Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Philip Seymour Hoffman

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #26
    Philip Seymour Hoffman

    AB2 wrote: Anyway, a really tragic story. What the fuck was a rich, successful, peer-respected 47-year-old with a young family doing injecting himself to the gills with heroin?
    Do we have to go over this every time this happens? It's an addiction, an illness. It doesn't matter how rich, successful or well-respected someone is nor, tragically, how much they love their family and they love back in return. He was filling a hole that, unfortunately, he couldn't feel he could fill with that which the rest of us can. That is the nature of addiction.

    Completely forgot about him in "Charlie Wilson's War". Great film.

    Comment


      #27
      Philip Seymour Hoffman

      Well, either that or when you have fame, money and the respect of your peers, you realize that there's a much bigger hole left to fill than you'd thought possible.

      Comment


        #28
        Philip Seymour Hoffman

        I think it's fair to question the nature of addiction.

        Comment


          #29
          Philip Seymour Hoffman

          In what manner?

          Comment


            #30
            Philip Seymour Hoffman

            In the manner many are often labelled or label themselves as addicts without any objective proof they are and also, an implication they have no choice.

            Comment


              #31
              Philip Seymour Hoffman

              So do you want people to get themselves tested to ensure that the nomenclature they apply to their condition is 100% accurate? Or do we simply dispense with the concept of addiction because some people might not be real addicts?

              Now, I would entertain an argument which suggests that people with addictions cannot be absolved of all personal responsibility. If they try to make you go to rehab, a triple refusal is not a response that indicates personal responsibility.

              But sometimes events in life coalesce in such a manner that one's addiction (non-objectively unproven or officially diagnosed, Luke R) simply becomes stronger than the will to fight it.

              There have been reports of family problems in Hoffman's life in the time preceding his death. That kind of thing can create a massive hole in your life, no matter how successful you are in other domains. If you are predisposed to taking drugs -- alcohol, heroin, painkillers, whatever -- that is a time you are vulnerable to abusing them.

              Comment


                #32
                Philip Seymour Hoffman

                diggedy derek wrote: Thanks for that contribution Calvert..
                Aye. Nae bother , Tonto.

                Comment


                  #33
                  Philip Seymour Hoffman

                  I don't know if "filling holes in one's life" is the best metaphor here, because that that quite doesn't express how urgently one feels the need for the substance. It becomes a basic physical need like food or sleep.

                  Being alive feels awful without it. So the choice is to top oneself or to take another hit of whatever it is to level out and then hope for better luck tomorrow.

                  Perhaps people who can't understand that have never felt that kind of profound despair.

                  However, I don't understand denial. Surely addicts know they're addicts because they feel the overwhelming need for whatever it is. I suppose the refusal to go to rehab, etc, comes from a fear that sobriety is going to feel like they feel when they don't have whatever it is that they're addicted to. And, in a way, they have a point. As Thoreau wrote, "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." If the choice is between gradual oblivion or that, it's not too hard to see why many choose the former.

                  And, of course, "When you're on junk you have only one worry: scoring. When you're off it you are suddenly obliged to worry about all sorts of other shite." Other people have said more or less the same thing and, while I've never taken any illegal drugs, I can see the hard logic of that.

                  Comment


                    #34
                    Philip Seymour Hoffman

                    Perhaps people who can't understand that have never felt that kind of profound despair.
                    The vast majority of people commenting on this clearly have never felt that kind of despair. Hence the repetition of expressions like 'but he had a wonderful family, children, career, so much to live for', etc - which is an understandable but far too logical a response. As you suggest, the dependency on, and need to score junk doesn't operate within such parameters.

                    Comment


                      #35
                      Philip Seymour Hoffman

                      Reed John wrote: I don't know if "filling holes in one's life" is the best metaphor here, because that that quite doesn't express how urgently one feels the need for the substance. It becomes a basic physical need like food or sleep.
                      Oh, that's not what I was saying though, and certainly not that drugs "fill a hole". I was referring to people, like apparently Hoffman, who relapse after a long time of sobriety because certain personal circumstances have knocked their equilibrium.

                      Otherwise that was an excellent post, Reed.

                      Comment


                        #36
                        Philip Seymour Hoffman

                        Oh I see.
                        I didn't like the "fill a hole" metaphor, not because it's wrong, but because people use the same language to describe why they decided to take up cycling or some other life change. Something like that can change a person profoundly over time, but the decision is usually more gradual and deliberate than the decision to take up smack again.

                        I don't think many people decide to go out at 4 am looking for a shady character to sell them a bike to resolve their acute existential crisis. But then, I'm a simple country person and don't know the ways of the big city.

                        Why does a heroin overdose happen (if not deliberate, of course)? If one is injecting it into oneself, one is able to carefully measure how much is in the syringe. If one has done it many times before, what happens during the OD time that makes it go wrong? Or is there something different or especially polluted in that particular hit that makes it go wrong? 90% of what I know about heroin comes from Trainspotting, and yet in the scene where Renton ODs and Mother Superior just sticks him in a cab, it wasn't clear why he OD'd that time as opposed to any other. I haven't read the book in about 15 years so I can't recall if it was explained there.

                        Comment


                          #37
                          Philip Seymour Hoffman

                          Less "filling a hole" than "killing the pain", physical or emotional, from what I know.

                          Comment


                            #38
                            Philip Seymour Hoffman

                            Why does a heroin overdose happen (if not deliberate, of course)? If one is injecting it into oneself, one is able to carefully measure how much is in the syringe.

                            Doesn't matter how carefully you measure if you don't know what it is; it's not like it came from a pharmacist, although IT SHOULD HAVE. For instance, there were stories a few weeks ago about a new version cut with synthetic fentanyl. Don't think they know yet in this case.

                            I don't think many people decide to go out at 4 am looking for a shady character to sell them a bike to resolve their acute existential crisis.

                            I'll bet La Lanterne Rouge has.

                            Comment


                              #39
                              Philip Seymour Hoffman

                              Doesn't matter how carefully you measure if you don't know what it is; it's not like it came from a pharmacist, although IT SHOULD HAVE. For instance, there were stories a few weeks ago about a new version cut with synthetic fentanyl. Don't think they know yet in this case.
                              That probably explains it, then.

                              Comment


                                #40
                                Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                I think that Hoffman has been off heroin for a while and relapsed. This is a common cause of ODs where one's tolerance has been lowered due to being clean and they go back to their original dose.

                                However, I don't understand denial. Surely addicts know they're addicts because they feel the overwhelming need for whatever it is. I suppose the refusal to go to rehab, etc, comes from a fear that sobriety is going to feel like they feel when they don't have whatever it is that they're addicted to. And, in a way, they have a point. As Thoreau wrote, "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." If the choice is between gradual oblivion or that, it's not too hard to see why many choose the former.
                                in some way, your misunderstanding of denial sounds a bit simplistic but I think that the rest of your paragraph is equivocal enough that you're not being absolute in your view. I guess the issue is that, when you addicted to heroin (or anything), you aren't thinking straight.

                                There were a lot of "Fuck Heroin" remarks but am I right that, per capita of users, booze and fags still kill more people?

                                Comment


                                  #41
                                  Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                  When I say that I "don't understand denial," I don't mean that as a moral judgement. Not necessarily, anyway. It's not a rhetorical "what the fuck is wrong with you people" comment.

                                  What I don't understand is what makes some addicts deny they have a problem while others seem to be well aware of it.

                                  Some addicts call themselves drunks/junkies/smackheads and yet don't change because A) it's very hard B) they're afraid, perhaps with some justification, that life without the stuff will be even worse and we all have to die somehow.

                                  That makes sense, although it's tragic. I feel the same way about eating carbs. Which isn't to say that eating is as bad as drugs, but the basic logic feels similar.

                                  But others, apparently, deny there's a problem at all. To me, if anything I was doing to feel better involved sticking a needle of unknown cleanliness into my arm and spending lots of money on drugs of unknown provenance, I'd see those dangers - let along the brain, body, and life damage - as reason enough to be very worried. But many don't.

                                  Comment


                                    #42
                                    Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                    Bored of Education wrote: There were a lot of "Fuck Heroin" remarks but am I right that, per capita of users, booze and fags still kill more people?
                                    Different sort of deaths though. Cigarettes won't suddenly kill you like a heroin OD, and the deaths through acute alcohol poisoning are a fraction of the total attributable. Which makes ones reaction to it different. Logical? Maybe not. But emotional reactions also matter.

                                    Comment


                                      #43
                                      Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                      Reed John wrote: When I say that I "don't understand denial," I don't mean that as a moral judgement. Not necessarily, anyway. It's not a rhetorical "what the fuck is wrong with you people" comment.

                                      What I don't understand is what makes some addicts deny they have a problem while others seem to be well aware of it.

                                      Some addicts call themselves drunks/junkies/smackheads and yet don't change because A) it's very hard B) they're afraid, perhaps with some justification, that life without the stuff will be even worse and we all have to die somehow.

                                      That makes sense, although it's tragic. I feel the same way about eating carbs. Which isn't to say that eating is as bad as drugs, but the basic logic feels similar.

                                      But others, apparently, deny there's a problem at all. To me, if anything I was doing to feel better involved sticking a needle of unknown cleanliness into my arm and spending lots of money on drugs of unknown provenance, I'd see those dangers - let along the brain, body, and life damage - as reason enough to be very worried. But many don't.
                                      I think you've hit the nail on the head. Those of us who aren't addicts can't understand and think the dangers through which probably keep us away from heroin in the first place. I mean, I can't understand how someone would be addicted to gambling or prescription drugs but, you know, people are.

                                      Comment


                                        #44
                                        Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                        Janik wrote:
                                        Originally posted by Bored of Education
                                        There were a lot of "Fuck Heroin" remarks but am I right that, per capita of users, booze and fags still kill more people?
                                        Different sort of deaths though. Cigarettes won't suddenly kill you like a heroin OD, and the deaths through acute alcohol poisoning are a fraction of the total attributable. Which makes ones reaction to it different. Logical? Maybe not. But emotional reactions also matter.
                                        Oh, yeah, I get all that. However, the other issue is that, of course, there is the more positive view of alcohol and drugs due to the legality of them.

                                        Comment


                                          #45
                                          Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                          Heroin is also massively physiologically addictive, so those who are on it are having to deal with other issues as well as having a yawning void in the soul to fill. Although that would appear a more general point than one about this current story.

                                          Comment


                                            #46
                                            Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                            Aren't nicotine and alcohol more physically and physiologically addictive? Genuine question. I think I have read it in a book and everything.

                                            Comment


                                              #47
                                              Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                              Yeah, Janik's right on. You can be well aware of your addiction while denying it to everyone around you, and probably will be for practical reasons. And heroin's very easy to overdose on if you inject – you don't know exactly what you're taking [cause it's unregulated], it's not an incremental hit, and your tolerance varies according to how regularly you use.

                                              I'm sure it's delicious and everything but fuck me it looks hazardous, and a lot of hard work, from where I'm sitting. I feel very lucky not to have been attracted to it.

                                              More broadly, I think Sly and the Family Stone's 'Running Away' distils the psychology of addiction down to what's basically a dark children's song that anyone could understand. Imagine this being the voice in your head for the whole time you're in that state (often someone's whole adult life). Round and round and round:
                                              Running away to get away
                                              Ha ha ha ha
                                              You're wearing out your shoes
                                              Look at you, fooling you
                                              Making blues of night and day
                                              Hee hee hee hee
                                              You're stretching out your dues
                                              Look at you, fooling you
                                              Shorter cut is quicker but
                                              Ha ha ha ha
                                              Time is here to stay
                                              Look at you, fooling you
                                              The deeper in debt the harder you bet
                                              Hee hee hee hee
                                              Need more room to play
                                              Look at you, fooling you
                                              Another day you're farther away
                                              Ha ha ha ha
                                              A longer trip back home

                                              Comment


                                                #48
                                                Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                                Meanwhile, Charlie Sheen found alive...

                                                http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/201...tment-aged-48/

                                                Comment


                                                  #49
                                                  Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                                  This isn't bad.

                                                  http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/06/russell-brand-philip-seymour-hoffman-drug-laws

                                                  Comment


                                                    #50
                                                    Philip Seymour Hoffman

                                                    It shows the Brand's opinion is only worth garnering when he talks about something he actually knows about.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X