The Smug Alert: Part Two
-
Kevin Godbee - Feb 2, 2011
- 5 min read
By C. R. S. Lyles
This is the place referenced in the countless examples of a dystopian future; these are the limits of human control.
Since the 1600s, those in power have wanted nothing more than to bring the use of tobacco under their jurisdiction, either to control its sale or to eradicate it altogether. Beginning with James I, the tyranny of tobacco’s opposition has grown in its methods and goals, and yet the underlying motivation remains unchanged.
Last July, the University of Florida initiated a campus-wide ban of tobacco use on all of its properties, becoming one of the first major universities in Florida to do so.
The ban, stemming from an initiative put forth by the Healthy Gators Coalition, a branch of the Alachua County Health Department, outlawed "the personal use of any tobacco product, whether intended to be lit or not, which shall include smoking…, as well as the use of an electronic cigarette or any other device intended to simulate smoking and the use of smokeless tobacco, including snuff; chewing tobacco; smokeless pouches; any other form of loose-leaf, smokeless tobacco; and the use of unlit cigarettes, cigars, and pipe tobacco."
Dr. Jane Emmerée, a former participant in the coalition, stated that "The mission of the coalition is to create an environment supportive of the development and maintenance of a healthy body, mind and spirit for all members of the University of Florida community"
Borrowing this mantra from Dr. Jill Varnes, the former vice chair of the Coalition, and Dr. Steve Dorman, the current vice chair, the statement itself, while understandably benevolent in its intention, begs the question, How does eradicating smoking develop or maintain a healthy mind or spirit for current smokers?
Yes, smoking is bad for the body, there’s been multiple reports and blah blah blah. That’s not the issue here.
The issue is that banning smoking on a public property is not only ill-advised, but can’t be enforced because smoking isn’t illegal.
Though the proponents of health care reform and the anti-smoking crusade would like nothing more than for tobacco to be illegalized, the fact remains that it is not, and the revenue it generates inadvertently pays for the aforementioned anti-tobacco proponents to continue with their vendetta.
Which, of course, brings up the issue of how to enforce a policy which is unfounded in any vestige of legality? The answer, simply put, is through fear.
For example, the other day a young student was caught by a police officer on the University of Florida campus while having a cigarette. The officer ridiculed and harassed the student for several minutes, reminiscent of a Gestapo-esque authority, before allowing the student, who had put out the cigarette when asked, to leave.
There was no citation given, no arrest, nothing. Nothing more than a lecture on the student’s personal health choices and how said choices were affecting the other students and, more importantly, the environment.
Since when did police officers have the authority to curb an individual’s behavior based on how that would affect the environment? Sure, if a student is opening up ten thousand aerosol cans simultaneously, then an intervention could be justified. But smoking? As referenced in the first part of this series, the self-satisfaction of the anti-smoking crusade knows no bounds.
Which leads into another component of their vendetta: the various advertising techniques that they choose to use in order to ensnare and confuse the smoking community.
For example, on January 12th of this year, the local independent newspaper of Gainesville, The Alligator, ran an advertisement which read:
"SMOKING STUDY: Do you smoke? Do you have a New Year’s resolution to QUIT SMOKING? The Alachua County Health Department is looking for young adults who drink alcohol and are interested in receiving a new treatment to help them quit smoking."
In researching why the advertisement specifically called for "young adults who drink alcohol", a representative of this particular division of the Alachua County Health Department stated that the program was designed to "look for a correlation between binge drinking and smoking."
Dr. Steven Pokorny, the head of this division, was unable to be reached for comment regarding this article in time for its publication, but the representative was able to provide a cursory background on the history of this program.
Beginning in July of last year (coincidentally coinciding with the campus-wide tobacco ban at UF), the program was designed to track how alcohol, and specifically binge drinking, affects smoking levels.
The program did stress that it is not encouraging students or young adults to binge drink, but is merely interested in tracking the correlation between the two.
This study is interesting for two main reasons: one, it is propagating the same myth begun over four hundred years ago by James I as an excuse to ban tobacco use, and two, it assumes (though not explicitly stated) that people who smoke are probably more likely to drink, and possibly to excess.
Smokers have a bad reputation, and always have, but to presume that a smoker is not only going to spew dangerous carcinogens into your children’s lungs but also drink to the point of blacking out is somewhat offensive.
The goal behind the initiatives at UF and the Alachua County Health Department are benevolent in nature, meaning they really do only want the health of our state and our nation to exceed the rest of the world’s because, frankly, America’s system of democracy makes it one of the few nations in the world that can become the healthiest. But the nature of being an American is having the freedom to choose, and while we have the capability to become the leader in world health care, it doesn’t mean we have the capacity.
People always will enjoy doing things which are slightly bad for them. Fast food, drinking, smoking, gambling…it’s the nature of freedom. We’re allowed to be a little stupid now and again, and the ability to do so is what smoking bans and health studies such as these detract from.
The people at the forefront of changing health care and how we treat our bodies are, in my experiences, kind, polite, and good-hearted people, but their participation in these endeavors is woefully misguided. As stated in the first installment of this series, smugness can be just as deadly as carbon-emissions, secondhand smoke, or chlorofluorocarbons.
But smugness, unlike those elements, brings a much more harmful effect than death with it. In lieu of mortality, smugness seeks to control the life choices and morality of the mass populous, all in the name of the all-mighty greater good.
Related Article: The Smug Alert (Part 1)
Carter R. Lyles is a student at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, FL and at the University of Florida in Gainesville. He is a journalism/psychology major, and in addition to his work at Pipes Magazine, he has contributed articles to The Alligator, Thursday Night Magazine, and The Fine Print. |
Written by Kevin Godbee
7 Responses
Recent Posts
Welcome to The Pipes Magazine Radio Show Episode 585. Our featured interview tonight is with Glen Whelan. Glen is the Director of Sales for Peterson of Dublin. Peterson is a family tradition for Glen. His father worked in the factory for 50 years, eventually serving as Factory Manager. Although Glen now serves as Director of Sales, he started as a part-time retail associate in the Peterson store at the age of 16. After more than a decade in Peterson retail, Glen joined the sales team in Sallynoggin. At the top of the show, we will have an “Ask the Pipemaker” segment with Jeff Gracik.
Welcome to The Pipes Magazine Radio Show Episode 584. We have a special show tonight where there will not be an interview, but we will have Jon David Cole as co-host. JD is the Owner/Tobacconist at The Country Squire in Jackson, MS, and he is the former co-host of the now discontinued podcast, Country Squire Radio. Country Squire Radio ran for 10-years and is still one of the most popular pipe-niche podcasts. Brian and Jon David will be talking all things pipes and tobacco, and we will get an update on what’s new at The Country Squire. We will be preempting our usual first segment to start right off with JD. We will have the usual music, mailbag and rant at the end of the show.
Welcome to The Pipes Magazine Radio Show Episode 583. Our featured interview tonight is with Tanner Halligan. Tanner is from Columbus Ohio, and makes the Butterbone Briars line of pipes. He first tried pipe smoking in high school with some friends, and enjoyed it on and off. About a year ago he began making pipes part-time, but was struggling until he decided to buy some pipe making kits by RawKrafted. The kits are made at Smoker’s Haven in Columbus. Tanner went into the shop and was immediately hired by shop owner and pipe maker Premal Chheda. With Premal’s mentoring, Tanner’s pipe making skills took a big leap forward. At the top of the show, we’ll have a Pipe Smoking 101 segment on flake tobaccos.
Saturday, I spent a wonderful day at Ohlone Cigar Lounge in Fremont, CA, sharing the stage with the ever charming Joe Fabian, who was doing a “Trunk Show” of Savinelli and Peterson pipes, which evolved into being as much of a pipe club experience as it was a sales event. It was a great opportunity to spend time with a bunch of folks talking about pipes, tobacco, food, cars, the joys of rigid-frame mountain bikes, and pretty much anything else that came up. To me, this sort of fellowship is one of the best things about pipe gatherings, and I certainly look forward to doing more in-store events in the future! At one point some of us had a conversation about why we tend to prefer one size or bowl shape to another, and we all had different views to share. Some choose pipes for their weight or their balance, others for their aesthetics, still others for capacity. This got me thinking about my own collection. While some may have very specific criteria, and their pipes exhibit a certain sort of “sameness,” my collection exhibits a pretty broad range of shapes and sizes from tiny to cavernous, and each has its place. For me, choosing the pipe I want to smoke is often as much a practical decision as it is one of whim and whimsy. On the practical side, one thing that often comes up for many of us is whether or not there is time to spend with a large bowl. For me, a certain irony arises in that decision process all too often; I think I don’t have time for a long smoke, but end up burning two small bowls instead, consuming as much time as the larger bowl would have, if not more. My whacky brain is now swirling with something almost too geeky to discuss, but I’m going to anyway. If you had, let’s say, a finite amount of tobacco and wanted to maximize your smoking time, would you be better off with smaller bowls or larger ones, especially wide, squat bowls vs. narrow, tall ones? How would you choose which pipe or pipes to smoke? Tall, narrow bowls filled with the same weight of tobacco seem to have a slight edge over wide, squat ones, at least with respect to time alight. As an informal experiment tonight, I chose a Castello 55 weighing in with a chamber diameter of 23mm and depth of 35mm, and my Sea Monster bent, with its 18mm x 53mm chamber. I chose these two because they are both exquisite smokes, and have similar chamber volumes. Each was filled with the same 2g weight of a VA tobacco, packed with a gravity fill followed by a very light tamp. The Castello gave up after 32 minutes. The Sea Monster lasted 40. I guess if you were stranded on that often discussed island, and maximizing your smoking time was an important consideration, you’d be better off with the tall, narrow bowl. But smoking time is certainly not all there is to consider in selecting a pipe to smoke; other differences are at least, if not more important, especially if maximizing enjoyment is the intention. Not surprisingly, the taste of the same tobacco from each of these two bowls was quite different. The smoke from the pot was a little sweeter, a little more complex, while the taller bowl delivered a brighter, more zesty flavor. In this case, both were delightful, but that hasn’t always been true. Is there such a thing as “the right” bowl geometry for any given tobacco type? Opinions are as varied as we are, but for me, flakes tend to sing in wider bowls, delivering nuances of flavor that can be somewhat attenuated in a narrow one. Yes, this is counter to the “conventional wisdom” that pipes with narrow, tapered bowls are “Flake pipes,” and large bowls are better suited as “English mixture pipes.” Though I’d never question another’s preferences, I’m comfortable taking the contrarian position here with respect to my own. Years ago, when I was developing my first VA/Perique flake, I did what I always do, and smoked the prototypes in a variety of bowl geometries. One of the pipes I chose during my exploration was a GBD 9493, a lovat-like pot with a wide aperture and conventional billiard height. The tobacco took the center stage spotlight and sang arias in that pipe. Since, I’ve repeated the experiment many times, always with the same result. If you want to experience everything a flake has to offer, try it in a pot. Wide bowls also offer something to the burly aficionado, bringing out some of the more subtle nuances of that leaf while keeping the smoke cool. Things get perhaps more interesting when it comes to bowl height. Since tall bowls tend to concentrate more of the distillates that form when tobacco burns, they can be both harder to keep lit at the bottom, and can intensify some flavors. This can be a good or a not so good thing, depending on the tobacco type, and the smoker’s preferences. I love shag cut tobaccos in tall bowls, while flakes are just too often challenging. Too, I find that fuller latakia mixtures deliver their best in medium and smaller bowls. This might have more to do with “palate fatigue” than the smoking dynamics of a particular pipe’s bowl geometry. (Truth told, unless I’m really focused on the process, I rarely could be considered a “slow smoker,” and as my cadence rises, so does the intensity of some of latakia’s less friendly characteristics, especially as the bottom of the bowl is reached. Combine that with a tall bowl, and my tongue just gets fuzzy.) But, I’ve known many who enjoy gigantic bowls of heavy lat-bombs. Maybe this is one reason the “conventional” medium billiard bowl is, and has always been so popular. It’s kind of the middle-ground – not too tall, not too wide, and does pretty […]
Welcome to The Pipes Magazine Radio Show Episode 582. We have a tobacco filled show for you tonight. Our featured interview is with Adam Boolen of Cloudbear Custom Blends. He became interested in pipe smoking when he walked past the Tinderbox in the Cerritos Mall while he was in high school. He smoked a pipe on and off again with years in between. When he became interested in pipes again five years ago, he downloaded a book on home tobacco blending, which eventually lead to Cloud Bear Custom Blends. At the top of the show we will have an Ask the Tobacco Blender segment with Jeremy Reeves. Jeremy is the Head Blender at Cornell & Diehl, which is one of the most popular boutique pipe tobacco companies in the USA.
This will be a bit of a stretch, a hill, a ridge too far for some of my pipe-smoking friends. Let’s just say the Pundit continues to suffer from being a mile too high. On a recent trip to Colorado, I traveled up and across Berthoud Pass, a mere 11,106 feet skyward, and later returned over the Continental Divide. Up and down, over, and beyond! Berthoud Pass is 1.4 billion years old, give or take a million. And the Continental Divide is a mere 70 million years old. Please, no jokes about Pundit’s age. It’s not in the millions. Just sayin’. Cutting across the Great Divide in Colorado—which slices through some 21 counties in the Centennial State since it earned statehood in 1876, 100 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence—Pundit was stunned by massive, and ever-hovering rock structures. And whether or not you are into geology and rocks, you might like to know that a couple of famous geologists (and presumably rockhounds) from way back were pipe smokers. There was John Muir, naturalist, botanist, writer, and author, who traipsed across the nation on foot! Make that a 1,000-mile trip afoot! You might recall that after viewing the phenomenal natural beauty stretched out before him in Yosemite, he convinced ol’ Rough Rider U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt to join him on a camping trip to see the land in all its geological beauty. Muir’s influence was instrumental in getting the land preserved. A natural loveliness we enjoy today, just as it was in Muir’s and Teddy’s time. And Muir had this to say of his early stint in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in the heart of what is now Yosemite National Park: When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe—from his book, “My First Summer in the Sierra,” 1911, page 110. John Muir was a pipe smoker. Then there is John Wesley Powell, a naturalist-geologist, like Muir. He was one of the first to float the upper Colorado River and to give the Grand Canyon its name. And from one of his observations of the canyon and its marvels: The wonders of the Grand Canyon cannot be adequately represented in symbols of speech, nor by speech itself. The resources of the graphic art are taxed beyond their powers in attempting to portray its features. Language and illustration combined must fail. John Wesley Powell too was a pipe smoker. He even swapped pipes with some of the Native Americans he encountered in the great canyonlands and elsewhere as he explored ranges and valleys. Now just hold on a bit more. I hear the boobirds in the audience trying to drown out the vistas. I see all the eye rolls. Those craggy Colorado mountains, the famous Rocky Mountains just right there nestled up to roads cut through immense solid rock structures, reminded Pundit of the beautiful sandblasts some of his pipes show off. I know, a stretch. But what is life without imagination and art? Imagine rock arrangements wrinkled in layers and stacks, lines etched into massive configurations that once reposed on the bottom of seas that once existed and have since disappeared. Returned and faded into geologic history once again. That’s right. Crags and even the look of plateau briars (that knobby rough rim of the bowl). For a better understanding of plateau shapes just head over to SmokingPipes.com. I can even hear now the loud chorus for someone to get out the stage hook on that one. But if you have ever had the opportunity to scrutinize those magnificent monoliths, you might arrive at a better understanding of the “craggy” aspect of a pipe’s outer sandblasted skin. Not to mention the pure natural beauty of our pipes and the artisan’s imagination. One of Pundit’s favorite pipe writers, Chuck Stanion at SmokingPipes.com has some wonderful stories on sandblasting. But those gigantic rocks of the ages have more lessons. They just didn’t appear in Colorado. They went through billions of years of emerging and disappearing. Oceans came, went, and returned. Some of the table mountains reminded me of a few of my Sherlock Holmes Petersons, especially the Holmes original with its calabash design. Up, flat, curved. Mark Irwin, another of the pipe world’s finest authors, has a delightful piece in his Peterson Pipe Notes about the Holmes and the history of the Peterson calabash. Which brings us to a final thought. Our pipes are born in nature as are we. We are all “hitched” together to everything else in the universe, as John Muir said. And master pipe artists provide us with a view of the past and present in their marvelous constructions. Layered, craggy, smooth, stained as is the earth in all of its past iterations. We enjoy such rich pleasure smoking these pieces of history with that fragrant leaf, tobacco in its many forms. Connected. Sometimes traveling a mile high into the great Rocky Mountains not only takes your breath away but gives us insight into other parts of our lives.
Thanks for the illuminating article. Although it preaches to the choir, so to speak, it’s important to be aware of the initiatives at UF and the Alachua County Health Department.
“The mission of the coalition is to create an environment supportive of the development and maintenance of a healthy body, mind and spirit for all members of the University of Florida community”
Ok, but how is anyone else’s health any of your business? How is what the Healthy Gators Coalition define as healthy the same as what everyone else defines as healthy?
There is also mental health. If having a smoke makes some feel better mentally, than taking that away harms their mental health.
You can make all the reasonable remarks you want. This isn’t about reason, it is about control and hate. Every time “they” can prohibit you from doing something “they” come closer to control over what you actually DO. Do you really think “they” are concerned about the general health of the population? Then why do “they” allow so many fast food franchises to be set up? Why do “they” allow so many additives to be put into your food? If “they” are so concerned about the general welfare of the populace, why are prescription drugs cheaper in Canada? Why is the wide s spread use of high fructose corn syrup allowed in food products? It’s not about health, it’s about control.
I actually just wrote a letter to my college (Washington University in St. Louis) to try to get pipes to be exempt from our newly enforced smoking ban. I don’t think the ban should be there at all, but one step at a time, you know? Here’s a copy:
“A bearded professor is sitting on a bench on his university’s quad, enjoying a break between classes and watching the clouds float overhead on a warm, summer day. While people watching, he pulls out his old Dunhill pipe, packed gently with Prince Albert tobacco. Putting match to tobacco, exhales a ring of smoke and sweet aroma. Returning his attention from his pipe to the quad, he sees a campus security officer approaching him. “Put that thing out,” he said, and hands the professor a ticket.
Being raised in a local restaurant and jazz-club, I saw first-hand the wonderful effect that not allowing smoking in an establishment has; however, the wonderful result was because of the lack of cigarette smoke, not all smoke in general. A sight similar to the one previously described is the event that changed me from ardent supporter of Washington University’s campus-wide smoking ban to hazarding to suggest that there need to be certain exceptions. The smoking ban is noble in intention, and has had many great results, but it spans further than is needed. Washington University’s campus-wide smoking ban should not apply to pipes because, though they are tobacco products, they are not nearly as contentious or dangerous as cigarettes. To show this, I will take the main reasons for the ban, one by one, and attempt to show that they are either not applicable to pipes whatsoever, or not significantly so; I will then address possible concerns to allowing pipes to be exempt from the ban.
According to proponents and designers of Wash-U’s smoking-ban, along with supporters of other outdoor smoking-bans, there are two primary reasons for the restriction: a more pleasant environment and the dangers of second-hand smoke. As for the first justification, there are two main prongs to this. First, the smell of the smoke: most pipe smokers are frequently approached and complimented on the aroma of their pipe tobacco, which is often flavored with cherry or vanilla. They are told that it reminded the person of a grandfather or uncle who used to smoke a pipe. This, coupled with the number of pipe smokers, which is so insignificant in comparison to cigarette smokers, makes it unlikely that their presence would be noticed and, if it is, even more unlikely to offend. As for the trash caused by cigarettes, this again does not apply to pipes; when a pipe is finished, the tobacco is simply ash and leaves, biodegradable substances that are barely noticeable and cause no detriment to the environment. The first of the two justifications for the ban on smoking is not applicable to pipes.
The concern of second-hand smoke is very real. However, the majority of the carcinogens from cigarettes comes from the chemicals sprayed on the plant prior to harvesting and from the machines used in production. These two factors are not present within pipe-tobacco and the amount of carcinogens is thus exponentially reduced. The amount of smoke to which one is exposed is another factor involved. As was previously mentioned, the number of pipe smokers is minute, thus the amount of exposure would be minute, as well. Additionally, the average pipe smoker enjoys far less tobacco on average than the average cigarette smoker smokes; once again, this would mean there would be less exposure. Thus, though smoke is still present with pipes, the danger is far less than with cigarettes.
I would imagine that this exception would cause a number of concerns. One of the first would be that there would be an increase in pipe-smoking. This is extremely unlikely, as pipes are not used to attain a chemical fix as cigarettes are. Thus, those who smoke cigarettes for a nicotine fix, as most do, would find no solace in the humble pipe. Another possible complaint is that it is unfair to allow one tobacco medium and not another; so be it. There are a number of private communities that allow people to own a golden retriever but not a pit-bull; both are dogs and both pose potential risks, but one is so much more hazardous than the other that one is forbidden while the other is allowed.
Pipes are a totally different breed than cigarettes and should not summarily be banned simply
because they are similar. Pipes are cleaner, less offensive, non-addicting, and safer. For these reasons,
the all-encompassing smoking-ban on campus should be amended to allow for the smoking of pipes.”
I am a huge fan of tobacco (and I also like to drink some spirits from time to time, mainly rum, although I take great care on drinking as I once almost fallen into alcoholism) and coffee. I like my pipes, I smoke daily and I have the great opportunity of living in a country where we have a smoking lounge at the office and 99% of the bars and pubs allow smoking (And that’s about it with the advantages of living in Eastern Europe 🙂 ). Although I am a man prone to vice, I can not say that I agree for example with the consumption of drugs (marijuana etc.) and neither the crappy legal stuff they call etno-botanics. Is there a difference between alcohol,cofee,tobacco and marijuana. How would you react if you would find a kid smoking pot at the entrance, not to mention that one night while I was going on the rooftop of my building to enjoy a cigar I found two guys with syringes in their veins?
Seeing this crusade against smoking makes me sick as the real dangers out there although more or less illegal run free. For example, marijuana appears in a lot of movies lately, while tobacco smokers if there are any are usually the “bad-guys”. I had the chance of seeing what a few joints smoked weekly can do to a person, sometimes smart people. Result: at least as bad as the excess of alcohol.
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-front for the urge to rule it.\
-H. L. Mencken