Anyone Else Have This Problem With Unsmoked Estates?

[pipingruotsi]

I can offer a different perspective here. At one time in my life, I was a functional potter. I made pots to be used. I didn't want to hear that someone was going to put my tea pot on the mantle. Sometimes I would tell people if I found out they weren't using the pot, I'd come to their house and take it back. lol

I think that putting things like pottery, pipes, furniture in the world of art is a great disservice to the maker and the object. These things are NOT works of art. The makers are craftsmen. Not using a craftsmen's work is robbing them of completing their project.

That being said, these works are "artful." The same rules apply to craftsmen as to artists with the exception that the work must be functional. Line, shape, form, color, etc. However, not using them is like completing your masters and being told you're not allowed to get a job. It's a big waste of time and effort.

Smoke 'em or I'll come to your house and take them back!

 

[jkenp]

pipingruotsi, you are the man! Well said.

 

[kashmir]

I once spent two grand on a case of six unsmoked Comoy Blue Ribands. After staring at them for a couple months, I decided to smoke em. Hey, its why I bought them in the first place. All my sixty four pipes are in my rotation. Life is just too short to worry about things like this. One of the reasons I enjoy pipes so much is precisely because they are objects of art that are meant to be enjoyed - in the most intimate way.

 

[captainsousie]

Wow, lots of replies. These, with the exception of one, were all bought because I like them and want to smoke them. Still doesn't make it easy to do the deed. The one I don't really care for is a meer lined pipe and I've hated the last 2 I had. It's from a company I like (Wally Frank) but it's meer lined :? . Do I want to smoke the pipe or trade it up for one I would prefer while it's still a virgin? Decisions, decisions.
Thanks Sable and Peck, good to know a few of the experienced pipers can feel some of the same things about virgin estates.
Bradley, I just may try that. Load up a new one and an old favorite and smoke them both.

Smoke 'em or I'll come to your house and take them back!

:lol: Yes sir, no problem there.
Thanks to all for the replies so far.

 

[pipingruotsi]

Captain, glad you took that in the light it was intended. It would always bother me when someone did not use a pot I'd made for its intended purpose. I guess I get a little worked up about it lol
I've never understood meer-lined pipes....you don't get to see it color

 

[drwatson]

I also have this problem. There are several pipes that I own that are just too nice to use, they are collector type pipes. I also have a couple that have some sort of special meaning. I have a encase glass case were these sit and are more show then anything. BUt there have been acouple pipes I have bought and after starring at them for a month, I finally decide to break them in. But I have really had to limit my buying, because I like you was ending up with way to many laying around.

 

[keith929]

Sorry captain,I don't have that problem.

Every pipe I purchase whether it's an unsmoked estate or brand new gets smoked.

I'm part of that school that believes an unsmoked pipe is not a pipe but just a pretty looking piece of wood,meerschaum,clay,etc.

Not smoking one of the pipes in my collection would be for me like buying a collectible watch and never wearing it.

 

[mso489]

Mostly I buy pipes to smoke, and do. However, I have had some reluctance, like for a week or two, before I finally

take the plunge, but it is mostly just trying to do the moment justice. I don't know how many pipes you have. If

you have more than (arbitrary figure) fifty or so, you may have "too many" for you, or you may be buying them too

fast to assimilate them into your rotation. Or you may be wavering between your pipe smoking and your pipe collecting.

Maybe a dozen or so of your best smoking pipes would suffice for your rotation, and the rest need to be a collection,

with no intent of smoking them. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[sablebrush52]

These things are NOT works of art. The makers are craftsmen. Not using a craftsmen's work is robbing them of completing their project.

We're going to disagree on this one. Sometimes an artisan uses a form to express something other or more than its mere function. If all pipes are nothing more than a bit of wood with a hole in either end, and some rubber and plastic, then any other concerns are superfluous; which position could be extended to suggest that spending hundreds and thousands of dollars over "grain" or "shape" or "artisanship" is pointless.
For that matter, the same could be said for any of the so called arts. After all, Rembrandt was a commercial artist, producing portraits for a monied clientele to the fashionable taste of his day. Giotto, Donatello, were illustrators who decorated the walls of churches with passages of the bible for the education of a largely illiterate populace. They were tradesmen. Anyway, painting is merely spreading around colored goop on a surface, nothing more.
It makes perfect sense that Johann Sebastian Bach's manuscript pages were better suited to use as covers for jars of preserves, or stuffing for chairs, or kindling to light a fire in the hearth. They had been played once for the occasion for which they were written and were of no more interest. Lets' not forget that persons such as Bach or Mozart were liveried servants. Their work was useful craft, not art, right?
Photography is definitely not an art form, right? That's what a great many "experts" in the art world have maintained. It's just a matter of chemistry, exposing a sensitized surface to light and then fixing the image. Matthew Brady is nothing more than a mechanic and the same can be said of Ansel Adams.
Or, maybe, there is occasionally something more to an endeavor than craft.

 

[raevans]

Captain,
That does sound like a problem indeed. I can understand the fear of burning the pipe out on the first couple of smokes. I found a way that, for me, eliminates that concern. It is a variation of the quarter method. I for the most part do not like the quarter method for a couple of reasons, it makes it too easy to damage the pipe in the mid section and worse than that, it prolongs the complete misery of having to break a pipe in.
(Yes, I’m one of those that hates the break in process, some say breaking in a pipe is like gaining a new friend, not me. I look at breaking in a new pipe along the same lines as training a dog. It’s a pain, but you have to make sure that it’s done right the first time or your in for trouble the remainder of the time that you have it)
Anyway, I use a variation. The first couple of times that I smoke a new pipe, I only fill one quarter. That way I can start to build a cake at the bottom of the bowl. After the first couple of smokes, I fill the entire pipe. I’ve never had a problem burning a pipe out with this method.

Also, I would recommend that you do not use your “go to” tobacco for the break in. The taste will be off, your tobacco will not taste like it should and it will only add to the disappointment factor of breaking the in the pipe. Try to find a tobacco that will not leave a ghost, but will build a solid foundation on the cake as soon as possible.
Dedicate time to break the pipe in. Don’t rush it, if it helps, take a break smoking the new pipe and have one of your “stand by” pipes ready to go. (Kind of a cleanse the pallet break) No said that you have to smoke a pipe within an hour, two hours, etc. If it takes the course of the day to smoke the pipe, (smoke it for a bit and then switch to normal smoke throughout the day), then so be it. After a couple of bowls in the pipe, it should be broken in enough so you don’t have any headaches and you should be able to add it to your regular rotation.
OK...maybe at that point, it is like gaining a new friend.

 

[ssjones]

I think that putting things like pottery, pipes, furniture in the world of art is a great disservice to the maker and the object. These things are NOT works of art. The makers are craftsmen. Not using a craftsmen's work is robbing them of completing their project.

That being said, these works are "artful."

While I consider many pipes to be "art", I sort of like the term "artful" as described.
While it is not something I've encountered a lot, lighting an unsmoked estate (if if had some brand value) is always something I consider carefully. To date, there has only been one that I have not enjoyed, it was resold as it wasn't a shape I appreciate. I see it show up occasionally in the "what are you smoking today" tread of another forum, so the new owner is appreciating the craftsmanship.
Ultimately, I've decided also as mentioned, that life is too short not to enjoy any particular piece.

 

[pruss]

Captain, I've been chewing on your question since you initially posted this. Ruminating, as it were, on my own process/madness when it comes to picking a pipe to smoke. I have, as I imagine you and the other folks doing resto/refurb work do too, a surplus of pipes that are cleaned and restored estates. I have no problem firing one of those old burners up and enjoying them. My problem with them, and with the NOS pipes that I stumble across, is that I often want to re-sell the nice ones, and that leaves me with the seconds... I do have to convince myself that I'm worth a nice pipe now and again.
Once I get over that hurdle, it's easy for me to light 'em up and enjoy them. In fact, I would say that most of the pipes in my rotation(s) have been smoked less than 10 times each. Now as my frequency of smoking goes up, that will change, but that will be a while... at least until my job doesn't require a level of palate sensitivity.
It's fun to read how everyone answers the various questions we face as buyers, collectors, and smokers of pipes. I had no problem firing my first commissioned pipe the day I received it. I want to have beautiful pipes in my collection, sure, but I want them to be grand smokers.
Happy Monday.
-- Pat

 

[docwatson]

I've been a smoker/collector for many years. It's an addiction for me; PAD (Pipe Acquisition Disorder) as it's known. I collect pipes because I love the history of a particular company or because I like the shapes, etc. It's just not possible in my situation to smoke them all. I'm not boasting mind you, just stating a fact that there are too many pipes that I smoke already rather than break in an unsmoked one. If you meet me at a pipe show, I will usually have many unsmoked pipes for sale or trade. I don't enjoy breaking in a new pipe for the most part and sometimes I question myself as to why I still buy new pipes. Answer: PAD :crazy:

 

[pipingruotsi]

My dear sablebrush, we are much closer to agreeing than you think. :wink: In fact, I completely agree with what you said.

I was by no means trying to suggest that a craftsman cannot also be an artist, or vice versa. What I am saying is that the majority of a craftsman's work is made to perform a function. If they're any good, it's made to perform a function superbly.

I would think that all great craftsmen are also artists at heart (hence the term artisan). I definitely made pieces that were never intended to function in a pragmatic sense, but the majority of my work was always a balancing act between making a pot that performed its function as it should, while the form remained beautiful. However, if it came down to a choice, I would sacrifice form for function.

I was also not trying to suggest that art is void of function. I do think, however, that the function between art and trade has a fundamental difference. If a craftsman/tradesman makes poorly functioning work, he won't make it very long in his trade. He may make it as an artist, though, if his work is sufficiently beautiful, moving, etc.

In a trade, the use of the object is necessary for the completion of the work. I suppose we could look at these makers as interactive artists, but I prefer the time tested terms of craftsmen/tradesmen.

Works of art, on the other hand, are meant to be received, contemplated, or admired without any physical interaction of the one receiving it. There are always exceptions, of course, when speaking in general terms.

I guess it all gets really muddy and subjective because it depends on the maker's original intention. In my first post, I was speaking as a craftsman, but as an artist, I would be equally as upset if I found someone using my drawings as "stuffing for chairs." Why? My intended function for the work was not being completed.

To further complicate matters, there's always the "bread and butter" work that both sets of makers need to do to survive and do what they actually want to do.

So now, we will see if you agree that I agree that we are, indeed, in agreement. :mrgreen:

 

[numbersix]

I fortunately don't share this problem with you Capt. ::
In fact, I've tried to come up with a situation where I might feel the same, but I can't. I don't really mind breaking in a new pipe - 9 times out of 10 it's been a piece of cake. For me, a pipe must be smoked or else it's existence is all for nothing...

 

[sablebrush52]

Hi Pipin,

I guess it all gets really muddy and subjective because it depends on the maker's original intention. In my first post, I was speaking as a craftsman, but as an artist, I would be equally as upset if I found someone using my drawings as "stuffing for chairs." Why? My intended function for the work was not being completed.

In the case of Bach's work, it's function had been completed. His job was to write pieces for a performance, sometimes weekly output, occasionally for a special occasion. Played once, their function was completed according to the standards of his day. Discarding his work would have been acceptable practice. Bach's successor took his manuscripts off the shelf and threw them out. It's only by mere chance that any of his work survives for later generations to experience and enjoy. And that survival owes itself to a broader appreciation of the significance of an objects purpose.

A hundred year old pipe that is both unsmoked and unworn is like a window in time and will tell me things about its maker that will be lost once it's put to use. I have a few very old pipes that are completely pristine and unsmoked that I use as a point of reference for restorations that I do from time to time. But I generally buy pipes to smoke them, so I leave the unsmoked antique pieces to others to fight over.

I also am fascinated by the history of pipemaking, which is how I came to edit the Pipedia Barling page. And I'm beginning work on another article, concerning another maker, for Pipedia. That side of my interest allows me to appreciate factors in addition to purpose.

After nearly 50 years as a professional artist/craftsman I've come to accept that the definition regarding what constitutes a work of art lies not just with the creator of the work, but also with those who interact with it. If I feel that something is a work of art, it's a work of art, regardless of what others say. Others may venerate something as a work of art that I think is not a work of art.

Years ago, when I was drawing inspiration sketches for Something Wicked This Way Comes my sketches were sent to Ray Bradbury for review. To me they were suggestions for shots for the film. Once reviewed, if selected, they would be used as a guide for location shooting. Once the scenes were shot, their purpose was, as you say, fulfilled. To Ray they were art and he kept them for his collection. He appreciated their purpose, and he also saw them as more.

Some say pipes are not works of art. I disagree. Not all pipes are works of art, but some can be. It's not just in the intent of the creator, it's also in the appreciation of the beholder. Purpose may get redefined by others, including artists like Picasso who take handlebars, attach them to s bicycle seat and call it a bull's head, and that's fine with me.

 

[yazamitaz]

I may have a similar situation but not as intense and it goes with your last line and Peck's "I'm busy and just want to grab a pipe I am familiar with" way of thinking. I purchased 4 gorgeous Trypis pipes back in May or June. I started breaking two in and they are part of my rotation. The other two I just started smoking THIS WEEKEND. They sat with me for 5 months as virgins and I never even thought of touching them. I also picked up another unsmoked estate on the Bay in July and that is my last remaining virgin. While I don't necessarily consider break in time "work", I do find the laziness factor kicking in saying "Grab this pipe because you want that tobacco". As my cycling season is over and other influences decrease their interruption frequency I think I will get all the girls broken in and be in prime condition.
I do sympathize with ya Cap'n

 

[ssjones]

Years ago, when I was drawing inspiration sketches for Something Wicked This Way Comes my sketches were sent to Ray Bradbury for review. To me they were suggestions for shots for the film. Once reviewed, if selected, they would be used as a guide for location shooting. Once the scenes were shot, their purpose was, as you say, fulfilled. To Ray they were art and he kept them for his collection. He appreciated their purpose, and he also saw them as more.

Wow, that is incredibly interesting. That movie and book were wonderful. Btw, the movie opens with a shot of the town cigar shop!
I appreciate your participation here sablebrush, it seems we can really learn a lot from your experiences.
Btw, you can view the movie online here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hna602MM-eA

 

[jkenp]

Is it art or craft? Well the craft has to be there for their to be art. But, art is empirical. Sable's examples seem to as much point out the exceptions rather than the rules. Face it, they had unique insights. For every Rembrandt, Adams etc. the are a ton of copiest/craftsmen. Watch one session of Antiques Roadshow and you'll see art and craftsmenship intermix in interesting ways. But there are far more craftsmen than artists. A craftsmen makes great copies that lack the fire of the artist.

 

[sablebrush52]

Is it art or craft? Well the craft has to be there for their to be art. But, art is empirical. Sable's examples seem to as much point out the exceptions rather than the rules.

Right. The rules don't evolve unless exceptions get noted. But, the fate of Bach's work wasn't an exception. It was pretty much the rule. Old Johann probably cleared out the shelves containing HIS predecessor's work.

Any craft that is denied any possibility of being recognized as an artform or having any merit beyond utilitarian purpose is going to be disposable. 90% of all film production from the silent era is gone forever, much of it melted down for the silver content in the film. The percentages for the sound era aren't a whole lot better. But nobody cared because films are craft and commerce, not art, or history, or social commentary. Animation studios used to wash the ink & paint off of cels so that the cels could be reused. Once photographed, the drawings, having fulfilled their purpose, were of no further value.
All pipes involve craft. But I won't agree to the proposition that no pipes are art or that their only justification for existence lies at the business end of a match. For me there are exceptions. Others make up their own minds.