After The Fall

After writing yesterday of the “bliss to sit in a smoky pub with a beer and a cigarette and a few friends”, today I saw the expulsion of smokers from pubs and cafes as the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. Here’s Michelangelo’s depiction of that event on the walls of the Sistine Chapel:


The story is essentially the same. But this time, the original sin of Adam and Eve has not been to eat an apple, but to smoke a cigarette.

I think Michelangelo’s painting depicts the scenes before and after, with the left hand side showing them in flagrante as they plucked the apple from the tree, and the right hand side their expulsion.

A contemporary variant of the picture might have the left hand side as the cosy interior of a pub, with the boulders becoming a bar with glistening bottles and glasses behind it, and Adam and Eve seated on stools in front of it, both fully dressed. The centre of the picture would be the door of the pub, outside which they would be seen trooping sadly away together, naked in the wind and snow and pouring rain. I’m not sure where the serpent might appear, but perhaps he might be the bartender who offers them a cigarette. And the nasty angel with the sword could become Deborah Arnott depicted as (H/T Tony) an Abhorrent Toad?

Perhaps I might fire up Manga Studio 5, and trace the outlines of Michelangelo’s masterpiece, adding bar, bottles, glasses, carpets, and so on.

For as far as I am concerned, 1 July 2007 was an event on the scale of The Fall, when millions of Adams and Eves were evicted from their cosy, friendly pubs, and “exiled to the outdoors”. And it will have consequences that flow from it on an equivalent scale.

Oddly enough, for many years, I had a local pub a few yards from where I lived called the Adam and Eve. It’s quite a common name for an English pub. I wonder how many people were standing outside it on 1 July 2007, and how many of them saw themselves as re-enacting a scene from Genesis?

I spent 3 or 4 hours with Manga Studio 5 creating The Fall (after Michelangelo). It’s got the same figures in the same places (I traced them), but the background has completely changed. The perspective is completely different. On the left, Adam and Eve are sitting on barstools at a bar, and the Serpent is handing Eve a packet of cigarettes that she’s just got down from the top shelf behind the bar, where Adam has been pointing to show her where they are. On the right, Adam and Eve are shown exiled naked by an Abhorrent Toad to the outdoors, where it’s raining of course.


Could have done with a bit more work on it, I suppose.

About the archivist

This entry was posted in cartoon, cartoons, Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to After The Fall

  1. Clicky says:

  2. garyk30 says:

    Nicely done

  3. Roobeedoo2 says:

    Frank, I’ve got a short story in the upcoming ‘The Underdog Anthology’ about a pub:

    Can I use your image, when I post that story at the LoL, after the book comes out?

    *Is that for Frank saying yes, or for the book being ready for Halloween, Clicky? No, don’t answer that…*

  4. Smoking Lamp says:

    Great image! Smokers were cast out (exiled to the outdoors) but now they seek to go even further increasing the persecution of smokers by seeking outdoor bans and ultimate prohibition…

  5. Lepercolonist says:

    Abhorrent Toad, that’s perfect !

  6. Rose says:

    Frank, rather than the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, I have always thought of what happened on the 1st of July 2007 as more like “sending the intellectuals to the fields” during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. The thinkers and talkers were classed as enemies of the people and then sent outside to learn hardship and humility.

    • Frank Davis says:

      Well, yes. But that supposes that we smokers are all intellectuals. But there have been plenty of intellectuals who didn’t smoke. But then, what is an “intellectual”?

      I prefer to invoke the Fall, because the Fall was the original catastrophe. And I like the idea that the Fall is reproduced throughout history, and is in some sense ever present.

      I was surprised yesterday that it had taken me so long to connect the smoking ban with the Fall, given all the obvious similarities.

      • Rose says:

        I wasn’t taking “intellectual” too literally, but as I remember, we did spend a lot of time setting the world to rights in the pub.

  7. garyk30 says:

    God banished Adam and Eve, Parliment did the ban.

    Are you equating Parliment with God?

    • Frank Davis says:

      Good question. I would think that Parliament regards itself as God’s representative on earth, much like the Pope does. And if the smoking ban was not God’s will, we may look forward to divine retribution on Parliament.

  8. Rose says:

    A news story within another news story From Sky.

    “But despite the destruction there are celebrations as people taste freedom once again.

    We witnessed jubilant crowds in Fadhiliya – 10 miles east of Mosul – as a shopkeeper arrived with the first supplies of cigarettes for two years.”

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen cartons of cigarettes being waved in the air so joyously.

  9. Tony says:

    Warning Warning Warning

    UKIP leadership hopeful Suzanne Evans today :

    “anti-PC reforms Farage regarded as “common sense” are briskly ruled out by Evans.
    “I actually really like the smoking ban!” she exclaims with a tinkly laugh. “So I definitely disagree with Nigel on that one.” She wouldn’t dream of relaxing the drink-driving laws (“No, good God no, absolutely not”) nor wage war on speed cameras (“I am passionately anti-speeding”). “

    By contrast, I believe Paul Nuttall has criticised the ban on several occasions. I remember meeting him at a Forest do at the House of Commons. He appeared to have travelled down to London in the company of Nick Hogan (the pub landlord who was gaoled for failing to prevent people from smoking in his pub).

    (I suspect Raheem Kassam is also opposed to the ban).

    • waltc says:

      How quickly they forget that it’s not about what THEY personally “like” but about the freedom of their constituents to act on their own “likes.” Nice lead article quoting jean Kirkpatrick on the proper role of government at along with some reasoned reasons for “liking” Trump

    • smokingscot says:

      Paul Nuttall has been very consistent about amending the smoking ban to allow indoor smoking rooms in pubs and clubs.

      He repeats this on his blog and adds his criticism of plain packs as well as banning smoking in parks.

      Seems that Paul (who did not stand for party leader last time) may be having second thoughts. I suspect he’s aware that should Evans win, then UKIP simply becomes a Tory shadow party with no clear unique selling point (that’s where Evans jumped ship from) – and is finished.

      Nuttall on the other hand is UKIP through and through – and has a strong support base in his constituency. Hard earned it has been too.

      If he stands, I’d be flabbergasted if he didn’t cakewalk it.

      • Tony says:

        “Seems that Paul (who did not stand for party leader last time) may be having second thoughts.”
        I’m not sure what you mean. I hope you just mean that he plans to stand for the leadership this time. Which is good news. And, yes, I think he’ll win easily.

        I fully agree about Evans of course. She seems to be a fully paid up member of the bbcliblabcon party.

        • smokingscot says:

          Tony, to clarify. I do mean that he plans to stand for the leadership this time.

          Paul’s been at the forefront of UKIP for many years and – like Farage – I felt he just wanted to take time out after the EU vote. Both of them were knackered, fitting 36 hours of work into a day.

          So he’s had time out and – like myself – has been horrified at the bickering, infighting and general lack of direction of UKIP.

          Paul knows there will be no EU election in the UK henceforth, so he’ll lose his seat in Brussels. He can revert to lecturing on British Politics (a post he held way back when), but I doubt he’ll want to do that. He most likely can retire as he’ll likely get a pension for all those years he spent as an MEP.

          Or he can maximise his strengths in UKIP and within his constituency. In short he can stand for election as a Member of Parliament as Party Leader, (which does carry a certain weight), to get a seat in Westminster.

          That’s why his Wiki entry is pertinent:

          “In October 2016, Nuttall announced that he would run in the leadership election triggered when Diane James said that she would not become leader despite winning the leadership election.”

          (last para under Political Career)

          If he does both things – and I believe they’re both doable – then he’ll have the clout to overhaul the party and concentrate on the political space vacated by Labour as well as the Tories.

          And he’s likely to be way better at holding Ms. May to account for a complete Brexit. No fudge, just out. He knows we speak from a position of great strength – and we really should be dictating the terms of our continued relationship with the EU. Not the other way round.

          At the moment it looks like he’s done good, with Ladbroke’s giving the fellow a 75% chance of nailing that position.

    • Roobeedoo2 says:

      I think Frank or one of the other smoker bloggers should ask for exclusive interviews with each of the candidates, specifically to get their views on smoking and the smoking bans.

      If you don’t ask you don’t get ;)

  10. Tom says:

    A little off topic, but it may be of significance, in the long run. That onerous tobacco tax of a year or two ago in the California election, USA, is back with a vengeance, and this time is $2 a pack, all to go to anti-smoking groups in California, meaning Stanton Glantz – and that translates into more fake-studies from Glantz and other liars – that go out into the world as proof positive of blah, blah, blah and as a result, more bans, more taxes, more onerous government crack downs on smokers, not just in California, but worldwide.

    Not surprising (to me), at the same time more money is being taxed onto smokers to fund more anti-smoking hatred and division, another California proposition at the same time will be voted to legalize marijuana – thus setting the stage to eventually replacing tobacco altogether with marijuana, which like grape and wines, is a MAJOR California industry these days, with some counties relying nearly entirely on marijuana revenue as the sole source of economy they have left.

    So as marijuana plantations of the West Coast replace tobacco farms of the Southeastern US, the votes will be cast in another two weeks in California to set the stage for just such an outcome.

    More information on these two propositions can be found here, if of concern, interest or value to anyone – or perhaps trivial and of worthless consideration by all and just an old man’s concern over much ado about nothing.,_Tobacco_Tax_Increase_(2016),_Marijuana_Legalization_(2016)

    • waltc says:

      Not OT, where’s Smoker-voter? And not btw, this prop also taxes vapers who are up in arms tho the hands attached to those arms are again shoving smokers under that hackneyed bus. I also note that on fb, the CA liberals love this prop and completely buy in to For The Children.

      • Tom says:

        Yes, the tax applies to vapers too, not just smokers – so vapers who support anti-smoking are soon to be back under the bus along with the smokers. The ads pro-Prop 56 are MANY and yes, it is all “for the children” – which liberals from SF to LA will gladly vote Yes. So it is almost a given, this WILL be the new source of funding anti-smoking “experts” such as Stanton Glantz and cohorts will be using to fund more “studies” that will again “prove” smokers and vapers deserve hateful contempt – AND, THEN THESE SAME STUDIES WILL BE APPLIED WORLDWIDE – So, everyone, please get ready for it since there is nothing going to stop this nightmare from California from coming true, in less than 10 days from now.

        • Frank Davis says:

          Tom, I hardly ever hear from smokervoter these days. You probably remember he asked for help with Proposition 29 a while back. Would you be able/interested to write something about these new Propositions that I could post on my blog?

        • Tom says:

          I am sorry for not being so helpful, but right now I am a little busy with some personal health and finance issues that are not conducive to writing up any long story lines about these CA propositions or doing mass research – and frankly, the way the ads seem to be running on TV, newspapers and endorsements and the pre-election mail campaigns – I would venture to guess the 300+% tobacco tax increase (from $.83 a pack to $2.83 a pack) and a similar percent applied to currently only sales-taxed vaping products will pass into law and Stanton Glantz and others around the state, who are in charge of the Anti-Smoker Industry out here, may even have “studies” already waiting in the wings to begin pulling out one after another to show what a magnificent job they are doing out of gratitude for new funding and further manufacture the illusion that California citizens all “did good” to pass this into law. The campaign for yes seems to center mainly on doing good, saving the children from smoking, it is the right thing to do, studies show raising tobacco and vaping taxes work at stopping smokers, all of that same nature. The links above give a basic outline of what is being put up for a vote – and honestly, this being California, I see no reason why this will not become the law and the increased funding going to the Anti-Smoker Hate Industry will now segue over to manufacturing the same hatred against vapers and used to manufacture studies-galore that will then blanket out across the world, crossing into other states and countries via UN proclamation and treaty – so it affects all, is not just some local yokel California event but will extend outward, the ramifications into other parts of the world as the money filters out and purchases more anti-smoker and anti-vaper vilification and propaganda. That is pretty much all I can say at this point, given I do have some personal health and finance matters that are pressing harder on my time currently than I have time to investigate or research more deeply. If you look at the backers, it is the entire panoply of the Anti-Smoker-Establishment going to prosper and there is no organized campaign against this other than R.J. Reynolds Tobacco company mails out the occasional flyer to vote no, claiming insurance companies will prosper, which is a mere morsel of the entire truth in this matter. Look at the sponsors and those who back it and that will tell you all you really need to know, where this thing is coming from and what it will lead to once it is passed into law – and my gut hunch is, this will pass into law by a very large majority. It is being sold as a no-brainer to vote yes and anyone voting yes is a caring, child loving, smoke-free-world loving genuis. And who doesn’t want to be that, so the lemmings will all vote yes, in plenitude, is my gut feeling.

        • Frank Davis says:

          OK. Maybe I’ll try to put something together myself.

        • junican says:

          What I don’t understand is the willingness of smokers to pay the taxes. Apart from the odd occasion for a month or two when I had no alternative, I haven’t bought tobacco products in the UK for years. Not only do I venture abroad and buy cigs at half price, I also acquire whole leaf and process it myself and I grow plants in my garden.
          If I can go to the trouble of flying to Spain (1000 miles) and risking the possibility of trouble with Customs, why cannot Californian smokers organise a trip out-of-State every three months or so and buy their stuff in bulk?
          On the passing of this law, tobacco sales in California should collapse to near zero almost immediately. Or will the Governor veto it?
          The trouble is that I have no idea of the distances involved. Which is the nearest State with negligible tobacco taxes?

  11. Clicky says:

  12. Roobeedoo2 says:

    *Alright, Clicky, stop being so safety conscious… I know… /rolls eyes…*

    Frank, Clicky has a comment in moderation… something to do with ‘bbcliblabcon party’ which sounds like a Library at the tower of babel to him…

    *Alright, I’ve left it… you can light it…*

  13. CF Apollyon says:

    Ya’ll can all go to hell…I’m goin’ to Texas. No wait…I’m already in Texas.

    Ya’ll can all go wherever in the fuck you want, I’m getting the fuck outta Dodge. (Texas) Not anytime soon I grant you, but I digress. Actually, an egress would be better than an digress at this particular time…but I digress. ;-)

  14. Pingback: Vote NO On 56 | Frank Davis

  15. Reinhold says:

    Translated this (for the most part) into German in
    and eventually it will also appear on

  16. Reinhold says:

    Oh, sorry, no, once again I placed my comment under the wrong piece. This translation is not yet published.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.