plants of the gods- the book

[nabraxas]

i read that a new version has come out w/a new 'australasia' section.

if anyone has seen a copy, i'd like to know if they've updated any ov the 'original' entries. my version is the 1992 edition, & as an example, the entry for 'salvia divinorumm' reads "No chemical evidence of a psychoactive substance is at yet available". well we know that needs updating, has it been?

[gerbil]

"The main active ingredient, salvinorin A..."

, yes, it was updated

I havent seen the '92 version, so not sure how much was actually updated, but i'd say there would be a fair bit here and there.

have a good one

gerbil

[This message has been edited by gerbil (edited 19 December 2002).]

[mr b.caapi]

hmmm...an australasia update...!!

i dont think there would be as "plants of the gods" is devoted to hallucinogenic plants and their uses..

there is no recordings of the use of plants as visual aids in the aboriginal(australian)

culture!!...

[nabraxas]

mr b-capi- that's what i read- don't know if it's 100% true. got the impression it was more about the plants, than there native non-use.

gerbil- cheers, maybe time for me to update.

[gerbil]

The Australian section focus is on duboisia hopwoodii (pituri), stated as probably the longest use of a psychoactive substance in the history of humanity.

It talks about the Australian Aborigines, although the section is quite brief, but still great none the less

there certainly is a section

Is there anyone that has seen, or owns both copies?, could you point out the major updates possibly??

[mr b.caapi]

well in that case i must apoligize!

you learn something new evryday..

[Guest reville]

Originally posted by gerbil:

The Australian section focus is on duboisia hopwoodii (pituri), stated as probably the longest use of a psychoactive substance in the history of humanity.

It talks about the Australian Aborigines, although the section is quite brief, but still great none the less

there certainly is a section  

Is there anyone that has seen, or owns both copies?, could you point out the major updates possibly??

mmm. I think this idea that Aboriginal people and culture as Europeans encountered it in the last few centuries is the same culture and people that have always been here is dubious.There has been people here for at least 40 000 years, whether they are the same people here now is an issue the australian academic fraternity doesnt want to be seen asking as its not PC.

All across australia from the rainforests of Qld to inland NSW, SE WA and especially Tasmania there is evidence of people with very different origins than the majority of Aboriginal people today,who may be much more recent arrivals aided in their rapid displacement of the original inhabitants by superior technologies, social differences and even i suspect by bringing the Dingo with them and so i think that assuming that the use of Pituri is the oldest is merely and extrapolation based on an underresearched assumption.

the new plants of the gods is nice - but theyeve taken out some of the pictures i liked in the original. Also It is expanded but it also contains alot more careless errors this time which was disapppointing.

[Torsten]

Originally posted by reville:

it also contains alot more careless errors this time which was disapppointing.

Plz make a list and I will pass it on.

[Guest reville]

I think that the most noticeable one was the picture of the alleged Tanaecium nocturnum - which is what looks identical to moonflower - not just in the flower but look at the leaf and tendrils. Its nothing like the original drawing.

Tanaecium is a liana in the bignoniaceae i think and moonflower is convovulus

The rest were in the text. I dont have my book on me but i did notice them. I dont think it detracts from the book much at all but when you start reading heaps of Ethnobotany books you get too high expectations, This is an excellent book however and i know the original was one i reread dozens of times.

[Torsten]

because christian's books have a high turnover and edition rate, he will take note of any corrections he receives before the next printing. such corrections are often useless with other authors as their volume rarely allows a reprint.