© Borgis - New Medicine 4/2006, s. 112-121
*Vingender Istvan
The space and time dimensions of drug addicts´ world of living
Semmelweis University Faculty of Health Care
Department of Social Studies on Medicine, and Addictology
Summary
Summary
Drug users are set apart from society in many respects. The main field of their status is that drug user thinking is at the same time the cause and consequence of the drug user´s way of life. The drug user´s behaviour is a representation of an idiosyncratic worldview, which cannot find adequate forms of expression amid the options culturally endorsed by modern society. Drug consumer behaviour, despite its hidden and secretive (albeit increasingly more open) nature, materializes in a societal space and in a network of social relations. At the same time, it may be asked how, to what extent and in what forms drug users interact with society.
We have examined two areas of drug-user thinking: temporal dimensions of their world of living, and their drug consumption characteristics in the social space. The conclusion is that the structure and pattern of drug-user thinking according to its temporal and spatial dimensions is basically different from the normal population´s way of thinking, which makes work focused on prevention and rehabilitation difficult and challenging.
Drug users are set apart from society in many respects. On the one hand, they constitute an independent community or social configuration with a peculiar internal structure, specific interpersonal relations, unique channels of mobility and trends, as well as unusual factors of inequality. They also form a markedly autonomous subculture, given that they possess values, customs, needs, behavioural norms and moral imperatives different from those recognized by society. Furthermore, it may be assumed that drug consumers also deviate from society with their idiosyncratic structure of thinking and special cognitive schemata. Their interpretative models of the world, their environment and themselves, as well as the logical order of their everyday thinking – in terms of our hypothesis – are specially structured. (Values, opinions, worldviews, perceptions, memory and other components of knowledge, i.e. the invisible forms of behaviour which make human life predictable and calculable (Elias 1987) [1], are treated as part of everyday thinking.)
The alterity of their thinking and worldview may be explained by the fact that, on the one hand, it is an obvious condition of the way of life and life strategy drug users choose and undertake. On the other hand, drug use itself – stemming from its essence – destines one for an atypical way and culture of thinking. Thus, drug user thinking is at the same time the cause and consequence of the drug user way of life. A basic criterion of intervention targeting the complex problem of drug use is to understand the structure and process of drug users´ thinking and worldview. Below, we shall make an attempt at outlining the structure of the sociological aspects of the thinking characteristic of drug use, thereby describing and delineating the nature of the cognitive world of this social group. (Jenkins, C. 2006) [2].
The phenomenological approach to drug use
From a sociological point of view various approaches and interpretations are available to examine this question. Out of these we opt for the branch of the development of sociology which started with Edmund Husserl´s phenomenological philosophy, continued with Alfred Schütz´s and then Peter Berger´s and Thomas Luckmann´s epistemological sociology, and finally attained its synthesis in Jürgen Habermas´s concept of communication theory. The scientific concepts of these authors offer appropriate applicability in several aspects. Firstly, they formulated, described and even thoroughly analysed that phenomenon in which, in our view, drug users´ way of thinking may be most efficiently examined sociologically. This is called the world of living. Secondly, in their contribution they created those concepts and categories which appear to be indispensable for the successful completion of the present task. Thirdly, the mental effort exerted by each of them had a central motive, which we can also identify with and consider to be indispensable: how can a common denominator for social reality and the problems of personal existence be found?
Phenomenology, as represented chiefly by Husserl3, offers a unique research stance, which has been largely adopted by epistemological sociology. Its kernel is the creation of a unique type of consciousness and mental state, which Husserl christened ´parenthesization (suspension) of ourselves´ (epoché). According to Husserl, the process of learning needs to be liberated from the object of learning, primarily because the former is whereas the latter is not part of consciousness. Hence evolves phenomenological sociology, which is self-reflexive and, therefore, concentrates on the process of learning and not the elements of reality. Becoming acquainted with the world of drug users may be based only on this type of self-reflection, since all of his or her characteristics to be uncovered are meaningful from the point of view of and in relation to the person examining him or her, and not in themselves. An important component of phenomenology is that it ascribes a highlighted role to ”reports”, in Schütz´s wording [4], and ´narratives´, in which not the facts or information contained therein but the narration and reports (Mantza 1969) [5] are to be examined.
Another significant characteristic of the phenomenological approach is that social reality is understood not as a world extraneous to and independent of us (although the raison d´ętre of such an interpretation is not questioned), but as the successive performance of subjects instead. The aim of phenomenological inquiry is to reveal the idealisations and symbols through which one creates one´s own world in everyday life, for this is the main point: everyday thinking not only reflects on the world but also constructs it.
In our case the main point may not be related to anything else either: drug user society, on the one hand, lives in social reality (this may be proved by a number of factors; at best, the underlying evidence is that drug user behaviour itself may be seen as a reflection on a particular social world); on the other hand, it also moulds it, and in quite a versatile way. Through its presence, behaviour and existence it poses challenges that constantly compel the rest of society to respond. At the same time, it is hardly questionable that the world lived through, felt and subjectively experienced by the drug user is not identical with those of others, as it concerns a dimension of reality organized by, for, as a result of, etc. drugs.
It must be treated as a methodologically important thesis that the meanings concealed in the background of various social activities should never be invested with objective or metaphysical content reflecting the truth or a sense of correctness. In a phenomenological sense, a way of thinking is never true or false, correct or incorrect but linked to one or another kind of socio-existential circumstance or stemming from it (Schütz 1984 [6], Mannheim 1995) [7].
The phenomenological approach, in the analysis presented below too, promises to enable us to unveil the everyday life-related individualistic interpretations (Jack Douglas 1984) [8] peculiar to drug users instead of empirical based social indices, objective social facts, conceptualized researcher qualities, previously devised scientific categories and social circumstances.
Drug use as a socio-existential condition
Drug user behaviour is a representation of an idiosyncratic worldview, which cannot find adequate forms of expression amid the options culturally endorsed by modern society. Thus, drug use is in effect a consequence of a unique interpretation of the world. At the same time, it should not be overlooked that this arbitrary understanding of the world is also a consequence of the physiological but, more importantly, of the psychological and social effects of drugs, in so far as these chemical substances alter the basic parameters of physical, spiritual and social perception. They create a special filter between the environment and the drug user´s perception, resulting in an image of reality that might never be experienced under different circumstances (Clinard, M. B., Meier, R.F. 2004) [9].
The drug user´s lifestyle may be divided into two basic phases: the state while under the influence of drugs and the intermediate stages. (Ratios between the two may be extremely differential, and they are not always separated.) Our hypothesis is that the above-mentioned dual relation between drug use and an idiosyncratic understanding of the world works for both states – even if not in the same way. The explanation lies in the fact that drug use is not simply a condition which, analogously to some technical equipment, may be switched on and off by the input of the drug and upon the termination of the effects of the drug. On the contrary, drug use is a way of life, or even a lifestyle, which in a complex manner determines every minute and the entire living space of its subject (including those life motions in which the drug is not directly present, albeit differentially). Beyond direct spiritual experiences, the drug defines the consumer´s social context, social embedding and orientation regarding emotions, attention, cognition and perception to an equal extent. Drug use is a complex sociocultural status (Adler, A. – Adler P. 2003) [10].
Two essential structural elements of their world are the orientation of ”here” and ”now”. Their world is in the present tense, although it is open to the past as well. The world of drug users is particularly marked by this kind of present-orientation. Drug use itself presupposes and even necessitates thinking in the present: living one´s life in the present tense. This may be corroborated by two reasons. On the one hand, the direct effect of drugs and the effort aimed at acquiring them are restricted to a well-defined time interval. On the other hand, viewing drug use in broader dimensions of time might raise some dysfunctional arguments and aspects too. The construction of antecedents and consequences would obviously eclipse the experience of euphoria, happiness, comfort and legitimacy which could definitely be enjoyed by means of thinking and interpretation in a narrow time cross-section. Against such dysfunctionality drug addicts protect themselves with their present-orientation (Montanari, L. 2006) [11].
In conjunction with drug use, the condition of being tied to a particular place possesses a similar validity. For drug users – naturally with varying intensity – locations relevant from the point of view of the acquisition and consumption of drugs represent the most important living space. They live their lives in this space and attribute significance to it primarily when they become interested in certain situations of decision and choice making. Being tied to a particular place – although it may obviously involve several factors (the environments of procurement, consumption and socio-subculture) – means considerable confinement for drug addicts, provided it is sufficiently homogeneously structured (i.e. drug-specific). At the same time, it is also exclusive as it segregates one from other social spaces. Drug users are not interested in appearing in locations irrelevant from the point of view of drugs, and, because of the registered social label (´deviant´), their non-conformist conduct and behaviour, as well as some of their possible external gestures betraying their drug use, mostly they are not in a position to do so (Levinthal, C.F. 2005) [12].
Therefore, drug users´ living space, as well as their cognitive world, are firmly attached to the present time and to a place. This circumstance produces their natural attitude, which is the basis of the drug addict´s world. If that world is object constructional, i.e. it designates the elements of reality deemed to be desirable (perceived as real) by itself, the question how actively the natural attitude characteristic of drug users is constructed and to what extent it is a world marked by suffering may arise. To put it differently: is the world closed in terms of time and space created by the people concerned or by society? Is exodus or ostracism the typical social position of drug users? From the above it may be concluded that it is both. The abstinent part of society segregates the society of drug addicts. Simultaneously, the population of drug users typically also strives for separation and an autonomous world.
The spatial and temporal medium of drug user behaviour
According to Berger and Luckmann [13], in the most immediate space surrounding the individual there are the objects associated with bodily activities. The usage of drugs is a prominent form of bodily activities, since the input of the drug, the manner of drug usage, as well as the aim of the usage are markedly body-centred. At the same time, primarily through dreams and transcendentalisation, the drug is an important instrument, form and engine of mental activities. Not to mention the fact that drug usage in nearly all of its components is connected to the world of desires, aspirations, yearnings and ideals, and hence to dreams experienced while one is awake. In this sense, for drug users drug consumption may be a self-explanatory everyday activity, because the drug defines the scope of influence, decision- and choice-related competence, interests and dependence which provides the backbone of the consumer´s everyday life.
Besides the spatial structure of the world of living, a similarly important question is its time dimension. Natural time is not necessarily the terrain of this world. Reality that has been lived through is situated and takes place more in intra-subjective time than in physical time. At the same time, no-one can completely detach him- or herself from natural time. The everyday world of living is characterized by the fact that natural time dominates one´s way of living, since life events take place in objective time frameworks, irrespective of the experiences of the time that has been lived through. This is, however, not so in drug addicts´ world of living, where intra-subjective time has a considerably greater power over physical time than in ”civilian” life. This is a result of two causes. On the one hand, drug user lifestyle is closely linked to the rhythms and timetables dictated by drug usage, and, thus, parallel to that, lifestyle components pertaining to other time dimensions are engulfed outright. On the other hand, the effect of drugs can permit a unique perception of time, which often eliminates the validity of physical time.
The time frameworks of the world of living are also peculiar in the community of drug users in the sense that in them time is compartmentalized differently from the outside world. In the world of living intra-subjective time usually has no section boundaries but it develops as an infinite and permanent current, which may not be divided into segments. To employ Henri Bergson´s (1925) [14] concept, time is duration (”durée”). Duration may only be perceived and lived through subjectively, but it is not measurable and lacks any units of measurement. The historical sequence of drug consumption is primarily encompassed by the time that has been lived through and felt, which exclusively belongs to the drug user, and no-one else can perceive it, or not in the same way as he or she can. Furthermore, in the course of drug use a few life situations emerge that designate a sharp division line in the drug addict´s life path. These pregnantly segregate earlier and later events (the first instance of drug use, becoming addicted, the first attempt to quit, the last attempt to quit, the first intravenous application, the revelation of the consequences of drug usage, etc.). Such situations carrying challenges of decision making are the borderline situations of a drug career (Jaspers 1989) [15].
Examination of the social dimensions of space and time
Drug consumer behaviour, despite its hidden and secretive (albeit increasingly more open) nature, materializes in a societal space and in a network of social relations. At the same time, it may be asked how, to what extent and in what forms drug users interact with society. Therefore, an important question concerning the condition of being embedded into societal existence is whether the interaction between the drug user and the abstinent society works – in so far as this dichotomy does exist in reality. The two main dimensions of societal existence are the cross-sections of time and space. The question, therefore, is whether drug consumers are situated in the same time and space dimension as the abstinent society or if there are temporal and spatial forms extraneous to the majority of society, which constitute the frameworks of their lives. To formulate the problem differently, it may be asked what the time and space structure of the autonomous reality forms that drug addicts construct for themselves in cognitive, emotional and active ways is like. We tried to give an answer to this question in the context of a qualitative research project which was conducted among 200 people who regularly consumed illegal substances. The method of the investigation was the structured deep-analyzing interview.
Temporal dimensions of the drug user´s world of living
The features of temporal dimensions are worth examining in two aspects:
1. The intra-subjective temporal dimensions of the drug addict´s way of life
2. The integrity of temporal dimensions of the drug addict´s way of life
In our research, during the analysis of interviews recorded with drug users, these questions were divided into the following factors and constituents, and the following was observed (Vingender, 2003) [16]: (In the course of the analysis qualitative and quantitative methods were used as well. As the qualitative investigation step simply reading, searching for meanings, and text understanding were applied, and as the quantitative method a context analysis was adopted with an earlier elaborated vocabulary of categories. In that case the analyzing program "Atlas” was used to count words, terms, idioms, and their special context.)
What does the narrative of the drug-user way of life originate in (pre-world)?
It is not usual that the period preceding their birth would appear in drug users´ thinking. In their world of living there is no prior life, no ready-made world of living, no objective situation. They do not think of the parents´ and grandparents´ world and lives without them; they are not important or are not known by them. This means that they do not consider their own lives to be organic parts of societal life (including micro-social life story); their existence and presence, in their thinking, are without any antecedents, accidental and unique. They characteristically represent themselves and do not presume any sources or determination in their lives, because the period prior to their lives does not receive any interpretation.
The earliest life experience
The first significant events of their lives appear considerably later compared even to the commencement of the narration of their life stories (childhood, adolescence). This implies that ”things from the beginning were done by them and they were not something that happened to them”. The typically passive (childhood) age-related cycle and situation do not play a role in their thinking. As they could know about these primarily from the accounts of parents and others of the older generations, it is plausible to assume that these accounts failed to reach them or they are not relevant for them. The life story emerges ”out of nothing”. From this point of view, it is also an interesting question how the commencement of drug usage is interpreted by them: not as fateful but as an accident-like, inadvertent, ”slip-up-like” event, which is devoid of any reasons, causes and antecedents.
Where does the life story narrative begin?
Compared to the childhood beginning of reconstructed life story, drug users usually preface their own drug-related mythology with a considerably later period. The period preceding the drug user life cycle is divided into moments and specific points in time, whereas the drug addict´s life cycle assumes a process-like character. The switch is acute and unambiguous: it is not occasioned by differences in the ability to recall but by relevance attribution.
Fragmentation of the recounted time
The life path of drug addicts is thus composed of the following time cycles: lack of antecedents – irrelevant early childhood – relevant abstinent cycle divided into moments – relevant and process-like drug user lifestyle. This way, the life story is markedly interrupted, expressly fragmented, but, at the same time, the edges of individual periods are obscure in the sense that the aspects and structure of fragmentation are palpable.
The time units of life path narration
The time segments of the drug user´s world of living are small. Drug users typically view their lives in short periods. The process-like nature of periods that are temporally closer becomes more evident in the fact that events become more frequent and sometimes even contiguous. However, even in that case, they are still isolated movements and not events that are connected. The drug addict´s career story is saturated by experiences embracing, at most, days or hours, rather than complex, comprehensive or lengthy stories. As a result, a situation-based world of living is definitely characteristic of drug users.
The durational (durée) and metaphysical facets of intra-subjective time
In drug consumers´ thinking intra-subjective time is strongly over-represented. Metaphysical time has become obscure, uncertain and, above all, controversial. They can reconstruct events and phenomena unequivocally lasting several days in minutes and, possibly, hours and, vice versa, they sense short cycles as long-lasting intervals. This contradiction is not resolved or it does not present them with any problems. It seems more likely that the latter is the case. Intra-subjective time is granted priority, because real time does not represent any compulsive force from their point of view. Regarding its significance, the role of drug usage as a form of behaviour and habit, as well as of the temporal segmentation of the effects as determined by the symptoms, is a salient feature. Both appear as unmistakably internal times.
Jumps in time
One of the characteristics of drug user career stories is time travel. They do not contain any coherent or logical time map. Accounts and the epoch that has been lived through are split into sections by detours, forward and backward jumps, ”lost time dimensions” and blurred time units. There is typically no trace of the patterns of crystallized time dimensions either. The perspective ”past – present – future” often collapses, prior time contexts are not interpreted, and thinking about the past typically lapses into the present or even the future unnoticed and in a logically unjustified manner.
Time orientations
There are no attestable definite time preferences. The relevance domain of drug-user life path narratives is overall. There are no important, interesting or meaningful periods for them. Time is one-dimensional from the perspective of their lives, thus appearing to be totally independent of them. They are not only unable to shape it (except for their peculiar and personal experience in this respect) but they do no want to/cannot evaluate or assess it differentially or ascribe some degree of importance to it. Each period is equally important to them, i.e. time is, practically, an irrelevant dimension of their lives.
The time parameter of borderline situations
Borderline situations are numerous in the lives of drug addicts. Therefore, they are protracted in one´s life story and, in a sense, are permanent. Hence, they are not particularly situation-related. Because of their large number, their significance and relevance are also moderate. Conversely, these borderline situations are recurrent: the same fateful events occur several times in the course of one´s life story in a repetitive pattern. All this unequivocally points to the fact that borderline situations in the context under investigation form a cause-and-effect relationship: turning points in one´s life story powerfully generate further turning points.
The temporal concordance of life events
The time of the most important ”reconstructed” events appears only obscurely and is surrounded by uncertainty. Whereas the events themselves are clear and acute, and their structures, characteristics and even messages are precisely articulated, their temporal dimensions are lost: neither the drug consumer narrator nor the outsider ”audience” can identify the temporal embedding of the events. In the world of drug addiction the temporal sequencing of the most important life events as well as the boundaries between time barriers become blurred.
The time volume of prominent life experiences
An ambivalent picture is formed of these characteristics of the drug addict´s life story: the duration of the ”reconstructed” events is defined only in approximate values: years, age cohorts, e.g. ”while I was living with my grandparents”. They also provide an exaggerated but self-confident idea of the beginnings and ends of important events, and of their possible interruptions.
The ”phenomenon – process – event” structure of the narrative
A remarkable phenomenon-centeredness, i.e. an abstract, ideological interpretation, may be discerned. Although the starting point of the narratives is nearly always constituted by concrete events, the final message typically bears general significance: a predominantly inductive way of thinking (albeit not necessarily consciously). The verbalisation of experience, however, does not have an ”external direction”. In the narratives of drug addicts the morales are virtually always addressed to the narrator him- or herself. This testifies to the fact that drug consumers tend to create their own experiential and mental world. Support from others in this respect does not play a role (is absent or is not relevant) in their thinking.
The time of the beginning of the current period in the person´s life
Past and present usually become indistinguishable. There is no boundary between them, nor are there two periods in the life story. ”Yesterday” is part of the past, too, but what is at most ´today´ is not detached from the present, either. The present and the past are the conditions and situations recently lived through and everything that is behind them. Thus, drug addicts typically treat things that have happened to them in a non-historic way. The events that have taken place still seem to be manageable for them; they think that they can still influence the events that have transpired.
The expected time of the beginning of the next period in the person´s life
Future, in half of the cases, is not distinct. Similarly, as the past is assimilated into the present, the future appears in the same way. The future is also part of the present and is not separated from it, just like the past. In the other half of the cases, however, the future is definitely segregated: another period in the person´s life or another life is prognosticated, which is definitely detached from the present – occasionally even to an excessive degree – but its beginning is always unknown, intangible and uncertain.
The time interval of the planned (imaginary) future
There is virtually no information about it. At best, only a general idea is outlined: ”in the remainder of his/her life”, ”in the future”, ”then”, but there are no concrete time boundaries or time prognosis. (This applies not only to a possible intention to quit: social relationships, work, studies and anything else are affected alike.) The future has no temporal extent, as it is not a concrete programme, nor even a definite idea, but an intangible wish or expectation instead, which needs to be fulfilled in order for the drug addict to meet some external norms.
Boundaries between the past and the present
In view of the above, it has not existed, as there has been no transition. The older ”things” continue into the more recent ones unnoticed: the next period is always determined by an organic change, i.e. the previous condition and period in the person´s life. There are no outstanding events, nor is there a turning point between past and present; it ”has just happened like that”.
Time boundaries between the present and the future
In contrast, the transition between the present and the future is designated by an assumed boundary, the content of which is undefined, though. The drug addict´s narrative does not describe the process of the transition, but the latter is presented as a virtual moment. The transition, in their world, is explosion-like and unstructured. In the narratives the cause, the triggering event or the motivation behind the transition are not included, because drug addicts do not see these. The change is formulated in terms of the goals and not of the causes. Therefore, there is no information on how the change takes place, either.
The afterlife of a drug addict´s way of life (message)
Virtual afterlife takes shape in an extremely intensive form: on the one hand, from the point of view of objectivations primarily with regard to the/their children (to be born), from the point of view of symbolizations, on the other hand, in the form of lifestyle values (freedom, will, addiction, etc.). Hence, the image of the future is endowed with content, is concrete, but the path leading to it is murky.
Drug users and drug consumption in the social space
The socio-spatial organization of the drug consumer way of life is complex. It must be recognized as a distinct entity especially when drug usage has become a form of behaviour central to the person´s life and a shadow zone of one´s lifestyle, whether overt or covert, but still a particular manifestation thereof. Our experience based on research, however, indicates that in a number of respects general conclusions may be drawn which are characteristic of most cases:
Social distances which are characteristic in life (their units of measurement: social involvement, attention orientation, direction of activity, the network of interaction)
Between drug users´ lives and their social environment social distance is particularly characteristic. This is especially reflected in the system of relationships maintained with the parental family. Those who live together with their parents are typically in physical coexistence intertwined with social, cognitive and emotional segregation. Thus, living together typically means a shared household but at the same time a markedly partitioned way of life. Many of the drug addict respondents became independent of the parental family or part of it back in their childhood. It is a frequent phenomenon that they were brought up by their grandparents or other relatives, and it is not rare, either, that as minors they lived without the presence of their parents. It is also true for their current lives that their parents are physically far away, or there is no assessable contact with them.
Not only with regard to the parents but also to their own family members is a lifestyle based on keeping a distance characteristic. The spouse´s or the partner´s involvement in the drug user´s life is only significant if he or she is also a drug consumer him/herself. Otherwise, the distance between them is palpable in the structuring of activities, in emotional fields and in questions of life strategies alike. Although there is some abstract and ”solemn” emotional bonding, a sense of responsibility and identity displayed towards one´s own child, these are not realized in one´s behaviour or lifestyle. It is typical that drug addicts´ children are brought up by their grandparents or other relatives, or at least they spend a large part of their lives with them.
A similar situation may be observed in the social network of friends, acquaintances and partners. Either there are no such people in their surroundings or the system of relationships maintained with them is formal and symbolic. Attitudes towards neighbours are intentionally estranged (due to the illegal nature and covert quality of drug consumer behaviour) and are replete with conflicts unless the secrecy of drug use is basically secured. Former friends typically disappear from drug addicts´ lives, and the remaining ones are partners in the drug consumer behaviour, with whom relationships are sustained mainly with respect to drug usage. Love relationships are a considerable deficiency both in the previous and current periods of drug users´ lives, but in the present they have no attestable sensitivity in this respect.
Significant social distances may be perceived not only in social interactions and their forms (chiefly in communication), but in cognitive, emotional and even value system related attitudes coupled with everyday behavioural forms. Neither emotional bonds nor any considerable interest in the matters of the ”outside world”, including the people mentioned above, nor the values attached to others (solidarity, loyalty, responsibility, empathy, etc.) play any decisive part in their lives or thinking. Cognitive segregation is characterized by the fact that they do not connect to the environment even via the multimedia world constituting an organic part of today´s post-modern society (television, the Internet, press, telecommunications, etc.). Even the dominant directions in the use of mobile phones are defined by negotiations with fellow drug users and discussions with the dealer. Their activities and spatial movements are marked by a tendency to avoid communal spaces, or at least those that are not relevant from the point of view of drug use.
A general and shared attribute of drug users is that they neglect the social institutions that would serve as an institutional and organizational framework for their lives. They disliked educational institutions, rejecting nearly all components thereof. Even peer communities are recalled in their world of experiences and memories as alien environments imbued with discriminatory conflicts. Their alienation from social institutions (not only educational ones but those of different types as well: media, church, health care – not to mention the organs of prosecution and justice) is unique in the sense that it is absolute.
The world of dreams (relationship between living in this world and transcendence)
Dreams are an organic part of the world of drug users, including ´daydreaming´ both during sleep and when they are awake. All this means that a considerable proportion of their lives – at least in a cognitive and emotional sense – is not lived through in material reality. Dreams, nearly always, may be recollected by them exactly, are precise and possess clear-cut outlines. There are no blurred or fuzzy elements in them; they are not general but very concrete. It is also typical of them that they are recurrent. The world of their dreams is quite homogeneous, one-dimensional and constant. It is an emphatically important property of the recollected dreams that they are transcendental. In the recollected dreams it is not the reconstruction, continuation or correction of everyday life that takes place, but it is the counterpoint or complement of drug addicts´ everyday realities that materializes. It is also characteristic of the dreams that the transcendence articulated in them receives a function not only as locality but objectivation, too. The transcendent world appearing in dreams is not only a scene of the dreams but the subject thereof as well. Finally, the content-related properties of the dreams recalled by drug users are also relevant: they contain almost exclusively negative experiences. Part of them is unrealistic or even surreal and mystical (dragons, evils, crashing aeroplanes, etc.), and part of them is real and life-like (desire to escape or the inability to do so owing to e.g. limping, pain, etc.). Holistically, transcendental life dimensions constitute a strong element of the world of drug users, while it must be stressed that the properties of hallucinations, misconceptions and ”trips” arising as effects of drugs have not been considered here.
The world of secrets
Three easily distinguishable dimensions of the world of secrets may be captured in the lives of drug consumers: firstly, quite naturally, the secrecy associated with drug usage and the concomitant information and facts; secondly, the hidden world linked to one´s ”civilian” life (preceding drug usage and occurring ever since but not related to the consumption of drugs); thirdly, the set of elements of the conscious present in cognitive life dimensions and the spiritual world of one´s life but not revealed to the outside world.
Life dimensions directly not connected to drug use (prior life and parallel life section – if it exists) are basically loaded with secret elements. The system of various attitudes related to therapy and rehabilitation represents a frequent hidden world. Inner and never disclosed scepticisms, perceived pointlessness and aimlessness targeting these forms of care come up in numerous reconstructed drug addicts´ life stories. Other hidden life motions are primarily relevant in the sense that the would-be drug user was socialized into secret-management and seclusion early on. This mainly applies to seemingly small secrets common to everyone´s life which occurred in childhood. In them, however, there is latently an incipient deviant feature, and the social labelling as well as punishment associated with it also emerged (stealing toys, pranks, brawls, faking school documents; punishment, expulsion, physical and spiritual atrocities, the brand ”bad kid”).
The world of spiritual secrets is extremely homogeneous: drug, drug usage and its uncontrolled and free forms are almost always in the focus of the concealed thoughts, sensations, desires and plans. It has often been experienced that even behind the articulated project of quitting and cessation there are the hidden dimensions of the previously mentioned forms of consciousness.
Attachment to objects
The integration of drug users into social life is essentially not object-centred. Objects in their environment do not play a relevant role at all, do not tie them to space sections or spatial situations, do not mark any boundaries for them and do not orient them. Objects are not important to them, and thus their navigating function is not utilized either. Without any relevant objects drug addicts ”hover” in the social space that surrounds them; there are no designated positions for them in it. (The strongest attachment to objects has been experienced concerning a Christmas present: ”I was happy to have it, after all.”).
As objects that they like, at best drugs and the tools that are necessary for their use may be thought of. However, it is important to note that even the latter are seen as possessing a mere instrumental status. They have no symbolic or ideological significance. Drugs – in so far as they may be regarded as objects – are the sole objectivations of the system of relations of drug users and the socio-physical space. Hence, if the functions named above are attributed to objects, with drug addicts these are exclusively fulfilled by the drugs themselves.
The places of this way of life; where it takes place; what the spatial ecology is like
The spatial structure of the drug user´s way of life is on the one hand closed, while on the other hand it is marked by a fairly open structure, yet it is not dichotomous. A fundamental peculiarity of the lifestyle of those using illegal substances is that the activity is implemented in a closed area. Nearly all of their actions are carried out in some structured and, more importantly, closed location. The dynamics of their way of life, at best, means transfer from one closed area into another (commuting between work place, school, home, pub, disco, family scheme centre, drug counselling centre, hospital, etc.).
At the same time, open space also plays a relevant part in their lifestyle: streets, parks, strolls, ´playing truant´, etc. The essential difference between the two usages of space is that whereas in the first one activities take place, the second one is predominantly filled up by passive and inane existence. (The usage of the open area is characterized by efforts to acquire the drug as an exclusive activity.) The predominant place of drug consumption is the closed area again (except for users of organic solvents; presumably in their case this is not a result of a peculiar choice but is due to the expulsion stemming from social status).
All this means that the spatial structure of drug users´ lifestyle is essentially characterized by reclusive behaviour. The dominance of closed spaces possesses a loose fabric of social completion. Populous locations are also characterized by the solitude and peripheral position of drug users. Thus, such a structure of space use entails social exclusion as well. Conversely, existence in open spaces – in default of active participation – does not allow for or, at least, does not increase the probability of the establishment of social contacts.
Personal space: who are they surrounded by?
The social milieu of drug users may be divided into two dimensions that are related and equally relevant from the point of view of drug use: the social milieu of prior life, on the one hand, and of the drug user life section, on the other. In effect, both are characterized by the same feature: in a number of respects they are incomplete and dysfunctional, or, in any case, a system of relations fraught with conflicts may be discerned in them. It is common for male drug users to have been socialized in predominantly female, and women in male, social environments. It is assumed that the background of this phenomenon is the peculiar relationships with their peers. It is interesting to note that a considerable proportion of the drug addict respondents evaluate the family-related circumstances and the parents´ marital relationship as basically good, whereas the analysis of the narratives suggest that this was so only on the surface, at best. Consequently, it may be surmised that in the cases in question integration into and via the family was burdened by pent-up, unhandled and profound conflicts.
The present period is marked by similar attitudes to and embedding of social relationships. The parents, relatives, friends, acquaintances and loves all spin a loosely woven net around the drug user. Bonds as well as the ”sustaining” and supporting conditions of relationships are rather feeble. The only significant role type in human relations is taken by other drug addicts, namely in all kinds of roles: spouse, love partner, friend, pal, etc.
The most important characteristic of the entire social network is the fact that early isolation primarily occurs as a cause and the present one as an effect, although this is by no means a simple form of causality. It seems that the early deficit of social contact (which may be explained as a result of both specific personality problems and the dysfunctions in the system of relationships mentioned above) exerts an influence on current communicational and interactional difficulties, which drug usage reflects upon, on the one hand, and intensifies, on the other.
Role models, who guide and organize one´s life (or represent an example only at a notional level)
Amongst drug users, with regard to role models, three different patterns may be observed. For most of them no kind of role model, example or authority exists. They do not look up to anyone, do not endeavour to follow anyone, and in their lives no other person has either a guiding or a controlling function.
In the second group belong those who have some sort of role model, who is most often one of the parents or a former teacher. However, the narratives provide some indication that these examples are invariably idealized. It is typical that behind this kind of significance attribution, there is a social and temporal distance between the person who wins the status of role model and the drug user. These examples primarily play an idealizational and ideological function, i.e. they fail to provide concrete and precise guidance.
The third group comprises those drug users for whom the people referred to as role models do fulfil this status and function in a well-documented way and serve as real examples for the drug addict. In their case, however, it is absolutely general to notice that the role models also carry deviant examples or, at least, the conditions of deviant behaviour in their status. Role models, on the one hand, include drug user celebrities (mostly musicians), but, on the other hand, among them there could be an alcoholic father, a neurotic mother, an alcoholic and aggressive educator, a teacher whose favourite student was the drug addict and he or she was ostracized by his or her peers for this reason, a teacher who wanted to get rid of him or her at school, a love partner who caused him or her a fatal disappointment, or an uncle banned from him or her by the parents and with whom contact could be maintained only by means of conspiracy.
The ecology of deviant places
Some characteristics of drug users´ living space are its locations: entertainment facilities, discos, home parties, dump areas (where the littered poppy heads were collected), ”Sziget” (an annual week-long pop festival in Budapest), concerts, pubs, etc. Besides them there are some ”antipodal” places, too: approved school, police custody, court, prison, hospital department, drug counselling centre, etc. In the world of living of the drug user respondents the terrain-space associated with drug consumption is, therefore, divided into two approximately equally important place types: one is directly connected to drug use, and the other to its consequences.
Usage of the space where drug users´ drug consumption takes place is, above all, characterized by the fact that it has relatively narrow dimensions. ´They go out (for entertainment purposes) to institutions close to their homes´, ”the dealer lives a few streets away or in the same building on another floor”, ”his or her fellow drug addict lives next door”, ”they go to the nearby park or construction site to share the substance”, ”on their playground they beat up the smaller kids, and they were beaten up by the bigger ones”, etc. At the same time, the space section occurring as a consequence is substantially wider: prison sentence spent in another city, a far-off drug counselling centre or hospital, a remote court house, etc.
Therefore, a very important characteristic feature of drug users´ space usage is the discrepancy between the two kinds of locations, as well as the difficulties and conflicts caused by the switch between them. This duality is not independent of the fact either that the spatial organization of drug consumption is the outcome of the chiefly autonomous ambitions and needs of drug users (nowadays one does not have to walk far to find a dealer or entertainment facility presenting a chance of drug use), while the places emerging as a consequence of drug use are organized by people, institutions and aspects unknown to them.
The sphere of influence of bodily activities (awareness of one´s body, body image, attitude towards one´s body)
The structure of drug usage – indirectly – touches upon questions of body boundaries. Firstly, it is often certain attributes of the body that are in the background of drug use. Secondly, consumption affects the condition of the body. Thirdly, the consumption of drugs is in conjunction with body image, the awareness of one´s body, i.e. the owner´s attitude to his or her own body.
Among drug addicts it is common to find dissatisfaction with the features of the natural body, a subjective sense of deprivation and discomfort: ”plump body size”, ”crooked nose”, ”disproportionate shape”, etc. These feelings, however, are no longer relevant at the time of drug use. It is conspicuous that they are equally aware of the – primarily unwanted – effects caused by drugs to the detriment of the body, and, in accordance with the previously mentioned circumstance, they do not carry any significant body image-related disorders either. The only really important aspect of the system of relations between drug usage and the body is the drug effect, which affords nearly exclusively positive experience to them, since the mitigation or elimination of withdrawal symptoms counts as such in their case.
The most important property of the effect of drugs exerted on the condition of the body and on the awareness of one´s body – from the perspective of our subject – is that it is internalized, exclusively individual and unique, as opposed to the external meanings preferred by postmodern culture.
The relevance of ”others”. The world of living, viewpoint and opinions of others (the manifestation and importance thereof)
Drug use is a typically individual form of behaviour. This is so even if it most frequently involves several participants, even if it is structured by communal activities and even if there are drug user communities, notwithstanding the commonality of cooperation in drug input and shared experiences. Accordingly, the participants of the social environment appear in drug addicts´ narratives, but their significance is minimized. Drug addicts display total tolerance: they accept abstinence as a possible way of living, they understand if others ”solve their problems in a different way” and they do not aim to foist their own form of behaviour upon others. (No dealer was included in the research sample.) At the same time, they rigidly fend off interventional tendencies targeting them. Thus, drug users draw a solid boundary between themselves and other members of society or, at least, they can see a partition of this kind.
Drug user society is not homogeneous. It is also compartmentalized internally, mainly perhaps in terms of the most often used drugs. It appears that the sharp social and ideological boundaries discussed earlier are also present between individual drug user groups. Drug consumers segregate themselves approximately with the same degree of determination and clarity from those consuming other substances as from the abstinent society. This even applies to those who use drugs that he or she used to be a consumer of earlier or sporadically also takes. The predominantly mental, sociocultural and physio-ethological embedding of drug use seems to presuppose very strong social seclusion.
Piśmiennictwo
1. Elias Norbert (1987) (in trans.): A civilizáció folyamata. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest. 2. Jenkins, C.: (2006) Ethnicity, culture, drugs and sex. In.. Sex, drugs and young people. International Perspectives. Ed. Aggleton P and al. Routledge, New York. 3.Husserl Edmund (1984) : A tiszta fenomenológia és a fenomenológia filozófiai eszméi. in. Hernádi Miklós szerk. (1984): A fenomenológia a társadalomtudományokban. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest. 4.Schütz Alfred, Luckmann Thomas: Az életvilág struktúrái. in. Hernádi Miklós szerk. (1984): A fenomenológia a társadalomtudományokban. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest. 5.Mantza (1969): Becoming Deviant. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 6.Schütz, Alfred (1984): A társadalmi valóság értelemteli felépítése. in. Hernádi Miklós szerk. (1984): A fenomenológia a társadalomtudományokban. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest. 7.Mannheim, Karl (1995) (in trans.): A gondolkodás struktúrái. Atlantisz Kiadó, Budapest. 8.Douglas, Jack: A mindennapi élet megértése. in. Hernádi Miklós szerk. (1984): Fenomenológia a társadalomtudományokban. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest. 9.Clinard, M. B.- Meier, R.F.: (2004) Sociology of Deviant Behavior. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA, USA. 10.Adler, A. - Adler P.: (2003) Constructionof Deviance. Social Power, Context and Interaction. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA, US. 11.Montanari, L.: (2006) Drugs and social exclusion, focusing on minorities. EMCDDA Annual Report. 12. Levinthal, C.F.: (2005) Drugs, behavior and modern society. Pearson Education, Boston. 13.Berger Peter, Luckmann Thomas (1988) (in trans.): A valóság társadalmi felépítése. Jószöveg Műhely Kiadó, Budapest. 14.Bergson, Henry (1925) (in trans.): Idő és szabadság. Tanulmány szemléletünk közvetlen adatairól. Budapest. 15.Jaspers, Karl (1989) (in trans.): Bevezetés a filozófiába. Európa Kiadó, Budapest. 16.Vingender István (2003) A droghasználat szociális kontextusa. Semmelweis Egyetem, Egészségügyi Főiskolai Kar, Budapest.
