No, "Puff, the Magic Dragon" is not about marijuana, or any other type of drug. It is what its writers have always claimed it to be: a song about the innocence of childhood lost.


The poem that formed the basis of the song "Puff, the Magic Dragon" was written in 1959 by Leonard Lipton, a nineteen-year-old Cornell student. Lipton was inspired by an Ogden Nash rhyme about a "Really-O Truly-O Dragon," and, using a dragon as the central figure, he came up with a poem about the end of childhood innocence. Lipton passed his work along to a friend, fellow Cornell student (and folk music enthusiast) Peter Yarrow, who put a melody to the words and wrote additional lyrics to create the song "Puff, the Magic Dragon." After Yarrow teamed up with Mary Travers and Paul Stookey in 1961 to form Peter, Paul & Mary, the trio performed the song in live shows; their 1962 recording of "Puff" reached #2 on the Billboard charts in early 1963.


The 1960s being what they were, however, any song based on oblique or allegorical lyrics was subject to reinterpretation as a "drug song," and so it was with "Puff." (For Peter, Paul & Mary, at least, the revelation that their song was "really" about marijuana came after the song had finished its chart run; other groups were not so fortunate, and accusations of "drug lyrics" caused some radio stations to ban songs such as the Byrds' "Eight Miles High" from their playlists.) "Puff" was an obvious name for a song about smoking pot; little Jackie Paper's surname referred to rolling papers; "autumn mist" was either clouds of marijuana smoke or a drug-induced state; the land of "Hanah Lee" was really the Hawaiian village of Hanalei, known for its particularly potent marijuana plants; and so on. As Peter Yarrow has demonstrated in countless concert performances, any song — even "The Star-Spangled Banner" — can be interpreted as a "drug song."


http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/puff.asp

Moving this video to Leonards's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

Moving this video to Leonards's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

>> ^rougy: How can a number that has been used by civilized man to erect a civilization have no end?



What? Have you never heard of rounding?
Our calculators seem to know pi out to enough places to get our work done...

It's 4.In reply to this comment by rougy:
@Stormsinger:

So, tell me the last digit in pi.

I'm in agreement with you on most things, just to let you know.

But I think you missed the point of his statement, and that's exactly what I was talking about in my post above.

What is the last digit of pi?

Your video, Physicist Leonard Mlodinow vs. Deepak Chopra, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

WTF? Are you now claiming that pi does have a finite number of digits? Or are you claiming that it's not used by men?

LOTS of numbers have infinite digits in decimal form, dude. As I mentioned before. 1/3, 1/7, 1/9, a vast wave of fractions don't have exact decimal representations. And that's not even getting into the other irrational numbers, NONE of which have precise decimal representations.

And you're still ignoring what I said...if it was metaphor, he should say so, not try to imply that he saying something scientific.

You know what a metaphor based on an error is called? An ERROR. Wrong is wrong, it's really that simple. Would you accept it if I said that 2+2=5 is just a metaphor? I certainly hope not, because it's just wrong.
>> ^rougy:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Stormsinger" title="member since May 19th, 2007" class="profilelink">Stormsinger:
You don't get it.
How can a number that has been used by civilized man to erect a civilization have no end?
You still refuse to admit that you do not know everything.
It's metaphor.


I give up on this stupid broken quoting system. It works 2/3 of the time, then barfs up the rest. I guess I'll just stop quoting at all.

Then, as a professional communicator, he fucking needs to be clear that what he's saying is NOT fact. He does not do that...he tries very hard to present himself and his views as scientific. And that -does- do damage, in the same way and to the same degree that the creationist museum does.

Had he said "Pi is like infinity", or "The irrational nature of pi brings to mind the beauty of the universe" I'd have never said a word. But facts are facts, A is A, and Chopra is flat out wrong (or worse). And he ignores or fails in his duty as a communicator to communicate clearly and honestly.
>> ^peggedbea:

chopra is a snake oil salesman who uses beautiful words and metaphors in a silly nonsensical fashion to bring peace to people's minds. those words are metaphorical, beautiful and symbolic. that exploit a popular lack of mathematical or scientific understanding and a craving for something comforting.
the question is... is it doing any real harm?
i see the beauty in relating pi to the infinite. and the beauty of metaphorical souls. it's gorgeous and symbolic and hopeful and scientifically inaccurate. but is it doing any harm? chopra is not responsible for the failings of math and scientific education. i can appreciate scientific fact and mathematical constants AND spiritual metaphors.
we learn about mythology, fiction and poetry in school too. a humanities education is just as important. we don't have to be so accurate and measured all the time. we need metaphor.
people should just be more aware of when they're hearing facts and when they're hearing symbolism.

>> ^rougy:

I like Chopra.
Yes, he can be much at times, especially when we need real world, "here and now" answers, but I have yet to hear Chopra say anything that didn't ring true, that didn't compliment or magnify my own observations.
I also admire and respect the pragmatic, empirical discipline of scientists and mathematicians, but I sometimes tire of their apparent inability to to look beyond their equations and formulas.
I just don't think that the two need be at odds all of the time.


You didn't hear him say that Pi refers to infinity? If that rings true to you, you need a refresher course in basic mathematics. It's rather beside your point, I know, but it does serve as evidence to the fact that he -is- a scientific and mathematical illiterate, who works very hard to claim the authority of an "expert" without actually being one, without in fact, even understanding the subject.

When he redefines the words of quantum physics, and then tries to "educate" an actual physicist on the "truth" using this vocabulary of quackery, then the two definitely -do- need to be at odds.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'deepak chopra leonard mlodinow stephen hawking quantum physics science' to 'deepak chopra, leonard mlodinow, stephen hawking, quantum physics, science' - edited by shuac

This might be too cynical, but it seems like the anti-bottled water campaign is being driven by the same sort of people who bought all the bottled water in the first place. Yuppies.

They're vulnerable to being told that something is supposed to be healthy for them, even if there is absolutely no medical evidence for the clam. They don't mind paying more for a common product everyone else gets cheaply; in fact they see such conspicuous consumption as a status symbol. But they're also fond of half-assed environmentalism. So long as it doesn't inconvenience them in any way and the movement is popular enough that they can get some social credit for going along with it.

I'm not saying Annie Leonard is one of them, but just that they're the target audience. And it's irritating to no end when they act smug about the fact that they've finally woken up to how unbelievably stupid they've been about this for the last decade.

Moving this video to Leonards's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

The only reason I play Civ 4 now is to hear Leonard Nimoy say the quotes on every new advance. Sigh

Moving this video to Leonards's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

Moving this video to Leonards's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.