approved >>>> approach. During the heyday of DIONYSOS, the MLA consistently >>>> rejected any >>>> and all proposed panels in A&AS; perhaps it still does. >>>> Certainly I would >>> not >>>> advise a new PhD in English to come out nakedly and solely in >>>> our field. It >>>> ’s prudent to regard doing A&AS – at least in an English >>>> department -- as a >>>> post-tenure luxury. The reasons for this situation are well worth >>>> considering, but they are, unfortunately, among those things in >>>> academe (and >>> elsewhere) >>>> currently filed under “mum’s the word”: not to be spoken of out >>>> loud in >>>> public, candor being potentially hazardous to one’s professional >>>> health. >>> For >>>> the sake of younger scholars and of our field, I sincerely hope >>>> I’ve gone a >>>> little paranoid in these remarks, that I’ve bleakly overstated >>>> the case. I >>>> welcome contrary testimony. >>>> John W. Crowley >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: Alcohol and Drugs History Society [mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>> (mailto:[log in to unmask]) ] On Behalf Of Michael Carolan >>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:37 AM >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> To: [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask]) >>>> Subject: Re: literary drinking >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As a new member of the forum (and, believe it or not, a former >>>> student of >>>> Professor Wedge’s), I appreciate all the recommendations of >>>> creative work in >>>> here. I wanted to share what a veteran professor had to say >>>> about the field >>> in >>>> a professional recommendation he wrote for me recently after I >>>> developed >>>> addiction studies courses at UMass: >>>> “Addiction is an area of study not unlike African American >>>> studies or Native >>>> American studies, and possibly all the more relevant not least >>>> because it >>>> not yet an established area of study.” >>>> As I enter the severely shrunken academic job market, I am left >>>> wondering >>>> why all I see are openings for minority, third world, gay and >>>> lesbian >>> studies >>>> but none for alcohol, mental illness, and/or addiction? Am I >>>> missing >>>> something? >>>> With deep respect, >>>> Michael Carolan >>>> >>>> >> > >