Pipe Myths

[craig61a]

 

[Briar Lee]

I agree that there are health risks, and that is a myth to consider pipes as a “lesser harm” type of tobacco use.

That being said, we do have a few MD types on the forum. I would be interested to hear their thoughts on the “pipes are healthier” myth.

Smoke, and dust, and anything other than pure fresh air isn’t good for us to breathe.

Pipe and cigar smoking are less bad than cigarettes because usually we don’t inhale the smoke deeply in our lungs.

But, I’m convinced nicotine is good for the soul, as it releases dopamines.

Whether the well being effect nicotine releases is greater than the risks of smoke inside the oral cavity might be debatable.

Those damned cigarettes are such an efficient nicotine delivery system we pipe smokers, only about one per cent of nicotine slaves, get understudied.

Tex Williams died of pancreatic cancer at age 68.

 

[craig61a]

Regardless, myth shouldn't be written off so quickly. It serves a valuable purpose; mainly to provide a basis for maintaining and perpetuating the traditions of associated with any custom or endeavor.

Indeed - These are the truths held by the Pipesmokers of the Loyal Order of the Holy Mackerel...

 

[warren]

But, I’m convinced nicotine is good for the soul, as it releases dopamines.

While displacing oxygen. Which does the brain require? Nicotine or oxygen? There is nothing efficacious about smoke or smoking, absolutely nothing. Some of us who smoke recognize that and simply enjoy our little vice, selfish as it is.

I will observe that one man's myth is probably another person's reality/fact.

 

[sablebrush52]

Pipe and cigar smoking are less bad than cigarettes because usually we don’t inhale the smoke deeply in our lungs.

As long as you're not smoking indoors, sitting in a cloud of it.

In any event, everything croaks out sooner or later, even the Universe. So gather what few squalid pleasures as ye may.

 

[J-Evverrett]

I would argue that things which are not good for you can be good for you in proper amounts.

 

[sablebrush52]

CD. , v v.

While Ewha mentions that in his 1974 book, it is also noted that there is no documentary of that practice. It does mention that pipe cleaner's trade was established, and pipes were bundled together and sent to the bakehouse for cleaning. How pervasive or widespread the practice was is unknown. So to say that this was just done as a matter of course isn't really established.

At Fort Snelling, just a few miles east of me, people used to find old clay pipes near the riverbank over the side of the cliffs. The theory is that soldiers threw their used clay pipes in the latrine, and over the years the erosion washed the pipes down the side of the cliff. The area is marked no trespassing now to keep scavengers out. There are also old tunnels and dilapidated sewers in the area that attract urban explorers. I guess they didn't have pipe cleaners trade nearby in the early 1800's.

There's also no documentary evidence that William Shakespeare actually wrote any of his plays either.

There's also no disproof. Having worked as a craftsman and a small business owner, it doesn't strike me as something apocryphal. You save pennies where you can, using your resources as fully as you can.

 

[sablebrush52]

I would argue that things which are not good for you can be good for you in proper amounts.

Sure, but in a different way. Kind of a trade off.

 

[lraisch]

@The Amish Tyrant Interesting article!
Anthony says he found a pewter tankard and a clay pipe during a river clean-up and said he thought they were mine!
He says the Condor packet I found while litter picking was one of mine as well...
The beachcombing sounds my sort of thing; it would be fun to find complete clay pipes!
Do you think I'd want to smoke one I'd unearthed???
I'm strongly against disposable single use items and find it shocking that many people discarded their clay pipes after only one smoke...
I thought single use items were a modern problem and that discarded e-cigarettes are the modern equivalent of clay pipe fragments...
I've already reduced my plastic waste by refilling my empty bottles and other containers. I get my toiletries and cleaning products from the refill stall at the market and there's a newsagents in Chesterfield that sells loose Gawith pipe tobacco.

I've never heard of clay pipes being thrown away after a single use. These were fragile items and easily broken. I believe that's when they might be discarded.

Yes, they were cheap, shipped in barrels and packed in straw, but I've never heard of them being prefilled and I doubt that's practical.

 

[Zero]

As long as you're not smoking indoors, sitting in a cloud of it.

In any event, everything croaks out sooner or later, even the Universe. So gather what few squalid pleasures as ye may.

Ah, yes, Heat Death or Lukewarm Death (Entropy). You jogged my memory of a book I need to revisit. You are right, smoke 'em if you got 'em people...I shouldn't post under the influence.

 

[warren]

I would argue that things which are not good for you can be good for you in proper amounts.

How much oxygen deprivation would be considered good for your brain? Any medical/scientific studies around which provide such an amount?

To smoke is simply a selfish decision we smokers have made. Rather than trying to justify such a decision, load your pipe and simply enjoy your wee stab at rebellion. That's what many of us do, live with the risks and enjoy the pipe which can only be defined as a selfish decision. Weigh the risk versus the reward, self-satisfaction, and enjoy your tobacco while watching your moneys waft gently skyward. That's what I do when I'm smoking and not working.

 

[The Amish Tyrant]

I've never heard of clay pipes being thrown away after a single use. These were fragile items and easily broken. I believe that's when they might be discarded.

Yes, they were cheap, shipped in barrels and packed in straw, but I've never heard of them being prefilled and I doubt that's practical.

I think it is practical and convenient to sell pre packed pipes, especially at the pub during that era (with out having the market at your fingertips). Think of it this way: a strong majority of cigarettes are sold prefilled and often sold in bars st a premium before the vending machines were outlawed. With the average clay pipe life span of 2 years, the pipe could be refilled (similar to popcorn at the movie theatre).

Here is a historical business that sells just the clay Penny Pipe for $3 (and other clay pipes cheaper the SPC or PC. A penny for a pipe and chamber's worth of tobacco seems like a fair price, but I have no dog in this fight.

Penny Pipe

Stem length is about 2.75 inches to the base of the bowl. The bowl design is a tight grid pattern and the bowl is very small, about a half inch in diameter. The stem has a wave and dash design. This size pipe would often be sold as a pre packed pipe in the 18th century.

www.samsonhistorical.com

 

[HawkeyeLinus]

That's probably news to Briar. Briar is porous to a small degree, and contains the remains of its capillary structure, which is what is referred to as grain. This structure allows for heat dissipation, and that dissipation varies from pipe to pipe as does the structure.
But when I stare at one of my pipes and yell, "breathe" at it, it just sits there and mocks me.

Yet when I say "gurgle" .........

 

[bullet08]

P-lip is women's private toy for personal use. Yeah, that's a big myth.

 

[craig61a]

There's also no documentary evidence that William Shakespeare actually wrote any of his plays either.

There's also no disproof. Having worked as a craftsman and a small business owner, it doesn't strike me as something apocryphal. You save pennies where you can, using your resources as fully as you can.

There’s a fairly solid body of evidence that Shakespeare did indeed write his plays… I just don’t see that there is a solid body of evidence to support the claims made about clay pipes. Did it happen that way? Perhaps so, but I don’t think what little evidence is available would allow it to be claimed it as though it was a common, widespread practice.

 

[craig61a]

Many sold clays prepacked, one smoke shots.

Kinda like Jell-O shots nowadays…

 

[sablebrush52]

There’s a fairly solid body of evidence that Shakespeare did indeed write his plays… I just don’t see that there is a solid body of evidence to support the claims made about clay pipes. Did it happen that way? Perhaps so, but I don’t think what little evidence is available would allow it to be claimed it as though it was a common, widespread practice.

Go back and read what I wrote and show me where I said it was a widespread practice.

There is a body of evidence, all basically opinion, but no documentary evidence since no manuscripts are known to survive, and there is a body of scholarly work suggesting that someone other than the barely educated Shakespeare wrote the surviving plays. Personally, I think there is such a thing as genius and I think that Shakespeare did write the plays attributed to him. Then, of course, there is the matter of the sources used, and some evidence of editing in the creating of the First Folio. People always think they can "improve" genius.

 

[Yadkin1765]

Apologies. Hate to interject Just finished reading a work arguing for de Vere Earl of Oxford as the likely author of the Shake-speare plays along with his secretaries and scribes.

There really is little to no evidence that Will Shakspere of Stratford upon Avon wrote the plays (beyond a 19th century push to establish the Stratford man as the bard). But there is quite a bit of practical evidence to suggest he didn't. He could barely write (barely even spell his own name consistently), there is no written correspondence about the Stratford Shakspere as a writer, most especially during his near decade long retirement in Stratford. No one seemed to care he was there at all. His children couldn't write, and he left no books at all behind (despite being a polymath). And while I as well believe in genius, I do not think genius means knowing without having to learn.

Shake-speare (not Shakespeare) is a mighty-fine and deep meaning nom de plumb for an author of rapier wit if probed for its Elizabethan poetical value.

So far as clay bar pipes go, I think this is pretty well known to historians of the age. As I understood the clay pipes sold packed for one time use in pubs in old England, after they were smoke they were returned to the bar, where a small part of their tips would be broken off for the next use, the bar ownier getting multiple uses out of a single pipe by this method (paying for them through multiple uses), then when too small for practical use, they were disposed of. A single pipe might last a day or a week, depending on how often people were utilizing the service.

Lastly, a myth: Tobacco smoking make one smarter. Not really, but it does make one better at thinking (that is, if you've got a good thinker to think those thoughts). It is a well established nootropic.

 

[craig61a]

Go back and read what I wrote and show me where I said it was a widespread practice.

There is a body of evidence, all basically opinion, but no documentary evidence since no manuscripts are known to survive, and there is a body of scholarly work suggesting that someone other than the barely educated Shakespeare wrote the surviving plays. Personally, I think there is such a thing as genius and I think that Shakespeare did write the plays attributed to him. Then, of course, there is the matter of the sources used, and some evidence of editing in the creating of the First Folio. People always think they can "improve" genius.

I never said you did… it was posted on the thread earlier as though it SOP.

As for Shakespeare, well, there’s more subject matter out there making claims that he did or didn’t write his own plays.

The only reference I can find is some obscure paragraph from a book written in the 1970’s…

I’m out. IBTL

 

[UB 40]

I'm not sure anything I would list here would count as myths, but they are ideas I treat skeptically and do not employ in my own pipe smoking, despite their general acceptance in most pipe smoking circles.

1. You need to break-in a pipe before you can really smoke it as it was meant to be smoked. You need to build cake, and blah blah blah. None of this is true in my eyes. I keep my pipes clean and cake build up is minimal at best. It's not necessary. What is more important is keeping a pipe clean.

2. You must rest your pipes after every use. You can smoke the same pipe more than a couple of times in the same day without destroying it. I do think there is some value in "resting" a pipe, insomuch that use of any object typically entails its degradation unless due diligence to cleaning and repair is managed. But as a general rule, people treat briar and meerschaum as being far more fragile than it really is.

3. Every new smoker should start with an aromatic. I would say a new smoker would be best served by enjoying a sampler and then gravitating towards blends most like the tobacco he enjoyed from the sampler the most. Aros can be great for some newbies, and not so great for others. I started on aros, and it made my entry into this hobby probably a little tougher than it needed.

4. That the quality of how a pipe smokes is entirely objective. It isn't. Perception of things has a very large impact on how we take to them, regardless of the facts (or lack thereof) present. I'm convinced if you took a 100 veteran pipe smokers, blindfolded them, and had them try to reliably tell the difference between a basic $100 pipe and some custom piece, most would not be able to do so with any consistency. This is not to say there are not objective considerations that impact how a pipe smokes. But pipes are fairly simple tools, and I think people convince themselves their $800 pipe will smoke better than their, say, Peterson or Neerup just because it makes it easier to justify the pricetag. You're paying more for aesthetics than anything else.

5. Pipe smoking is physically healthy, or at least not harmful. We shouldn't kid ourselves. The mental benefits of smoking may very well outweigh the physical detriments, and pipe smoking in moderation helps alleviate some risks. But it is a physical risk. One I'm willing to take. But some pipe smokers act as if there is not physical risk at all, and that is just delusional to me. But to each their own. Wouldn't be much of a vice if it didn't incur some risk, I say. Where's the fun in having a vice without some risk?

I love analytical approach of your pamphlet. And you addressed some other myths which are not mentioned until now.

I agree also these things are pipe myths: the law of breaking in a pipe, and of building up cake. In my experience you don’t need both at all.

And there is the underestimated durability and simplicity of pipes and their engineering.