Pipes as Conversation Context vs. Content.

[greeneyes]

For most of pipe-smoking history, men didn't gather to talk about pipes and tobaccos; rather, they smoked tobacco pipes when gathered to talk about other things.
...

Obviously, I'm speaking in generalities. Of course guys commented in passing on how they preferred this or that pipe, and maybe they even bantered their OTC tobacco preferences as a fun diversion. But still, pipes were more context than content.

It's true that for many, pipe smoking is but another means of tobacco consumption.

And I think it may also ring true that a majority don't have an interest or curiosity outside the realm of the commonplace.

But there were, and have been for centuries now, dark and smoky dens where men congregated and for whom tobacco and pipes has been the principal referent. It is with these men that tobacco culture sprung and evolved and on whose coat-tails we now coast. I'd venture to say that none of us would ever have even heard the terms "Dunhill" or "Latakia" were it not for men like these.

Put another way, some learn by experimentation what's good, and others settle for what's good enough. I think it's tempting to turn a fond eye to memories of the past, and Uncle Joe who had "his brand" of lite beer and domestic tobacco, and didn't like it much when the store ran out and he had to try something different. But had this been the case for all of us our rich history would be little more than a dusty antique-store vitrine, a relic to now-antiquated means of tobacco consumption. Nothing more, just as before.

And we wouldn't be here, overthinking the people who overthink the tobacco.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Like wines... people drink wines to also lubricate discussion, business, merriment. But, there have also always been groups that gathered to drink wines and to discuss wines, tastings, and winemaking.

 

[lawdawg]

Perhaps they did not make their pipes and tobacco a regular central topic of their discussion, but they certainly did think about them, or at least some works by well-known writers (who also smoked pipes) indicate that there was more to it in their minds than just a nicotine delivery system. I'm thinking of Tolkien's writings about visiting the tobacconist which was his favorite shop, or A.A. Milne's skewering of the dandies smoking Dunhills who cared more about collecting their pipes than smoking them.

A very good point indeed.

Fetishization as defined by the Cambridge dictionary:

an unreasonable amount of importance that is given to something, or an unreasonable interest in something.

There is a fine line between enthusiasm and fetishization. IMO, most of us here are on the "confirmed enthusiast" side of that line. In my other vice, drinking whisk(e)y, a huge number bourbon drinkers have veered far into fetishization, where they care more about obtaining certain hyped but hard-to-find bottles than they care about just enjoying a good dram. It is mostly guys who are newer to the "hobby." We are not so far gone in pipe smoking, but we do some some fetishization (mostly Esoterica, and now McClelland) that is very much reminding me of the bourbon madness. I think most of the guys here though still just want a good smoke.

 

[mso489]

I've never noticed that Forums members had any problem wandering off subject. I've solicited all kinds of informed advice on non-pipe subjects, from buying tires to re-sizing my wedding ring. Hang around a while longer and you will see this is true. Also, men seem to require some common interest to socialize around. Women, in general, are at ease talking about themselves, their lives, their hopes. Whereas men need an objective activity to discuss, like pipes, automobiles, sports, or home repairs to focus on. Just an anthropological observation without bias, I hope.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

We do tend to have art, car, business, and other threads on here. But, not everyone enjoys the same off-pipe topics. Plus, it would be hard to call ourselves a pipe forum if all we talked about were movies, art, and home decor, ha ha.

But, I highly suggest people read JM Barrie's Book. You can read it for free here... https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18934
It is about all things pipe smoking, and it demonstrates that men did get together to talk about smoking while smoking. Plus, the book is hilarious at times. A wonderful read.
Also, this guy wrote Peter Pan. It's funny how CS Lewis and Tolkien get all of the attention from the pipe world. Barrie need some love too, ha ha.

 

[kcghost]

J.M. Barrie's book is most enjoyable and can be viewed for free at https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18934 as cosmic pointed out. Well worth your reading time.

 

[Chasing Embers]

indicate that there was more to it in their minds than just a nicotine delivery system.

It's how they projected themselves and their sign of the times into the story. Lots of cigarettes in James Bond lore just as Ian Fleming was a heavy smoker.

 

[Morrison Jeremiah]

There is a fine line between enthusiasm and fetishization. IMO, most of us here are on the "confirmed enthusiast" side of that line. In my other vice, drinking whisk(e)y, a huge number bourbon drinkers have veered far into fetishization, where they care more about obtaining certain hyped but hard-to-find bottles than they care about just enjoying a good dram. It is mostly guys who are newer to the "hobby." We are not so far gone in pipe smoking, but we do some some fetishization (mostly Esoterica, and now McClelland) that is very much reminding me of the bourbon madness. I think most of the guys here though still just want a good smoke.

Many years ago, before my teetotalism, I was invited to a rather posh wine tasting party. Goodness knows why. I didn't have the first idea about wine, so I took along a 7 pint keg of cheap beer.
It was gone in no time.
So for all their fetishization about wine, all they really wanted was a good bit of ale down their necks.

 

[Chasing Embers]

all they really wanted was a good bit of ale down their necks.

Sounds like my kind of people.

 

[Sweet Home Alabama]

Something occurred to me --

For most of pipe-smoking history, men didn't gather to talk about pipes and tobaccos; rather, they smoked tobacco pipes when gathered to talk about other things.

Maybe this is a wet-blanket of an observation. Don't stone me. I'm not suggesting what should or shouldn't be. I'm just observing, as a point of interest, where a forum like this fits in the history of things.

As a general rule, pipes and tobaccos adorned and framed and lubricated conversations about other things. Pipes and tobacco were air in the tires, so to speak.
They were assumed -- they were a given -- they were ubiquitous.
They weren't a topic so much as they were what made any other topic more pleasant.

Obviously, I'm speaking in generalities. Of course guys commented in passing on how they preferred this or that pipe, and maybe they even bantered their OTC tobacco preferences as a fun diversion. But still, pipes were more context than content.

This observation is neither here nor there, I guess. Just sharing the thought FWIW.

I do agree, but this is a pipe specific forum and not one discussing Middle Earth.

 

[mso489]

Sometimes people just want the simple pleasures without a lot of fussy conversation. I understand that.

 

[SBC]

It's true that for many, pipe smoking is but another means of tobacco consumption.

And I think it may also ring true that a majority don't have an interest or curiosity outside the realm of the commonplace.

But there were, and have been for centuries now, dark and smoky dens where men congregated and for whom tobacco and pipes has been the principal referent. It is with these men that tobacco culture sprung and evolved and on whose coat-tails we now coast. I'd venture to say that none of us would ever have even heard the terms "Dunhill" or "Latakia" were it not for men like these.

Put another way, some learn by experimentation what's good, and others settle for what's good enough. I think it's tempting to turn a fond eye to memories of the past, and Uncle Joe who had "his brand" of lite beer and domestic tobacco, and didn't like it much when the store ran out and he had to try something different. But had this been the case for all of us our rich history would be little more than a dusty antique-store vitrine, a relic to now-antiquated means of tobacco consumption. Nothing more, just as before.

And we wouldn't be here, overthinking the people who overthink the tobacco.

You're a good writer, greeneyes.

 

[SBC]

Perhaps they did not make their pipes and tobacco a regular central topic of their discussion, but they certainly did think about them, or at least some works by well-known writers (who also smoked pipes) indicate that there was more to it in their minds than just a nicotine delivery system. I'm thinking of Tolkien's writings about visiting the tobacconist which was his favorite shop, or A.A. Milne's skewering of the dandies smoking Dunhills who cared more about collecting their pipes than smoking them.



There is a fine line between enthusiasm and fetishization. IMO, most of us here are on the "confirmed enthusiast" side of that line. In my other vice, drinking whisk(e)y, a huge number bourbon drinkers have veered far into fetishization, where they care more about obtaining certain hyped but hard-to-find bottles than they care about just enjoying a good dram. It is mostly guys who are newer to the "hobby." We are not so far gone in pipe smoking, but we do some some fetishization (mostly Esoterica, and now McClelland) that is very much reminding me of the bourbon madness. I think most of the guys here though still just want a good smoke.

Certainly. There's nothing to disagree with, here. Heck, my own "signature" is drawn from Tolkien's fictional excursion into such tobacciana.

 

[hawky454]

We do tend to have art, car, business, and other threads on here. But, not everyone enjoys the same off-pipe topics. Plus, it would be hard to call ourselves a pipe forum if all we talked about were movies, art, and home decor, ha ha.

But, I highly suggest people read JM Barrie's Book. You can read it for free here... My Lady Nicotine: A Study in Smoke by J. M. Barrie - https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18934
It is about all things pipe smoking, and it demonstrates that men did get together to talk about smoking while smoking. Plus, the book is hilarious at times. A wonderful read.
Also, this guy wrote Peter Pan. It's funny how CS Lewis and Tolkien get all of the attention from the pipe world. Barrie need some love too, ha ha.

Ah cool man, thanks for linking that. I’ll definitely be reading this.

 

[SBC]

men seem to require some common interest to socialize around. Women, in general, are at ease talking about themselves, their lives, their hopes. Whereas men need an objective activity to discuss, like pipes, automobiles, sports, or home repairs to focus on. Just an anthropological observation

I think that Lewis agrees with you, mso489:

In early communities the co-operation of the males as hunters or fighters was no less necessary than the begetting and rearing of children. A tribe where there was no taste for the one would die no less surely than a tribe where there was no taste for the other. Long before history began we men have got together apart from the women and done things. We had to. And to like doing what must be done is a characteristic that has survival value. We not only had to do the things, we had to talk about them. We had to plan the hunt and the battle. When they were over we had to hold a post mortem and draw conclusions for future use. We liked this even better. We ridiculed or punished the cowards and bunglers, we praised the star-performers. We revelled in technicalities. (“He might have known he’d never get near the brute, not with the wind that way” . . . “You see, I had a lighter arrowhead; that’s what did it” . . . “What I always say is “ . . . “stuck him just like that, see? Just the way I’m holding this stick” . . .) In fact, we talked shop. We enjoyed one another’s society greatly: we Braves, we hunters, all bound together by shared skill, shared dangers and hardships, esoteric jokes—away from the women and children. As some wag has said, palaeolithic man may or may not have had a club on his shoulder but he certainly had a club of the other sort. It was probably part of his religion; like that sacred smoking-club where the savages in Melville’s Typee were “famously snug” every evening of their lives.

What were the women doing meanwhile? How should I know? I am a man and never spied on the mysteries of the Bona Dea. They certainly often had rituals from which men were excluded. When, as sometimes happened, agriculture was in their hands, they must, like the men, have had common skills, toils and triumphs. Yet perhaps their world was never as emphatically feminine as that of their men-folk was masculine. The children were with them; perhaps the old men were there too. But I am only guessing. I can trace the pre-history of Friendship only in the male line.

 

[SBC]

We do tend to have art, car, business, and other threads on here. But, not everyone enjoys the same off-pipe topics. Plus, it would be hard to call ourselves a pipe forum if all we talked about were movies, art, and home decor, ha ha.

But, I highly suggest people read JM Barrie's Book. You can read it for free here... My Lady Nicotine: A Study in Smoke by J. M. Barrie - https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18934
It is about all things pipe smoking, and it demonstrates that men did get together to talk about smoking while smoking. Plus, the book is hilarious at times. A wonderful read.
Also, this guy wrote Peter Pan. It's funny how CS Lewis and Tolkien get all of the attention from the pipe world. Barrie need some love too, ha ha.

Thanks for the link and recommendation, Cosmic -- I plan to read this!

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Thanks for the link and recommendation, Cosmic -- I plan to read this!

My favorite story in there is the one about the tobacco pouch. I chuckled through it completely.

 

[crashthegrey]

I need to read that, Cosmic. Not to beat a dead horse, but seriously, men have sat around talking about pipes and tobacco for a long time. I see no issue with that being the topic of conversation.

 

[PipeIT]

I think it is fairly straight forward, going back, well, pick any period of time, and it seems like these answers lay in quality of life, education, awareness and appreciation.

I believe at earlier periods in life, people lacked these things, because the struggles of life, and the production of certain things was greatly limited, to a point of what outweighed the most, was the needs for necessity of life, so that necessities versus luxuries in many periods of life didn’t exist much. Luxury was limited, not only in amounts, but those who could afford and acquire them.

So was tobacco really a necessity of life, or a luxury? Of course in many cultures around the world, tobacco was considered a medicine, or for spiritual purposes, etc...

It seems like until the periods of history shortened the distance between those that have, and those that don’t reduced, and quality of life improved, mankind wasn’t sitting around having conversations of Crafts, Culture, Education, etc., because life was to hard to just survive, let alone dabble and consider these things. But going back in time to days of Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, etc.., of course there were men sitting around having educated conversations somewhat akin to these same ideas, but these were men few and far between, and because life was a struggle for thousands of years, this was something few and far between, until life became better for the greater population.

Quality of life, appreciation, education, awareness, it’s why we are where we are at today with these conversations of our pipes and tobacco.

 

[SBC]

If I may indulge my instinct to defend myself, Good Fellows:

(1) I did say in the OP, "I'm not suggesting what should or shouldn't be. I'm just observing, as a point of interest..."

The OP suggests an historical claim; it doesn't evaluate the dynamic which is claimed.

(2) I also said in the OP, "Obviously, I'm speaking in generalities. Of course guys commented in passing on how they preferred this or that pipe, and maybe they even bantered their OTC tobacco preferences as a fun diversion."

I intentionally tried to preclude accusations of suggesting too sweeping a claim.

(3) My own signature is drawn from a fictional tobacciana. I never doubted that tobacciana was itself an occasional topic of conversation.

(4) Nobody's suggesting that this should be anything other than a pipe forum. It goes without saying that I voluntarily sought out and joined this pipe forum because I like to talk about pipes and tobacco!

But having highlighted these clarifications, I think that the gist of my OP stands. Pipe smoking in some times and places was closer to ubiquitous than it is today. As a result, you might expect to find (in some times and places) a group of men puffing pipes together, who were mainly interested to discuss the local gossip, politics, dirty jokes, religion, what the world was coming to, economics, the merits and demerits of each others' business or agricultural practices, poetry, complaints or boasts about their wives, etc. etc. This dynamic could be, and sometimes was, true for at least a couple of reasons: (a) communities were tighter knit (this invites its own set of theories, which may involve religious uniformity, travel technologies, media technologies, etc.), and (b) pipe smoking was more commonplace, so you were bound to find some men doing it who had little interest in discussing it.

I myself have great interest in discussing it. That's why I'm here. No doubt, as many of you have pointed out, there were some such guys in any given era. That reality is not in conflict with the gist of what I'm saying.

Thanks for all your reflections, guys! I've enjoyed them all!