« Shabbos Frivolity: Cherubim | Main | Not a doctor, but The Doctor. The Definite Article, you might say. »

A blunt question

So. Your Humble Blogger was supervising our student workers last night, as I am wont to do, or at least as I am paid to do, when one of our workers says more or less this: A guy just totally walked by the library doors smoking a blunt!

Now, my reaction was surprise that a marijuana cigarette would, in such an exchange, be referred to as a blunt. Not that I didn’t understand the term, but I have the sense that back in the early nineties, when I was the age that this person is now, the word blunt would have been an old-fashioned, somewhat pretentious or self-conscious way for somebody to refer to a marijuana cigarette. Such an item would have been called a joint, which (further investigation revealed) is a term still in use. I’m not sure what else would have been used in the situation. To the best of my recollection, a classmate might have told me that a guy just walked by the library doors smoking a fattie, but that would not have been a term used from a student to a supervisor. Similarly a spliff or a doobie or a jay, I suppose, or perhaps even reefer, used jocularly and as a way of indicating that the speaker is of course totally unfamiliar with such items. But from a student to a supervisor? It couldn’t have been anything else but joint.

I mean, without changing the terms of the sentence—I might have told a middle-aged supervisor that somebody walked by smoking marijuana, or even I suppose smoking weed, or just smoking something. Actually, I can’t really imagine telling the supervisor at all. Not that it was all that common, or all that uncommon, just not something I would have brought up in conversation, I think. Although I should say that the person had just come in, and I was the first person she had the opportunity to tell about it, so there’s that.

I should add that we are both white, both of middle-class (or upper-middle-class) suburban backgrounds. We are friendly enough, occasionally chat about topics not directly library-related, but aren’t best buddies. We are friendly enough to make jokes about illegal narcotics. I myself have never smoked the stuff (too cheap, mostly, and sensitive lungs) and the student in question is, you know, familiar enough with the smell of it (as I am, I suppose, if I am sufficiently decongested to have any olfactory sense worth the name) but not obviously in what we used to call the drug culture. I imagine all that stuff would make a difference in the jargon, but I have no idea exactly what that difference would be.

Any ideas?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

Comments

I believe, technically, that a blunt is a hybrid creation by which one removes a sizable percentage of tobacco from a pre-rolled tobacco cigar, cigarette, cigarillo, or perhaps even a cheroot. One then re-fills the space thus vacated with leaf. Clearly, if one were possessed of mighty Blunt Fu, one could sufficiently break down the chronic or dank bud to leaf-like consistency and re-fill the blunt cavity with kind, but if one were so possessed, one might also wonder why one would bother.

I assure you that among the population that creates such hybrid instruments, the term remains very much in currency. Or so one hears.

peace


Comments are closed for this entry. Usually if I close comments for an entry it's because that entry gets a disproportionate amount of spam. If you want to contact me about this entry, feel free to send me email.