new York times article on antique snuffboxes http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/fashion/22iht-acag-box22.html?emc=tnt&tntemail0=y&\_r=0&pagewanted=all I went on the gallery website couldn’t see any pics thou
“The snuffbox, essentially a masculine object, was a container for tobacco that the user would take to his nose in order to sneeze,” Mr. Kugel said. I must disagree with Mr. Kugel. Sneezing is an occasional effect not the purpose for me (or anyone else I know who takes snuff).
Mr. Kugel sounds like an English major trying to be a historian. He knows a lot more about boxes than snuff.
I don’t think you have to disagree, I think you can just say it is inaccurate. I think anyone reading this would, at that point question this. It’s too bad that the article writer didn’t think about this, at all.
Someone should write Ny Times and give some enlightenment pointing out his follies. Good journalism should be expected with a paper of this stature. This reporter probably thinks a screen door on a submarine is a good idea.
Most people today, even the sophisticates, have absolutely no idea what snuff is and for what purpose one would ever take it.
However it was in fact taken for the purpose of sneezing by many. Today that would seem ridiculous as the belief in the benefits of a good sneeze is no longer solicited by doctors. There is a fine line treaded on the subject of sneezing. I don’t believe it should be discouraged nor should it be boasted that one does not sneeze while snuffing. As almost any novice snuffer will sneeze. It would be better if the sneeze was embraced as a pleasantry by the masters as in days of old. Not that sneezing is the goal but certainly not berated as if a snuff was done improperly. 2cents
Not only that, but a good sneeze can be quite exhilarating.
I enjoy a good sneeze at 649 miles an hour.
oh, in that case, I take back my statement at being inaccurate