Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas

When reflecting on the possibility that he might be caught and sent to prison, Raoul recalls how he had once interviewed a group of incarcerated individuals for The New York Times. As he says, “they wanted their stories told” (75). But the article never appeared. This was because, he explains, “The lead paragraphs I wrote for that article didn’t satisfy some editor three thousand miles away—some nervous drone behind a grey formica desk in the bowels of a journalistic bureaucracy” (76). This story in many ways sums up what Thompson sees as wrong with conventional journalism. It spurns the direct stories and experiences of outsiders, like incarcerated individuals. Instead, it delegates the power to decide what can be said about such things, and about life in general, to spirit-less, distant authorities who have no real connection to the issues. Something similar is seen in Raoul’s parody of a Life article about the Mint 400. As he says, “LAS VEGAS AT DAWN- The racers are still asleep, the dust is still on the desert, $50,000 in prize money slumbers darkly in the office safe at Del Webb’s fabulous Mint hotel... And our Life team is here (as always, with a sturdy police escort…) (57).

Such writing and “journalism” tries to create the impression of depth or profundity. It presents itself as being in touch with the emotional heart of the event. In reality, though, beneath the self-important style, nothing is being reported. It is merely a dull relaying of objective facts about prize money and location. Worse, it is protected from any interaction with real events or action by complicity with authority. These journalists, to eliminate any personal risk, are dependent on and beholden to the very establishment forces they should be scrutinizing. This is bad enough when it is in relation to general news. It is catastrophic, however, when it comes to reporting about drugs and drug culture. Throughout Fear and Loathing, many examples of newspaper headlines are given to demonstrate this point. One says, “An overdose of heroin was listed as the official cause of death for pretty Diane Hamby, 19” (72). Another explains how, “a House Subcommittee report says illegal drugs killed 160 American GI’s last year- 40 of them in Vietnam” (73). And, most disturbingly, a headline states that “SURGERY UNCERTAIN/ AFTER EYES REMOVED” (101-102). This article refers to a man who had taken an overdose of animal tranquilizer and gouged out his own eyes.

The problem with these articles and the style of journalism they represent, when it comes to drugs, is manifold. As in the case of the incarcerated individuals and the Mint 400, no space is given to the experience of taking drugs and being a drug user. While they evince a morbid fascination with the worst consequences of drug use, they make no attempt to understand why someone would do this or the culture of which it is a part. The articles also do not bother to distinguish between types of drugs or the different experiences they provoke. Instead, all drugs are lumped together. Ignoring any desire to report the truth, “drugs” become merely part of a sensationalist, moralizing agenda to discourage deviance from established values. This is why Thompson was drawn toward Gonzo journalism. Gonzo encourages the journalist to experience and participate in the stories they are covering. It is also why, to get to the heart of drug culture, Raoul takes “almost every type of drug known to civilized man” (188), including the adrenal gland extract which nearly kills him.