Lately I've been thinking about what it is that we really "know" about cigars. Cigar hobbyists and devotees on numerous boards have wondered aloud about the nature of the statements we make about cigars, cigar production, cigar storage, and cigar smoking. But how much of this is just speculation or a reiteration of statements we've heard elsewhere? Does empirical evidence to support our assertions exist? Is evidence of this nature even necessary when you've got people speaking from years of experience?
That brings us to this "F-F-F" post. The objective of this post is twofold. First I'd like to begin collecting these little tidbits of information and second, I'd like to start cataloging these claims, assertions, and statements into one of three categories.
But first let's ask why we want to undertake this exercise in classification. I think one good reason is that as new people are introduced to this hobby, they begin to seek information about what is "right" and what is "true" about the world of cigars. Assertions that speak to what is "right" are statements of value, judgment, taste, or preference. These are personal, indiosyncratic, and encompass more than that which which is strictly factual. Assertions that speak to what is "true" are claims to factual, certain knowledge. An imperfect analogy is that "rightness" pertains to the subjective while "trueness" pertains to the objective. In reality, the two are intertwined and, in practice, uncritically conflating the two aspects of knowing can result in a hybrid construct, a sort of messy knowledge that is unclear as to what elements arise from personal experience and what comes from real phenomena in the world. This "messy knowledge" carries little force in convincing us of what to believe because we do not know in what ways it is "mere" opinion or verifiable fact and as a result, debates persist endlessly, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and resolving nothing. (My most sincere apologies to the Bard!)
There is a danger in such a conceptual mélange. We have a natural tendency to retain that which is agreeable to our ways of thinking and believing while discounting that which clashes with what we are comfortable in knowing. The consequence of this tendency with regard to the construction of "messy knowledge" is that our biases lead to the selection of bits and pieces not based on their validity as knowledge but on how well we like an idea. The risk to novices is that they begin building their knowledge bases upon these bastardized tidbits of information and eventually end up with a confused and contradictory understanding of the science and art of the cigar.
So, in the interests of clarifying the state of knowledge in our hobby and providing a clearinghouse to vet the statements that we come across in our discussions, I'm proposing the following three "bins" into which we can toss things. They span the range from trustworthy to "take it with a big freakin' grain of salt."
Fact: There is reasonable evidence to support the claim. There is no credible evidence of at least comparable quality that directly contradicts the claim.
Folklore: An assertion or claim that appears to be based primarily on tradition or extensive personal experiences. These are statements that have assumed the patina of "good information" through extensive retelling over a long period of time. Evidence, if it exists, is dubious or of uncertain quality.
Fantasy: Clearly idiosyncratic or wishful pronouncements that have no consistent basis for support either in observation or experience.
What I propose we try is the following:
1. Anyone can post to this thread a statement, idea, or claim that they're read or heard. A source or reference would be nice if it exists.
2. Tell us whether you think it is Fact, Folklore, or Fantasy...and why.
3. The rest of us will add what we know about the statement with the hope being that a) fact is verified as worthy of transmission and restatement, b) fantasy is agreed upon as non-informative, and c) folklore is recategorized as either fact or fantasy.
4. If you are not sure what to classify something, that's absolutely fine. Say so, and let the fine minds of CigarPass help out.
So with that, let me get the ball rolling!
*************************************************
1. Fact: Cigars that are stored too moist will exhibit burn and possibly draw problems and the taste will suffer. I say this one is a slam dunk based on experience and inadvertent experimentation. Dryboxing (which is the functional reverse of too-moist storage) provides benefits against the problems noted above.
2. Folklore: It takes about 2 weeks for a newly introduced cigar to stabilize in your humidor and smoke well. I say it's folklore primarily because there seem to be so many variables involved that this rule of thumb might be successful for you 2 weeks but for another guy it might take a month or more. In a sense, I'm saying there is a grain of truth in here, but it is equally balanced by the need for one to understand the particulars of one's situation. It's underdefined.
3. Fantasy: A white ash means a cigar is of high quality. This one has been debated endlessly over the years. Plenty of "science" has been cited but as of today, I am still unsure exactly what the heck ash color means, if anything. Based on the number of crappy cigars I've smoked that have produced snow-white ashes, I have to call bullsh!t.
So what do you think, gentlemen and ladies? Shall we find out what it is we really know?
Wilkey
That brings us to this "F-F-F" post. The objective of this post is twofold. First I'd like to begin collecting these little tidbits of information and second, I'd like to start cataloging these claims, assertions, and statements into one of three categories.
But first let's ask why we want to undertake this exercise in classification. I think one good reason is that as new people are introduced to this hobby, they begin to seek information about what is "right" and what is "true" about the world of cigars. Assertions that speak to what is "right" are statements of value, judgment, taste, or preference. These are personal, indiosyncratic, and encompass more than that which which is strictly factual. Assertions that speak to what is "true" are claims to factual, certain knowledge. An imperfect analogy is that "rightness" pertains to the subjective while "trueness" pertains to the objective. In reality, the two are intertwined and, in practice, uncritically conflating the two aspects of knowing can result in a hybrid construct, a sort of messy knowledge that is unclear as to what elements arise from personal experience and what comes from real phenomena in the world. This "messy knowledge" carries little force in convincing us of what to believe because we do not know in what ways it is "mere" opinion or verifiable fact and as a result, debates persist endlessly, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and resolving nothing. (My most sincere apologies to the Bard!)
There is a danger in such a conceptual mélange. We have a natural tendency to retain that which is agreeable to our ways of thinking and believing while discounting that which clashes with what we are comfortable in knowing. The consequence of this tendency with regard to the construction of "messy knowledge" is that our biases lead to the selection of bits and pieces not based on their validity as knowledge but on how well we like an idea. The risk to novices is that they begin building their knowledge bases upon these bastardized tidbits of information and eventually end up with a confused and contradictory understanding of the science and art of the cigar.
So, in the interests of clarifying the state of knowledge in our hobby and providing a clearinghouse to vet the statements that we come across in our discussions, I'm proposing the following three "bins" into which we can toss things. They span the range from trustworthy to "take it with a big freakin' grain of salt."
Fact: There is reasonable evidence to support the claim. There is no credible evidence of at least comparable quality that directly contradicts the claim.
Folklore: An assertion or claim that appears to be based primarily on tradition or extensive personal experiences. These are statements that have assumed the patina of "good information" through extensive retelling over a long period of time. Evidence, if it exists, is dubious or of uncertain quality.
Fantasy: Clearly idiosyncratic or wishful pronouncements that have no consistent basis for support either in observation or experience.
What I propose we try is the following:
1. Anyone can post to this thread a statement, idea, or claim that they're read or heard. A source or reference would be nice if it exists.
2. Tell us whether you think it is Fact, Folklore, or Fantasy...and why.
3. The rest of us will add what we know about the statement with the hope being that a) fact is verified as worthy of transmission and restatement, b) fantasy is agreed upon as non-informative, and c) folklore is recategorized as either fact or fantasy.
4. If you are not sure what to classify something, that's absolutely fine. Say so, and let the fine minds of CigarPass help out.
So with that, let me get the ball rolling!
*************************************************
1. Fact: Cigars that are stored too moist will exhibit burn and possibly draw problems and the taste will suffer. I say this one is a slam dunk based on experience and inadvertent experimentation. Dryboxing (which is the functional reverse of too-moist storage) provides benefits against the problems noted above.
2. Folklore: It takes about 2 weeks for a newly introduced cigar to stabilize in your humidor and smoke well. I say it's folklore primarily because there seem to be so many variables involved that this rule of thumb might be successful for you 2 weeks but for another guy it might take a month or more. In a sense, I'm saying there is a grain of truth in here, but it is equally balanced by the need for one to understand the particulars of one's situation. It's underdefined.
3. Fantasy: A white ash means a cigar is of high quality. This one has been debated endlessly over the years. Plenty of "science" has been cited but as of today, I am still unsure exactly what the heck ash color means, if anything. Based on the number of crappy cigars I've smoked that have produced snow-white ashes, I have to call bullsh!t.
So what do you think, gentlemen and ladies? Shall we find out what it is we really know?
Wilkey
(Fact?)
