Well since we’re onto the enormous pink elephant in the room…
Shane was immensely difficult. And chaotic and exasperating and all the other things. When I knew him in the 80s he was already a pretty derelict drunk. He was also using heroin, crack, speed (as mentioned here) etc . and obviously his substance abuse and addictions drove him to all the awful behaviour native to that state.
But people like Shane, hugely gifted and able to produce art even in the depths of addiction, people like that are given support and forgiveness. The clan meshes around them to create a safety net so that they can continue creating art. Victoria was with Shane for a very long time. She knew what he was, and struggled with him, for him, against him, but she stayed with him. I think her loyalty and love helped others around him to continue loving him, standing with him.
Im always astonished at how people in the grip of addiction can nevertheless produce art. It‘s because of the support they get from people nearby who value the art they produce. Material support, help, shelter, the necessaries, as well as repeated chances, forgiveness, and allowance of their foibles. Everyone knew Shane would never be sober. If you wanted him to be different to what he was, jog on. If you could accept him, then you’d be agreeing to the responsibilities that entails : take care of him, shore him up.
Other addicts in their orbit who don’t produce art, who aren’t creative, they get lost on the verges, ditched without a backward glance.
Shane would probably have died long ago if he hadnt been shored up by love. That’s true of a lot of artists. I know plenty of dead junkies. Of the addicts I‘ve known (and know) who’ve stayed alive, almost all of them are artists of some kind
Some of them are inherently pricks and they get forgiven over and over again. Some ( like Shane) are essentially decent, which makes it easier to keep forgiving them, continue supporting them.
Despite how disrespected artists are by the state, as a society we feel a deep foundational respect for our poets. We can’t help it, and we can’t stop supporting them in whatever way we can, even when they fuck up over and over. (Fame and celebrity can muddy that pure respect, corrupt their value into currency.)
I hate the way alcohol is deified in our society. Idiotic jokey greetings cards, T-shirts, mugs, endless fucking tat all normalising and celebrating our absurd toxic relationship to booze. It’s so malign and it’s so fucking puerile.
Maybe it’s just me, my age or something, but I’m not seeing this “drunken genius“ thing. Surely no one thinks his genus came from being drunk? I don’t see anyone making that claim. And I highly doubt that today‘s youngsters, who seem to look down their noses at us oldies who still use booze to unwind, would give one single respectful glance at Shane MacGowan.
I raised a glass to Shane, and would again. I did think twice about it for exactly the reasons
lazythursday said. But then, can you imagine Shane sober and straight? Long term, I mean. It was never going to happen. It was so much a part of him.
I can’t see how we can honour Shane and his poetry without including the excesses and the booze somehow, somehow. I reckon no alcoholic would try to justify their own habit by pointing at Shane and saying “Well if it’s alright for him….” because it was so obviously his talent, his gift, that defined him, not the habit. The booze was the frame, it wasn’t the picture.
www.theguardian.com
Look at this post on Facebook
