The Harvard Psychedelic Club

The following is excerpted from The Harvard Psychedelic Club available from HarperOne.
Huston Smith had come to MIT in 1958. He was thirty-nine years old and just hitting his stride as a scholar and commentator on the world's religions. Nearly five decades later, he sits in a sunny window in the living room of his home in Berkeley, California. He's still married to Kendra, but he's an old man now. He has trouble hearing, and with the help of a walker he can barely make it from his study to his living-room chair. But when he tells the story of that New Year's Day in Timothy Leary's living room, his eyes widen and he seems to lose ten years.
"What a way to start the sixties," he says, laughing.
Seeker: Newton, Massachusetts, February 1961
Richard Alpert would have taken the magic mushrooms in Mexico with the rest of the gang, back in the summer of 1960, but he arrived a few days after Leary's first trip. Everyone was still aglow in the aftermath of the experience, but the mushrooms were gone. Richard would have to wait nearly nine months before he got his own psychedelic baptism back home in Timothy Leary's living room. Back in Mexico in the summer of 1960, Leary was still feeling the mystic wonder of it all when he met Alpert at the Mexico City airport. Richard had quite an adventure just getting there. He'd just bought his fl ying teacher's Cessna and had decided to fly from San Francisco to Mexico City -- over the startled objections of his instructor.
"There's no way you can do that," his teacher warned. "That's a really difficult airport to fly into. Traffic control is a mess down there."
"Don't worry," Alpert said. "I'll be fine."
He bought the plane on a Saturday and flew down on Sunday. He had not told his flight teacher he was going to fly down tomorrow. If he had he probably wouldn't have gotten the keys. Alpert had already rounded up a Stanford anthropologist who needed a lift to Mexico, but he didn't tell him he had just bought the Cessna the day before. Mexico City is at a high elevation, making it a difficult place to land. His passenger sat next to Alpert with a terrified look on his face as Richard dodged other airplanes on his approach.
"Don't worry," Alpert said. "We'll be fine."
They arrived and found Leary waiting in the terminal. Richard was eager to tell Tim about the terrors of his airplane trip, but it turned out Leary had an even more amazing trip to talk about.
They stood in the lobby as Alpert told the story about buying the plane and flying down to Mexico the next day.
"That's quite a trip, Richard," Leary said. "You know, I've been doing some flying myself -- internally."
They got to the villa, and all the guests were sitting around the pool talking up the mushrooms. But the magic fungi were gone, and no one knew how to find Crazy Juana and score some more. Meanwhile, Leary was already planning his mushroom research project and wanted to begin as soon as he got back to Harvard. He and Alpert were trained clinicians, but this was not going to be like other drug tests. They were going to change the world.
"We're going to take a whole new approach with this research," Leary told Alpert. "Everyone thinks these drugs cause psychosis, but that's because they've been controlled by psychiatrists. Of course they're going to view this as psychosis. That's all they know. But there is really something deeper going on here, Richard. Wait until you try them. I learned more about psychology from these mushrooms than I did in graduate school. These drugs can revolutionize the way we conceptualize ourselves -- not to mention the rest of the world. It'll be great. We'll give them to philosophers, poets, and musicians."
Alpert had been working with Leary for about a year at Harvard. Richard might have had the bigger office at the Department of Social Relations, but Tim was clearly the mentor in their relationship. There were about ten research psychologists in the department, all of them interested in the dynamics of the human personality. As he got to know Leary, Alpert started changing the way he looked at Harvard, and the way he looked at himself. Until Tim showed up, Richard was happily playing the professor role. He'd go to faculty meetings, sit in big chairs, and have tea from a silver tea service. It was easy to let the whole experience go to your head. Alpert would walk through Harvard Yard and begin to think he really was somebody. He was a member of the Harvard faculty. But Tim wasn't like that. He was the first guy Alpert ever met who was not impressed by Harvard. It was just a job.
Their relationship went beyond the office -- even before they made the psychedelic bond. Tim arrived at Harvard with two children and no wife. Richard started hanging out with the kids, Susan and Jack, and began taking care of them. They started calling him "Uncle Dick," and he started acting out the role of surrogate mother. Richard was a bachelor. Tim was a bachelor with kids. Sometimes they'd find another baby sitter and go out drinking in Harvard Square. Lots of drinking, as in that 1950s kind of drinking.
Alpert had missed out on the mushrooms in Mexico and wasn't in Cambridge in the fall of 1960, when Leary started gathering together the tribe that would become the Harvard Psilocybin Project. Alpert had been teaching that semester as a visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley, but he was getting lots of fascinating reports about what was happening back at Harvard. He couldn't wait to get back and join the party, and his chance finally came one day in February 1961.
Alpert returned just as the biggest storm of the season dumped two feet of snow on the streets of Newton. Leary invited him over to his house for a Saturday-night initiation. By now, Leary and his growing band of graduate students had started experimenting with a new batch of drugs they'd gotten from Sandoz Laboratories in Switzerland. The drug was a synthesized form of psilocybin, the active ingredient in the magic mushrooms of Mexico. The psychic effects were the same, but the dose was easier to control.
While Alpert had been in California, Leary had begun to assemble an eclectic squadron of test pilots at his increasingly chaotic home. They included Beat poet Allen Ginsberg; jazz trumpeter Maynard Ferguson; William Burroughs, the legendary novelist and heroin addict; and Alan Watts, the popular Buddhist writer and commentator. Ginsberg was sitting at Leary's kitchen table the day Alpert burst in from the cold. Alpert joined them at the table, upon which stood a bottle of pink pills from Sandoz labs. He measured out ten milligrams of the drug and washed the pills down with a few gulps of beer.
Allen and Tim and Richard sat down in the kitchen and waited. Right away there was a bit of a melodrama. Tim's son, Jack, was upstairs when the boy's dog ran out of the house. The dog had been out galloping around in deep snow and came in panting heavily. They all started thinking, "Oh, no! The dog is dying!" Then they figured out that they really couldn't tell if the dog was dying because they were so high. Their thinking and senses were too distorted. Jack was eleven years old. He was upstairs watching television and a bit peeved that these silly adults were bothering him. He came down, assured them that the dog was fine, then marched back upstairs to the TV.
Alpert started really coming onto the psilocybin. There was too much talking in the kitchen, so he walked into the living room, a darker and more peaceful setting. He sat down on the sofa and tried to collect himself. Looking up, he saw some people over in the corner. Who were they? Were they real? Then he started to see them as images of himself in his various roles. They were hallucinations, but they seemed so real. There was the professor with a cap and gown. There was a pilot with a pilot's hat. There was the lover. At first, he was a bit amused by the vision. Those are just my roles. That role can go. That role can go. I've had it with that role. Then he saw himself as his father's son. The feeling changed. Wait a minute. This drug is giving me amnesia! I'll wake up and I won't know who I am! That was terrifying, but Alpert reminded himself that those roles weren't really important. Stop worrying. It's fine. At least I have a body. Then Alpert looked down on the couch at his body. There's no body! Where's my body? There's no-body. There's nobody. That was terrifying. He started to call out for Tim. Wait a minute. How can I call out to Tim? Who was going to call for Tim? The minder of the store, me, would be calling for Tim. But who is me? It was terrifying at first, but all of a sudden Alpert started watching the whole show with a kind of calm compassion.
At that moment, Richard Alpert met his own soul, his true soul. He jumped off the couch, ran out the door, and rolled down a snow-covered hill behind Leary's house. It was bliss. Pure bliss. At the time, Alpert's parents were also living in Newton. Their home was just five blocks from Leary's house on Homer Street. It was three in the morning, but that didn't stop a stoned Richard Alpert from storming through the snow to go see his parents. When he got to his parents' house, he saw that no one had shoveled the deep snow off their walkway. So he went into the garage and got the shovel. In his drugged state, he saw himself as a young buck coming to the rescue. He was all- powerful. He would save his parents! It all seemed so mythological. Then he looked up at the window and saw his parents standing there. They were obviously peeved, or at least confused. Then they assumed that their son must have been drinking with Leary. Alpert saw them up in the window and waved at his startled parents. Then he stuck the shovel in the snow and started dancing around it. He felt so fine, perfectly fine.
Alpert recounts this tale of snowy bliss just a few days shy of the forty-seventh anniversary of the event, yet he remembers it like it was last night. As he tells the tale he's sitting beside a large picture window overlooking the rugged coast on the island of Maui. He says he's come here to Hawaii to die. But when he tells the story of that wondrous winter night his eyes light up like those of an excited little boy. He was twenty-nine years old then. He's seventy-six years old now. Leary is dead. Ginsberg is dead. Alpert is no longer a young buck. A nearly fatal stroke a decade earlier has left him paralyzed on his left side and confined to a wheelchair. The stroke nearly destroyed his ability to find words and speak them. He struggles mightily to tell the story, once again, of the events that changed his life.
"Until that moment I was always trying to be the good boy, looking at myself through other people's eyes," he says. "What did the mothers, fathers, teachers, colleagues want me to be? That night, for the first time, I felt good inside. It was OK to be me."
Copyright © 2010 by Don Lattin. Used with permission of HarperOne, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers.
Don Lattin is the author of Jesus Freaks: A True Story of Murder and Madness on the Evangelical Edge. His work has appeared in dozens of magazines and newspapers, including the San Francisco Chronicle, where he covered the religion beat for nearly two decades. Lattin has also appeared on Dateline, Good Morning America, Nightline, Anderson Cooper 360, and PBS’s Religion and Ethics Newsweekly.
Teaser image by Ryuugakusei, courtesy of Creative Commons license.
- 2-5-10
- Don Lattin's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
ShareThis





Comments
Classic Story
Reason tatters...
Leary...
For me personally, I can't think of anything more terrifying than going insane, even if for a short time, which is why I don't plan to try psychedelics any time soon. I suppose, though, that dreams are sort of like a temporary insanity; thankfully, we are mostly unconscious while they take place (while I very much enjoy my dreams, many many years ago I had what according to Wikipedia is called a Wake Initiated Lucid Dream [WILD], and it was one of the scariest things I have ever experienced).
-*-
This book of Lattin sounds interesting, as stories about experiences from alternate reality tunnels are never dull. This is perhaps why I love all of Phillip K. Dick's books. As William S. Burroughs once said, ``Write about what you know [you have to have lived it to write about it]'', and in Dick's case I think the suggestion applied.
-*-
I am not sure what to make of Timothy Leary. I think he had a few intriguing ideas about the different circuits or tracks on which the brain operates, though it was mixed in with a heavy dose of nonsense.
Watching various interviews with him on TV and on the internet, I can't help but think of the disgraced pastor Ted Haggard -- permanent weasely grin, and con man sparkle.
I recall seeing an amusing cartoon by Robert Crumb, which was of a robotic Leary saying, ``Turn on, tune in, drop out'' over and over. I wonder how many people followed the advice, and how many of them have regrets...
Leary, complex Leary
E. Sam, I enjoyed that post. I want to address the Leary aspect of it.
Last fall, I read Robert Greenfield's comprehensive biography of Leary and came away with a new understanding of the man, an understanding that was not so rose-colored glasses as my previous one had been. In Greenfield's telling, he was a man driven by a need to be recognized and a desire for fame...in part. As a result, he often neglected the people in his life, especially his family but also friends who he'd sometimes use and the be done with and onto the next thing.
As for that smile, I think it is complex, as well. On one hand, it was a cover, it seems, for his insecurities, a way of masking his failings. On the other, it was his message to the world to lighten up and enjoy the ride. Not take yourself too seriously.
Personally, as a man who values his relationships and my family, I think Leary went too far toward a life of life being about HIM, but that doesn't stop me from seeing the positive aspects of his contributions. I do think he, like many of the pyschedelic 1960s, were naive about the idea of psychedelics saving the world, but this is totallly understandable when looked at in a historical context. They didn't have the benefit of hindsight and experience that we in the 21st century have with regard to how the psychedelic experience would effect/not effect our culture.
Anyway, this era of history is a fascinating one to me and has been for 20 years or so, and I quite enjoyed this excerpt. Yet another book to add to the shopping list!!!
more leary...
I figured there was probably some pain behind that smile.
Years ago, I lived in the Bay Area, and since I was there, I regularly went to this co-op/Communist bookstore near Haight-Ashbury (And I shopped at a similar `Communist' bookstore in Berkeley, called, I believe, `Revolution Books'. They accept Via and Mastercard.) to read up on the counter-culture, and one of these was a biography of Leary. I don't know whether it was by Greenfield or not, but my rough memory was that the book was more a factual account of his life than it was a penetrating analysis. One of the things I recall that the book discussed was Leary's problems with his son -- there probably was some pain there.
-*-
I think that it is important to know the context in which an author (Leary) is coming from, particularly counter-culture ones, so that one doesn't misread what they have to say. Some authors, for example, intentionally play the role of trickster and provocateur (e.g. Robert Anton Wilson), and without knowing this context one can easily reach the wrong conclusions. That is one of the reasons I read the biographies of Leary, Burroughs, Ginsberg, Kerouac, P. K. Dick, Mario Savio (didn't read a full bio of him, but did read bits and pieces from several sources) and even some fellow travelers from earlier generations, such as Emma Goldman (I have a biography of her in the form of a comic book!); the main reason I read such biographies, though, is that the Beats and their ilk (my ilk) were just damn interesting people.
-*-
One thing I don't like about acid culture is that it encourages certain young, naive people to feel as though they are enlightened just because they've had a few hits. They then go about creating websites about how the education system brainwashes people, how 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S.G., and so on. I would be willing to listen to such pronouncements if they came from a place of deep knowledge, world experience, intelligence, etc. But, no, most of the time these are just kids who think they know everything after just a few micrograms.
To such people, I would say, ``Travel the world. Definitely visit the Bay Area. Read a few dozen books on world religions, the philosophy of science, Greek philosophy, 17th-21th century philosophy, epistemology and ontology. Maybe even some modern science (genetics, basics of quantum mechanics and relativity, chemistry) and higher mathematics (logic, abstract algebra [group theory], modern geometry, probability theory, statistics). Meditate on all that for a few years. Do acid if you must. And *then* come back to me before you start treating me like your idiot pupil.''
Repressed Anger
shrooms...
As to your suggestion that I take mushrooms, ``No thank you''.
I suppose I got in a little bit of a foul mood, while recollecting my past encounters with certain people, which didn't turn out so well (I ended up belittling them, and felt very badly afterwords). I need to learn to be more compassionate sometimes, I think.
I have recently come to an insight on a related matter, while studying a little primate neuroscience (a field in which I am not an expert). It seems that in order to be cruel we must have a basic sense of empathy. One type of cruelty occurs when we experience people behaving unfairly or unwisely, and then we verbally berate them and feel justified in doing so. In such a situation our sense of compassion is diminished -- cruelty and compassion are both the children, in fact sibling rivals, of empathy (or at lest some types of empathy -- there are many kinds, apparently).
The trouble here is that when we perceive a person behaving unwisely or unfairly, it may not be the case that they are actually aware of this, in which case the nasty comment might appear to them as undeserved cruelty --although if you performed the act you might think it unfair or unwise, they may not think so.
So, as has been said many times before, by many people, ``See others as they are, not as you are.''
I have America Surrounded
Breaking Ground
In any case, breaking new ground will always likely be frought with varigated concerns. What can be done.
Just like in a flock of birds, one takes the lead to "break the wind" ... yet each bird in the flock must still fly all on their own.
There will never really need to be a "spokesman" for the Entheogenic experience. All that is required is a little guidance for initiates.
The spokesman part {of Leary in paticular} was basically related to the limitations of the powers that be in their lack of organic and indigenous sensibilities, more than any wisdom in regards to the very "spirit of tripping" ... which everyone pretty much gets on their own.
Personally I was satisfied with Aldous Huxleys relatively humble, yet scholarly views on social perspectives in relation to the Entheogens, which I was reading at age 15-16 {74-75}
I read "Be Here Now" by Ram Dass {Alpert} when it first came out a year earlier, and read a few things by Leary. But most of us local 70's trppers, got whatever was to be gotten out of the actual experience simply by "having" the experience.
I find relative value in all that came from such, outside of the undue focus on chemical synthesis and extraction, which seems to remove, howevrer sligtly, some synergy with the organic source of the wholistic {holy} experience itself.
Leading one in the direction of "overly objective" analysis at the expense of subjective entrainment, or yoga { holistic linking}
Not just in the chemical sense, but also how it effects how we actually view the substances in relation to nature itself { earthy nature / cosmic nature etc}
I feel both Leary and Mckenna get a little too "empirical" like many of us in this sci-fi age, but even that was certainly mixed with good ole insight into the nature of human exploration.
I have always wondered why there has never been a direct ergot {non synthesized} version of LSD.
It is not likely wise for any of us to try to place the mystical nature of such experiences into a mere social context ... our only real mistake, as we tend to do so with so many things in this "information age."
Competing with each other for "control of language" as if such could ever be acheived.
The Limits of Language
Pippalayna, Your comments remind me of a McKenna quote I read recently, which was: "If anything undoes us this will be it: that our language fails, that we misread each other's intent, that we could not understand each other."
I've been having a month-long conversation with some friends about how language can not put into words mystical understandings and how basically when one tries, one ends up becoming a target for ridicule. My friend, the very guy who frequently ridicules my perspective, denied this---but then again, he denies everything I say, except for the music that we both share a love for. Whatcha gonna do...
As for the Greenfield biography, I don't know if it was unfair or not. I'd like to read another account of Leary. I will say I've read some of Greenfield's other books, notably his biography of Jerry Garcia, and enjoyed them and that this one made a lot of sense to me about explaining why Leary did what he did, and it wasn't all negative. It mostly just pointed out that while Leary was great at being the high priest of LSD his family relations were strained, which lead to serious consequences (suicide of his first wife and, later, his daughter). I don't think this is far-fetched.
Another "hero" of the 1960s, John Lennon, realized in the 1970s that while he'd been out trying to "save the world" he had neglected his duties as a father to his first son, and so was making an effort to focus on being a father to his second child (and even writing a lovely song in trubute, "Beautiful Boy.") I think this makes sense, because anybody who is a parent realizes that being one creates an undeniable tension between one's duty to one's family and one's desires with regard to one's life works. It's very hard to avoid, and those that solve the dilemma are worth learning from.
Me personally---I am in a situation where I yearn to move back to my country (somewhere on the Left Coast), but realize that for my family, it is probably better to stay in Japan. This creates tension for me because I've concluded that no matter which way we go, someone will "suffer." So I can certainly appreciate the difficulties Leary faced and don't judge him harshly for his decisions.
The Harvard Psychedelic Club
Booze
I don't think LSD had as much effect on Tim Leary's personality as did his affinity for drinking alcohol. Every time I was around him he was either drunk, getting drunk, getting over having been drunk or getting ready to get drunk. And I've heard as much from other people who spent time around him.
That being said, he could be a heck of a lot of fun and was definitely brilliant.
I caught glimpses of how difficult it must have been to be close to him -like it is with any booze hound. I'm no psychiatrist, but is there any doubt that alcohol warps a person's ego in exceptional ways?
In private conversation he told me he had done LSD about fifty times in his life, and at the time we spoke, in 1987, he said he had not tripped in two years. We had gotten really plastered with William Burroughs the night before. William had given Tim some methadone from his private stash that morning to cure his hangover.
Long story short: I don't think it was LSD that made Tim difficult. I think it was booze.
What?!
Incomplete.
Amazing that people are
Perhaps Leary was BOTH a visionary AND a lousy family man
Re-reading these comments with regard to Leary, I was struck by how some of us seem to be wanting to take sides in a "Leary was good or bad" sort of debate.
I'd say nothing of the sort, only that after reading Greenfield's biography and learning about his family life, it became more clear to me that he, like ALL of us, had his drawbacks as well. It shouldn't have been that surprising to me, but since I'd come at him from a perspective of someone who generally supported his contributions to our culture as well as his sense of humor in the many speeches I've heard from him, it was a neccessary fleshing out of who the man was.
In other words, don't shy away from reading that biography if you are interested in who Leary was, but just don't believe that it tells the whole story. He was a very complex man.