We here at Points stressed quality over quantity more than ever this past week. Gearing up for a busy late February, we put up just three posts, though our writers addressed many of our favorite topics, such as moral panic, the science of addiction, and artistic depictions of addictions. Links to each of these excellent pieces are posted here for your perusal.
Monday: The week kicked off with the last part of Emily Dufton’s outstanding (and quite popular) “Debate for the Ages” series. In “The Parent Movement, Or “Mama Said Knock [the Drug Culture] Out,” Emily looks at the War on Drugs from the perspective of the Parent Movement and that groups’ concentrated efforts over the last three decades of the twentieth century to scare kids off drugs…that is, until they’re adults.
Tuesday: Stanton Peele provided Points with a fascinating analysis of Cambridge University’s sensational new study on addiction, twins, and genetics in “Nora Volkow Explains (Not Really) Why People Don’t Become Addicted.” The study, printed in the venerable Science magazine, was the result of researchers investigating siblings – one of whom was an addict and one was not – in the hopes of finding evidence that addiction is the result of an inherited brain dysfunction. If you like analytics, you’ll love this.
Thursday: Rounding out our social science-science-humanities triumvirate of articles this week, longtime contributor Eoin Cannon shared with us his excellent “This is Your Brain on Art House.” Struck by the popularity of the 2000 film “Requiem for a Dream,” Eoin asks how an art house film that received limited release and press eventually developed a cult following among college students. Furthermore, Eoin investigates the implication of director Darren Aronofsky’s combination of art house aesthetics, subtle timelessness, and unironic anti-drug handwringing.
Friday: A new, retooled version of Friday Reads will be back next week.