I've been through Listening to Ecstasy, not every word but then not a book where one has to read any paragraph thrice. I find his accounts of MDMA ethnographically interesting (insight into a subculture, especially) but not personally enticing. Part of that is my reaction to Wininger as a person: I see very little overlap between our lives and ways, and he doesn't make me wish to know him. It's surely worth trying to figure out the complexities of why that is, because they are many and would probably cast interesting analytical light on my own life and proclivities. It all starts, though, with AGE COHORT: another example in a research subject that I've been chasing off and on for 50+ years. And then wanders into the territory of TRIBE (all very anthropological): New Yorkers and New Englanders are just different on dimensions that matter, another bottomless arena to explore (geo-ethnic origin [see Colin Woodard for that], language, culture, folklore, class... the whole megillah, so to speak...). As I read, I found myself farther and farther from him in terms of personal style, and again fell into trying to analyze just why it is that I can't take him entirely seriously (as I would Michael Pollan, for instance). And I say again, a very worthwhile read for what it nudges me in the direction of. And some great lines and bits of insight: PDBS "post-dramatic bliss syndrome" and "hippie diaspora" both NAIL it, and of the music: "...it was for the most part made by acid- and potheads, in large part composed, recorded, and performed by the stoned, for the stoned." Right fuckin' ON! But there are fundamental declevities twixt he/him and I/me... for example (and you'll know that I mean no disrespect) there are two kinds of people: those who would do a "Men's [or Mens'] Group" and those who just wouldn't. And among the latter, still less would they allow the word "team" to creep into the descriptive lexicon re: such Groups.

I think there's probably a Yiddish word that exemplifies Wininger's to-me-less-than-Winning personality. The basic area is covered by 'schmuck' but that's really not quite it (not exclusively or even primarily pejorative, even a bit wryly admiring of the chutzpah).

The COHORT thing is, as you intimated it might be, Boomer/not-Boomer, but the dynamics behind that / are endlessly fascinating to me. In the years when Cohort really matters, which I'd say are in adolescent years, and are at a peak around 19-21, the width of a Cohort seems to be + or - 1 year from one's own age: college classmates yers, and those a year older or younger, but rarely beyond that. Throuh one's 20s the effective breadth of a Cohort may grow a bit, and by 40 or so it becomes sensible to talk of Generation (as Wininger does) and see it as encompassing as much as a decade. And by the late 70s one is still somewhat archly defending the boundary (born during the fucking War, NOT a Boomer goddammit...), as one notices that those born BEFORE the War are thinner on the ground than they were...

And just a word or two about Tribe, a concept well worth investigating MUCH further: Wininger's description of growing up Jewish on the outer edges of NYC in the 60s is riveting and believable, BUT is leagues away from the cultures I inhabited in formative adolescent years in Massachusetts and then Southern California and then Massachusetts again, and reading his description as ethnography makes it really worthwhile in my own investigation of my MA-CA-MA cultural background.

As for the MDMA part, especially the empathogen thing, I'm led to consider how much I enjoy the effects and affordances of cannabis, which for me is basically a solitary vice at this point: a place to venture with eyes and mind. Back in the day it was somewhat more sociable (talking for hours, grokking stuff) though the primary joys had to do with playing music and diving deeply into texts and images.

Anyhow, thanks for sending the book my way. Learned a lot of interesting tangential things.