Stan's back

Stan Hieronymus took his family on an amazing trek over 18 months. I love Stan and Daria, and I love how they travel, but...I missed Stan's blogging.

He's back. I can see work is going to be more difficult for me as I will be spending more time reading his blog again. You should too, Stan's one of the best.

Is "Craft Beer" a revolution? Is it a success?

Maureen Ogle takes an outsider's view of the beer industry, continuing a process she began in her 2006 book, Ambitious Brew. She looks at it with the dispassionate eye of a historian, and comes up with contrarian viewpoints that make Andy Crouch look like a mainstreaming cheerleader.

Witness her latest blog postings, which are cuts from an essay she wrote on craft beer for All About Beer's 30th anniversary issue (which I'd urge you to buy so you can read what she kept in the piece). There are three of them, and the 2nd and 3rd seem to largely say that contract brewing was controversial but is no big deal -- I got no problems with that thesis at all. I agree, and I regret the amount of money, time, and good feeling that was lost in the industry misunderstandings that revolved around it. I've said for years: it's about the beer, not where or who it's brewed by.

What I do disagree with is her first posting, a more general take, in which she writes:

The problem, [the late Michael Jackson] argued, was that the bottomless “pocketbooks” of the Big Six (at that time A-B, Miller, Stroh, Heileman, Coors, and Pabst) enabled them to “dominate the advertising scene” and thereby obscure consumers’ awareness of brewing’s lager-, porter-, and ale-stuffed nooks and crannies.
This “public ignorance” posed an “acute problem” for craft brewing. “No small brewery is itself an island,” he reminded readers. “None can succeed for long unless the . . . idea of small breweries is understood and appreciated by the consumer.”
He was wrong. Thirty years in, most Americans don’t know about or drink craft beer, and yet craft brewing is alive and well. [emphasis added]

I don't buy that. We got into a small, very civil discussion on her Facebook link to this post, in which I argued that craft beer is now widely known, to which she countered:

I base that on my experience doing beer events for various non-beer groups (I do a lot of paid speaking). Very few people at them have ever heard of the beers on offer, all of them, of course, local craft brews. Also, the term "craft beer" has zero meaning to people outside the craft drinking/brewing niche. Again, that's based on my experience w/people who are NOT connected to or interested in beer.

Well...my response was that people who aren't interested in American football may not realize that the forward pass revolutionized the game, but that doesn't make it any less of a revolution. In short, does the knowledge or opinion of people who don't drink beer, who are not "interested in beer," really have any meaning in this? I don't feel that it does.

Another point: is it the knowledge of the term "craft beer" that we're talking about? Because I don't like the term (even though I use it every day), and I don't think that most people who are aware of these beers use the term. They either know their local craft (like, for example, the thousands in Boston who drink Sam Adams or Harpoon and don't give a damn about anything else), or they call them "microbrews," a term just used today in the Wall Street Journal to refer to beers from small American and Italian breweries.

Microbrews (or 'mircobrews,' as I've seen it misspelled so many times on teh Interwebs that it's hardly funny anymore; likewise, "Rouge" and "nector") is the term a lot of people "still" use. I put "stupid quotes" around the word "still" because I don't really know why the beer police felt they had to change it, except to de-link it from the old definition as a brewery that made less than 15,000 bbls. a year, a size that Sierra and Anchor blew by decades ago. It's a perfectly good word -- by virtue of public acceptance -- if you want to distinguish the (practically) uniform light lager output of the major established breweries from the more varied output of the not-so-major...er, 'micro' breweries.

So I'd argue that we should disregard the awareness level of the specific term "craft beer" and instead find out if these non-beer people -- or more importantly, and validly, people who do drink beer -- are aware of any beers other than the majors; Sam Adams, Sierra Nevada, Fat Tire? How about non-mainstream types of beers from mainstream brewers, like Blue Moon? How about mainstream beers from non-mainstream breweries, like Yuengling?

Because while there are certainly still people out there who know nothing at all about these beers (or at least profess to know nothing about them for political purposes...), it seems less and less likely that their existence remains a mystery to the majority. I recognize the pitfalls of sampling a pre-selected audience -- I lecture the geekerie about it often -- but the buoyant growth of the segment, the assumption of knowledge in a growing number of news stories like the one noted above, and the continued introduction of beers like Bud Light Golden Wheat all are evidence of a wider knowledge...at least, among beer drinkers in general, and people interested in beer.

If people aren't interested in beer...well, really, who cares what they think about beer? I don't say that to be cavalier, I just point out that it's kind of like asking the average American citizen about...Austrian elections. If they don't care about beer -- as long as they're not one of that group who is trying to take beer away from us! -- why should beer care about them?

Discuss. Or discuss. Or discuss.

Angsting about Tasting

Saw these two posts about "tasting notes" and "beer reviews" at Beervana, and the one Jeff references in that post, at It's Pub Night. It seemed fitting to notice and comment on them before I post a small flurry of tasting notes.

Jeff's concerned about accuracy in beer reviews. He looks at some of the verbiage sprayed about on beer rating sites (and magazine reviews, and blog reviews, and judging slips...) and is -- rightly -- concerned that it's sometimes conflated for pizzazz. Me too. Then he references Bill's genius invention at IPN: a random beer review generator. Hilarious. Go ahead, go play with it. I did, it's funny. (Hint: if you don't think it's at least faintly amusing, if you think it's insulting...start drinking more water. And stop writing reviews for a while.)

But then Jeff drops one of the best things I've seen written about this whole business:

Even very good beers may not offer you a lot to hang your hat on; what distinguishes them is not their distinct elements, but a totally vague quality of harmony produced when all those elements come together. How do you describe that? I miss the mark more often than I hit it, but this post reminds me of a directive I try to use when writing about beer. Don't write to impress, write to communicate. How would I tell a friend about a beer so that she would get what I was trying to say? It's useful to include adjectives, but they should reveal the beer, not conceal the reviewer's inability to describe it.

Jeff, first off, what's wrong with saying "This beer has a totally vague quality of harmony produced when all those elements come together." I kinda like that, and I'd write it. I don't trust "hints of wet smoke, teaberry, DAP putty, and demerara sugar mingle with a strong intimation of the late addition of Chinook hops." Even if the reviewer does get that -- much like my deeply-questioned remarking of tasting carrots in PBC's Rowhouse Red -- that's their mouth. It's not mine, or yours, or Sweet Fanny Adam's mouth. So how much is that worth?

But "Don't write to impress, write to communicate" is good stuff. I can't believe that one of his commenters -- "Dr. Wort" -- actually advises him to use the Lovibond scale to make more accurate descriptions of color. Great, let's just all do it by the damned numbers. Useful.

Beer tasting is subjective. There's no way to get around that. Period. Never will. That's why medals are usually awarded by blind judging and concensus, by panels. Best you can do. I don't present my "reviews" as anything but my opinions. I don't say you're right or wrong if you agree or disagree; frankly, I don't care, in the end. If you find them useful, and I hope you do, that's great; if you don't, I can understand that, too. They're descriptive, not prescriptive.

I hope you find the following reviews useful. I'm not going to worry about it, though, and neither should you.

Jay Brooks Takes Over

Very glad to see Jay Brooks taking over Bill Brand's On Beer column at the Bottoms Up Bay Area drinks blog. It was a complete shock when Bill passed away after a tragic accident (during San Francisco Beer Week), and it's a nice sense of completion as Jay picks up the pen.

Congratulations, Jay. You are the man for the position.

Session Beer, Extreme Beer: there's no "versus," how about "and"?

There are two odd pieces of writing out in the beer press right now. Sam Calagione wrote a response to my last "Steaming Pile" column in Ale Street News, the column in which I opined that 'imperial' beers, while riding high, may be coming to the end of their cycle on top of the beer hype wheel. In Beeradvocate magazine, the Alström brothers' "Beer Smack" column was titled "Session vs. Extreme Beers."

In both pieces, the desire and nascent movement to popularize session beers was portrayed as being planned at the expense of extreme/imperial beers, implying a wish and a hope for failure of big beers. To make things short and clear, that's ridiculous. There is no versus in the equation. I don't speak for everyone, obviously, but speaking for myself and nearly everyone I've talked to about session beers, we'd love to see all types of craft beers thrive. I can't imagine why anyone would feel differently. This is not about taking away anything. This is about the classic image of the craft beer market: not a bigger slice of the pie, but a bigger pie.

The last thing we need is a trumped-up "fight" between segments of the beer biz. We had enough of that with the Sam Adams wars in the 1990s. There's nothing to fight about here. I'd like to see session beers get more attention from the beer press, and from beer drinkers, and from brewers. I'm doing what I can to help that along because I'd like more choice when I go out to drink. I'm not doing it to bash extreme beers, to benefit one brewer over another, or to make money for myself; believe me, The Session Beer Project ain't a moneymaker. Like Rodney says, can we all get along? There's no reason to make it look any other way.

Bill Brand Died This Morning

San Francisco-area beer writer -- and journalist, and father, and husband -- Bill Brand died this morning from injuries in an accident two weeks ago. I never met Bill, though we had corresponded, but his writing was a mixture of passion and professionalism -- tempered with an adamantine intolerance for bullshit -- that shone through the midden of "beer writing" like a streak of gold. We'll miss him. My deep sympathies to his family, and commiseration with the beer community. Raise a glass tonight, folks.

Say a prayer for Bill Brand

One of our own, long-time Bay Area reporter and beer writer Bill Brand, is in a coma and listed as critical after being hit by a commuter train. Here's the story, reported on his own blog (shared with a wine writer). It would be a terrible thing at any time, but it's particularly stunning during San Francisco Beer Week.

I've never met Bill, but we've corresponded and I'm a regular reader of his blog. He is one of the best of us, thoughtful, realistic, and sharp-eyed, and just damned enthusiastic and unabashed about the beers he likes. Think good thoughts, wish him luck, pray: whatever it is you do to influence fate, do it. I want to meet Bill Brand.

Tuesday at 1:26: Just read on Jay's blog that Bill's been upgraded to stable. Very good news.

Bravo Beaumont!

I am always happy to claim Stephen Beaumont as a friend. That's him on the left, with another good friend, Mike Gates, hanging out in my backyard back in August of '07, helping me drink up my leftover beer. I've known Steve for, oh, maybe 14 years, been to Germany and Belgium with him, hit some fun spots in his hometown of Toronto with him, and helped him celebrate his wedding last summer.

But today I'm very pleased to claim his as a colleague. Stephen Beaumont has received the "Raising the Bar" award from Cheers magazine, an award for individuals "who have made a noteworthy and sustained contribution to the world of beverage alcohol." Stephen didn't get this just for writing. He's been consulting and advising major restaurant and hotel chains on their beer programs for a number of years. In fact, the craft beer program at the ESPN Zone that I wrote about last year as a great example of how craft beer is getting in everywhere, the program that also won an award for Best Chain Beer Program? Built for them by Stephen Beaumont. This is a well-deserved award indeed.

Like I said, I'm pleased to say Stephen is my colleague. And my friend. Congratulations, my friend!

Triumph's Jewish Rye gets attention

There's a nice little bit on Meal Ticket, Philly CityPaper's food blog, about Triumph Old City's latest batch of Jewish Rye ale. I've been enjoying this beer for years, and a tip of the hat to brewer Patrick Jones for giving credit for the beer's development to Tom Stevenson, the innovative brewer at Triumph's original Princeton location (and to Felicia D'Ambrosio for including that; hell, for a very nicely-written short piece on the beer).

If you've never had the beer, go down and try it. D'Ambrosio and Jones do a nice job of both explaining (it's caraway that makes the beer taste like the rye bread you're thinking of) and describing the beer (touching on the pleasant tart/sour tang you get from rye -- think about it, it's there in the bread, too, must be more of a citric break than wheat). Nice work. Competition among people writing about beer is fierce in this town...

Best of the Best of the Beer Year: Our Suz

Belatedly -- because it left me slack-jawed with admiration and rolling around laughing -- I'd point you to Suzanne Woods' Best of 2008 post on her excellent "I'll Have Another Stout" blog. She's a fabulous voice for beer in the area, and no one I've talked to or heard from minds that she works for Sly Fox and is in a serious relationship with Iron Hill brewer Chris Lapierre, because Suzanne just loves Philly beer, and gives everyone their due. This list is an example: it's exhaustive, it's funny, it's engaging, it's human -- very much so -- and it's dead-on. Go now. Read.

Whatever happened to...

...the furor about expensive draft beer? In the first half of 2008 we got Jeff Alworth's Honest Pint Project, Andy Crouch's upset rant (vent? screed? tirade?) about prices, bunches of posts on the beergeek sites, and ink in BeerAdvocate and other beer rags, all about prices being just too damned high!! And now? It's all gone away. Why no more complaints about prices? Is it because gas dropped by more than half from its ridiculous mid-year high and no one cares anymore? Is it because a lack of business has brought prices down? Is it because someone got to the ringleaders, promising them free beers if they'd just shut up? (I have no proof of that, and no reason to even suspect it, but it's never stopped anyone from saying shit like that about me, so what the hell...) Is it maybe for the same reason that I haven't written anything new on my PLCB rant-site since October?

Dunno, but the silence is deafening.

Brooks takes on the Marin Institute

Jay Brooks has written a great diatribe -- not over the top enough for a rant, but it'll do -- about the booze-hatin' Marin Institute's support for California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed nickel-drink tax. He exposes all the crap about this proposal: the basic unfairness of it, the bogus justifications for it, the nebulous "statistics" used to support it, the imposition of morality it represents, all that, and does it well. Anti-alcohol groups like the Marin Institute, like the Center for Science in the Public Interest, like the Center on Alcohol and Substance Abuse, like the Center for Alcohol Marketing and Youth -- no wait, they folded their tents and slipped away into the night (or another Robert Wood Johnson Foundation-funded anti-booze group, same difference) -- consistently misrepresent the facts, rig the statistics, and spin the studies. This one is a classic.

But I have to disagree with Jay on one thing, this:

"I can’t help but be surprised to see neo-prohibitionists — an overwhelmingly conservative bunch — co-opt liberal socialist (and President-elect) Barack Obama’s tagline and appropriate it for their own use."

Neo-prohibitionists are not overwhelmingly conservative! That's what makes them dangerous. They are, as they were 90 years ago, before the neo- part came along, a movement that spans the political spectrum and uses whatever tools are to hand. They are against alcohol for moral reasons, for "health" reasons, and often, sadly, because their family was blighted by an alcoholic. We cannot assume that they only come from one side of the aisle...if we do, we'll be blindsided.

Uncle Jack Report

Good news from Phoenixville: I just talked to Jack Curtin, and he's feeling good. He had emergency surgery for a ruptured appendix on Saturday. "Ruptured appendix," I said, "that's pretty serious shit." Pause on the line, then Jack responds, with some asperity, "That's exactly what it is." Whoops. Tender subject, I guess.

Anyway, things are much better. He was told he can go home tomorrow, which is great news. Don't expect much blogging out of him, he's got work to catch up on, but it's enough to know our own beer curmudgeon will be back home. Cheers, Jack, here's to a speedy recovery!

Come home, Uncle Jack!

I just found out why Jack Curtin hasn't been posting on his Liquid Diet blog. His cartoonist partner at the Dubya Chronicles, Rob Davis, posted this at Jack's other blog, I Have Heard The Mermaids Singing, yesterday.

Jack’s in the hospital! He’s doing fine, but apparently his appendix decided to rebel Friday into Saturday morning, perforated and then burst. He and I worked out posting the latest cartoon to “thedubyachronicles.com” (which is now up for your reading pleasure). He stated to me that he should be out in a few days and back to his normal oneriness. He does NOT have e-mail access at this time but those of you with his cel phone number can contact him that way.
Best wishes for a quick recovery, Jack!

Who knew Jack had a Republican appendix?

If I know Uncle Jack, this unprecedented three-fer plug for his beer and politics blogs will make him feel much better. Get better, Jack, we miss ya!

In Which I Keep All About Beer's Streak Alive

As this posts, I'm accepting the trade and specialized beer and brewing media award of the Michael Jackson Beer Journalism Awards at the GABF; my piece in All About Beer on "The Real History of Craft Beer" won. My apologies to all the folks I told I was not going to be at GABF: the BA asked me not to tell anyone about winning the award, so I didn't. At all.

And so this morning I left my hotel in San Francisco at 4:20, flew out of SFO at 6:20, and got into Denver about 10 AM to make it to the GABF on time to get the award. At least, I assume I did; I'm writing this in my room at the San Francisco Marriott Downtown on Friday afternoon before WhiskyFest.

My thanks to Rogue Ales, Boston Beer, and Brooklyn Brewery for the sponsorship of the award, to Daniel Bradford for the original idea of the story, and to Julie Bradford for suggesting that I submit the piece for the program. "We've got a streak going," she said, "and I just have a feeling about that piece." Other folks liked it too -- it's one of the few pieces I've done that I've gotten fan mail on -- so I sent it in.

So right now I'm collecting the award (that's a picture Tom Dalldorf took, and thanks to him and Celebrator for it), and tonight I'm going to spend some time at Falling Rock or Wynkoop with brewers and fellow writers. Good times, folks, good times. Thanks to everyone who's dug my writing; I do it for the most sincere beer geeky reasons: to share the love.

An update: I ran into Don Russell at the Fest afterwards, and we got to talking. Writers from Philadelphia have won one of these awards every year they've been awarded: Don, Carolyn Smagalski, Marnie Old, and now me. Sounds like we've got America's Best Beer-Writing City, too!