Try to justify your own alcoholism much?

This is a great topic that I’m glad you brought up, although David Lee’s right — we could be here all day nitpicking about examples. Which I’ll do in a second.

I often think about this and have had some debates with artists who are now sober. Some say that it’s true, others say that it varies from case to case, and others say that any art that needs to be enhanced by substances wasn’t art to begin with. It’s an obstacle on the path to grace, they say.

I think there’s a lot to be said for just how bad the substance abuse was before the artist sobered up. Had it devolved into self-sabotage? What did they fill that hole with once they put the plug in the jug, hash in the trash, etc. If they’re white-knuckling, of course their work is going to be terrible — it’s because they’re miserable.

Eric Clapton’s been sober for a long time. He even began a recovery facility in the Caribbean. His recent work, in my opinion, is nowhere near as powerful as his stuff from the past, but I chalk a lot of that up to his establishment as a successful musician who doesn’t have to release a groundbreaking album every go-round. Do a duet with Babyface and people will still come see you at Chastain. Maybe there’s a little bit of boredom in there for him. But I doubt his music has lost some oomph because he’s sober.

Maybe we’re looking for a little bit of that recklessness we can watch from afar. And when artists stop being reckless we’re disappointed. Because if anything bad happens to them, hell, better them than us. “Exile on Main Stret” comes to mind. That’s a powerful, desperate album, and was recorded in a substance-filled haze. But how much of an artist is their image and how much of an artist is their work?