Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Refusing to play at places where smoking is allowed
- Thread starter sonicland
- Start date
Yes, I think you are being a "jerk" (in your words).
Making a demand like that is unrealistic and overly selfish, in my opinion.
My advice is to suck it up, man up, and step outside between sets if you have to.
Well you are entitled to your opinion. But as someone who has come to enjoy gigging out again thanks to almost all clubs in my area going smoke free I have to disagree. There used to be clubs I dreaded playing due to heavy smoke and lack of proper ventilation. A couple of them I even refused to play again. So I say again to the OP, stick to your principles.
As long as you are upfront BEFORE you audition, you aren't wasting anyone's time. i wouldn't hire someone so inflexible, but other people may not care. Going into a smokey bar once in a while is not a health hazard, it's an inconvenience. If someone told me this before an audition I would wonder what other "deal breakers" they may come up with later on.
One of the great things about a "controlled choice ban", that is one where you know it is a smoking venue but have the choice to enter or not, then the risk is yours, is that I can double a musicians work.
Two bars, one smoking, one non-smoking should see two different audiences, so two seperate chances to play and earn money.
If the bars are side by side then there should be no talk of not playing one because you take the customers from the other, as is the case in certain towns where bands cannot even play different venues in the week prior or after a show.
But the reality is that bar staff have to stop serving and leave the premises for a "smoking break"????
What has been suggested in the UK is that bars and pubs lose money because of the smoking ban, so venues and opportunities to play are reducing fast.
It seems smokers are more carefree with their time and money and do not rationalise the spending of it, so will spend well in bars. As such they help keep bars in profit so non-smokers can enjoy everything else on offer? Music being one of those things on offer goes when the bar closes, as is the case of the "blanket ban" where everyone is penalised.
Two bars, one smoking, one non-smoking should see two different audiences, so two seperate chances to play and earn money.
If the bars are side by side then there should be no talk of not playing one because you take the customers from the other, as is the case in certain towns where bands cannot even play different venues in the week prior or after a show.
But the reality is that bar staff have to stop serving and leave the premises for a "smoking break"????
What has been suggested in the UK is that bars and pubs lose money because of the smoking ban, so venues and opportunities to play are reducing fast.
It seems smokers are more carefree with their time and money and do not rationalise the spending of it, so will spend well in bars. As such they help keep bars in profit so non-smokers can enjoy everything else on offer? Music being one of those things on offer goes when the bar closes, as is the case of the "blanket ban" where everyone is penalised.
On the same topic, but veering a but further away from the original question...
When the argument of other airborne pollutants come up, such as automobile exhaust fumes, chemicals, welding, etc... In my opinion, the thing with all of those, as opposed to cigarette (or cigar) smoke, is that they serve a purpose. And by that I mean, when you drive a car, you're either going to work or using it to get somewhere. If you're in a work environment that uses chemicals, you are doing so to produce something to be sold as part of the business. Same with welding, you're making something. The bottom line, is they are byproducts of something productive. Maybe not ideal in the sense that they have negative side effects or byproducts.
What is productive from smoking? Does it serve a purpose? Maybe personal enjoyment for some, I guess. But can someone honestly tell me that they really enjoyed their first cigarette?
When the argument of other airborne pollutants come up, such as automobile exhaust fumes, chemicals, welding, etc... In my opinion, the thing with all of those, as opposed to cigarette (or cigar) smoke, is that they serve a purpose. And by that I mean, when you drive a car, you're either going to work or using it to get somewhere. If you're in a work environment that uses chemicals, you are doing so to produce something to be sold as part of the business. Same with welding, you're making something. The bottom line, is they are byproducts of something productive. Maybe not ideal in the sense that they have negative side effects or byproducts.
What is productive from smoking? Does it serve a purpose? Maybe personal enjoyment for some, I guess. But can someone honestly tell me that they really enjoyed their first cigarette?
I have thought about that and I probably think you're right. I think there are a lot of other factors too, such as the economy, cheaper costs of buying alcohol at the grocery store and drinking at home and just the overall social acceptance of going out to bars on a frequent basis. I think that in general, people are starting to have to work longer and harder now, so they probably just don't have the time and energy to get out as much.
Smoking bans here are piecemeal, some localities have bans, some don't. The small town I live in has two bars, one allows smoking, one hasn't for a decade. Guess which one is generally busier? Yep, the non-smoking bar. The universal complaint, even from smokers, is that the other place just smells too foul from cigarettes. The smokers I know really don't complain much from having to go outside, even in the winter, which is very long here. Everyone in my band (no one smokes) would rather play in a smoke-free environment, but we won't pass up a gig in a smoking venue if they are paying. But it is everyone's right to decline to play a certain place if something about that place offends their sensibilities, whether you agree with their reasoning or not.
It's just an argument/justification tactic. Much like most pot debates, it's an attempt to win arguments. If one steps back from personal opinions, feelings, and agendas, it's generally used when the argument isn't very strong or it's a losing battle. Smoking is bad....OH YEAH?! Twinkies are bad, they should band Twinkies! That type of thing.
As for the purpose, it goes back to the 'ol joke that nobody really enjoy smoking, but no way in hell do they want to stop.
Besides getting married and having kids, homebrewing has killed my need to frequent bars. I still might go a few times a year. When I can brew 2 cases of good beer for ~$30 (or more depending on ingedients), it's easy to stay home and drink my own hooch.
Yes, I think you are being a "jerk" (in your words).
Making a demand like that is unrealistic and overly selfish, in my opinion.
My advice is to suck it up, man up, and step outside between sets if you have to.
Why do so many people in this thread thinks the OP should be obligated to go somewhere he doesn't want to be and breathe chemicals he doesn't want to breathe? It's his life, his health and he has the right to establish his own priorities. He obviously doesn't depend on music for income, so why is it a problem if he wants to work with like minded individuals who would limit their gigs to venues with clean air? That would leave more work for those who don't mind the smoke. I don't understand all the judging and condemnation.
He's not talking about springing this on the band after he's in, he's asking what effect this would have on band leaders' decisions to hire him or not. Appropriate answers would be;
1. I would hire you and only play appropriate venues.
2. I would hire you and find subs for jobs at smoke friendly venues.
3. I wouldn't hire you. I would hire someone who will play all the rooms I book.
Instead he gets response to this effect (this is a composite of multiple responses and paraphrased)
"You are a selfish jerk who is responsible for the erosion of my rights and the decline of democracy"
How is he being selfish? If I asked you to come clean my septic tank and you refused, would that be "selfish" of you? I haven't paid you any money, you owe me nothing and you are not under any obligation to perform a task you are not willing to do. If you have other gainful employment, it would be a waste of my time and energy to judge and cajole you, when there are others who are willing and able to do the job.
Well, the OP's original question was germane to this category. Perhaps returning to the original topic would be more appropriate.
Pretty much. With that, I think it will be hard to argue against this, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone tries.
And of course I forgot to say to the OP.
It's a decision, stick to it, but do not fear going back on it of a great opportunity falls yourway. There will be those that say "oh now you feel you can pick and choose"? To which the answer is yes, it has always been about choice and on this occasion I choose to.
Don't let your freedoom to choose be shackled to previous choices, take choices on merit.
As I said I am a smoker, but I smoke for pleasure, I can go days, weeks or months without a cigarette, but I do not like stale smoke....so you can imagine some of the comments I get when I complain about smoking at some venues.....then head out for a cigarette.
One venue though does stick in mind. It was in Belgium, and the air was thick with the smoke. I can still see the Harp player drawing in that smoke,and the swirls it made, into his harmonica, as I can still see the smoke moving around him as he played. I also can remember the sore throat he had for days after it.
It's a decision, stick to it, but do not fear going back on it of a great opportunity falls yourway. There will be those that say "oh now you feel you can pick and choose"? To which the answer is yes, it has always been about choice and on this occasion I choose to.
Don't let your freedoom to choose be shackled to previous choices, take choices on merit.
As I said I am a smoker, but I smoke for pleasure, I can go days, weeks or months without a cigarette, but I do not like stale smoke....so you can imagine some of the comments I get when I complain about smoking at some venues.....then head out for a cigarette.
One venue though does stick in mind. It was in Belgium, and the air was thick with the smoke. I can still see the Harp player drawing in that smoke,and the swirls it made, into his harmonica, as I can still see the smoke moving around him as he played. I also can remember the sore throat he had for days after it.
Only smokers see it otherwise.
Wrong. I've been advocating here for bar owners and smokers to have the right to operate a smoking bar. It's not political, it's just common sense. Oh, and I do not smoke.
Yes they did. Who forced them to enter a smoking establishment? They are free to choose to work wherever they please.
This is just more Big Brother BS.
Yes they did. Who forced them to enter a smoking establishment? They are free to choose to work wherever they please.
This is just more Big Brother BS.
Go back a page or two. Not everyone has the luxury of chosing where they work, especially in current market conditions. Of course, you already knew that.
Go back a page or two. Not everyone has the luxury of chosing where they work, especially in current market conditions. Of course, you already knew that.
So they couldn't find a McDonald's or Wendy's gig, instead? Doubtful.
So they couldn't find a McDonald's or Wendy's gig, instead? Doubtful.
With tips, bars generally pay more than the minimum wage they'd likely get at McDonald's or Wendy's. I know. That's their problem. I get it.
Okay, so why not wait at a restaurant or deliver Pizzas? I could make upwards to $80-$100 in tips a night (that's cash straight into my pocket without even considering a salary) working the gig my friends have at a local pizza joint right now. There are other options. It's not even that it's their problem. I found ways around it (I'm not a fan of smoke either) and I know others who have too. It's not impossible or even impractical. It's just a matter of applying to the right places. Granted, it's not a great job, but it's no worse than working at a bar.
