Here’s an interesting idea for a book. The writer picks some substances that are banned in various places around the world, and then visits each place to try to learn more about why they are banned. The twist here is that he isn’t just talking about them, in (almost) each place he tries out the banned substances to see what the fuss is all about.
This makes for some occasional childish situations – chewing gum on the train in Singapore, for example – but is far more interesting when he tries coca leaves in Bolivia or absinthe in Switzerland.
One drawback about reading this book is that since it was written about 20 years ago a lot of the situations and bans may have changed. One example – he describes the area around Oslo central station as strewn with junkies and broken syringes, trash and police and hopelessness. But we were there a month ago and it was the complete opposite, a peaceful clean area that was not unlike any other train station in Europe or even Japan. Apparently a lot has happened in 20 years, so the info I was getting from the book needed to be taken with that in mind.
The book theme shifts slightly towards the end as the writer spends a lot of time (and pages) cogitating about the philosophy of banning substances and what situations warrant it, the war on drugs, and the goals of a nanny state.
I thought the author had a very reasonable viewpoint – that as long as a person is making a rational choice and that choice is not causing any harm to others then it is the responsibility of society to let them do it. There are some exceptions to this, and the author lays out the argument in detail. I liked his philosophy, and his admission that it is probably difficult to pull off in the real world.
The book ended differently than I had expected when I started the book, but I like the more intellectual shift that it made and this content more than any of the other stories will make the book worth reading even after another 20 years or more.
Next I am reading They Both Die at the End by Adam Silvera.
