"At the time, acid made me consider questions of reality, the difference, as someone said, between words and silence. It also brought back a lot of latent religious feelings in me that I had turned my back on"
About this Quote
Stone frames LSD less as a party drug than as a philosophical pry bar, the kind that wedges open the seam between language and whatever sits stubbornly beyond it. The key move is his invocation of “the difference…between words and silence,” a line that borrows the authority of secondhand wisdom (“as someone said”) while also confessing how drug insight often arrives: half-remembered, quasi-quoted, more felt than footnoted. For a novelist, that’s a loaded admission. His entire craft depends on words, yet the trip makes him aware of their limits, even their fraudulence. Silence here isn’t peace; it’s the untranslatable real, the thing prose circles but can’t pin down.
Then he pivots to religion, not as doctrine but as “latent…feelings,” which is psychologically sharper and culturally telling. The 1960s psychedelics boom sold transcendence as an experience you could access without churches, creeds, or gatekeepers. Stone’s phrasing suggests the opposite: the chemical shortcut doesn’t replace religion so much as resurrects it, dragging back impulses he’d “turned [his] back on” with the willpower of a lapsed believer. The subtext is guilt and recognition: you can reject faith intellectually, but the appetite for awe, terror, and moral accounting doesn’t necessarily leave.
Context matters because Stone’s fiction is crowded with seekers, addicts, and ideologues chasing certainty in a country that markets liberation while delivering confusion. He’s not romanticizing acid; he’s charting how it exposes the same old hunger - for meaning, for the Real - that modernity keeps trying to manage with language.
Then he pivots to religion, not as doctrine but as “latent…feelings,” which is psychologically sharper and culturally telling. The 1960s psychedelics boom sold transcendence as an experience you could access without churches, creeds, or gatekeepers. Stone’s phrasing suggests the opposite: the chemical shortcut doesn’t replace religion so much as resurrects it, dragging back impulses he’d “turned [his] back on” with the willpower of a lapsed believer. The subtext is guilt and recognition: you can reject faith intellectually, but the appetite for awe, terror, and moral accounting doesn’t necessarily leave.
Context matters because Stone’s fiction is crowded with seekers, addicts, and ideologues chasing certainty in a country that markets liberation while delivering confusion. He’s not romanticizing acid; he’s charting how it exposes the same old hunger - for meaning, for the Real - that modernity keeps trying to manage with language.
Quote Details
| Topic | Faith |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Robert
Add to List



