If you happened to come here after finding my "name site" down -- http://www.lewbryson.com/ -- well, my apologies. It's been a long morning already at 9:30 AM. My domain registry expired yesterday, although I thought I had an auto-pay set up: turns out that I should have paid attention to the e-mail from my service, warning me that their auto-pay system was down till Spring...I've paid, manually, and the site should be back up in a couple hours.
However, it means that my e-mail is also down, which is a major handicap. So as a notice to anyone who has business with me: if you have to send e-mail to me today, please use this address. Thanks, and my apologies for the inconvenience.
Is it too early for a beer?
Update: everything came flooding back Tuesday morning, so the usual e-mail is back online, as is the website. Apologies again, and thanks to all who adapted!
Monday, January 5, 2009
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Pike Auld Acquaintance
The game goes on: still 16-14, though McNabb is ripping off an exciting series of mid-length passes and marching up the field. So time for another beer, something also PNW but completely different: Pike Auld Acquaintance Hoppy Holiday Ale.Let me get right to the payoff first: I wish more spiced ales were like this. PAA is not overspiced at all, and comes across as a delicious Chrismas cookie. I had something like this New Year's Eve: Cathy and I dropped by Triumph in New Hope where I had a glass of Oatmeal Cookie Stout. Same kind of sweet, gently spicy mouth-fillingness...but where the Triumph OCS was dark and had a hint of chocolate to it, the PAA takes that and somehow slices off the back half of it and bolts an IPA on there...well, at 5%, maybe more like a pale ale.
What's good? The sweetness is not overpowering, the spices -- orange, nutmeg, cinnamon -- are not overwhelming, and the alcohol is not overwhelming. Oh, thank you, Pike: a holiday beer that isn't too heavy, or too spicy, or too strong, or too boring. I'm ready to drink this whole bomber. It's like cookies without the crumbs.
BridgePort Hop Czar
I'm watching the Eagles/Vikings game, it's just after the Vikings went up 7-6. I decided to pop a sample: BridgePort Hop Czar, an imperial IPA at 8%. (And in the time it took me to get that picture and crop it, the Eagles are now up 9-7. Sweating it out.)Anyway, BridgePort sent me this sample (along with the Raven Mad Porter I wrote about a few days ago) -- whoa, interception, Eagles up 16-7! -- and I've been looking forward to it. So I poured some for Cathy, and some for me, and I'm drinking it. Hey, it looks great! Cloudy-sticky, incredibly long-lasting creamy white head, fine carbonation, and wacky strong grapefruit and pine aromas.
The hops are ringing my chimes, seeming to change with every sip, there are so many flavors here I'm only picking up bits and pieces as I go. We're told Hop Czar is "triple hopped," more than BridgePort usually uses, and I'm feeling it. Hop Czar is also damned bitter, clinging bitter, ripping bitter. But the malt's there to beef it up and sweeten it up, balancing that bitter. There's also some substantial fruitiness that keeps it all interesting. (Peterson does it again, 16-14, Philly still hanging on at the end of the first half.)
That's the good stuff, beerwise. It's good, it's bitter, it's hoppy, but it's missing the liveliness, the verve of something like the Blind Pig I had on New Year's Eve. The Hop Czar goes for the straight-up slam, a bit blunt, and I'm not nuts about that...except that's just not all there is to the Czar.
Look, I've made fun of Bob Klein's beer reviews in which the beers seem to change flavor in mid-sip. But I keep getting different impressions, every time I lift the glass. Sweet, blunt, fruity, pine, bitter, solid...a protean IIPA? Or is it just that there's so much going on it's hard to get it all at once. I'd still like to see more of that liveliness...but that's not the only kind of beer. I can get into the bludgeoning, too. Thumbs-up for the Czar. (Halftime, by the way, and I'm feeling like a Philly fan...how are they going to figure out how to lose this one? (Whoa, holy crap, Westbrook breaks loose for a big one: we win! This is getting weird...))
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Otter Creek Sphinx
I'm up late on a regular Friday night chat session I've been doing since 1993; same bunch of guys, we're on about our fourth chat service. We talk about beer mostly, but a lot about life, food, family, and...Amish women (I mostly blame Guy Hagner for that).
But tonight was Bomber Night, the theme was drinking big bottles of beer. So I grabbed a sample I'd received: Otter Creek World Tour Sphinx, an "Egypt-inspired multigrain ale brewed with honey & chamomile." Maybe. But it's not going well. It's very tart, to the point of gut-ache, though I don't think it's soured. I think the brewers meant it to be this way, and I don't know why. It's tangy, tart, and it's not very quiet in my stomach.
I like the World Tour series; on the whole, they've been excellent. The Baltic Porter I had a couple weeks ago was delicious. But this isn't doing it for me. I'd run from this if I saw it again.
But tonight was Bomber Night, the theme was drinking big bottles of beer. So I grabbed a sample I'd received: Otter Creek World Tour Sphinx, an "Egypt-inspired multigrain ale brewed with honey & chamomile." Maybe. But it's not going well. It's very tart, to the point of gut-ache, though I don't think it's soured. I think the brewers meant it to be this way, and I don't know why. It's tangy, tart, and it's not very quiet in my stomach.
I like the World Tour series; on the whole, they've been excellent. The Baltic Porter I had a couple weeks ago was delicious. But this isn't doing it for me. I'd run from this if I saw it again.
Friday, January 2, 2009
The Session #23 -- 2008? 2009?
It's The Session, beer blogging on a common topic, and this month BeerMe of Beer and Firkins asks: "What will I miss from 2008 and what will I excitedly await in 2009?" See all the links soon here.What will I miss from 2008?
The Penn Brewery, which is closing for reasons that seem not nearly as clear as the new owners insist they are.
Jay Misson. Jay was a good friend and a craft beer pioneer, and was enjoying the hell out of cranking out excellent lagers and ales as 'executive brewer' of the small Triumph brewpub chain. His sudden death shocked us, and the sense of loss remains, solid and deep.
The carefree economy we enjoyed through the first half of the year, when it didn't matter that gas prices were up because we were all making money. None of us will probably ever look at the stock market, banks, or job security the same way again.
The incredible energy of the inaugural Philly Beer Week. This year's is looking more organized, better publicized, and solid in structure, but the crackling excitement of last year's white knuckle ride was something else: could we pull it off? Oh, yeah, we did, so much so that cities across the country imitated us...even New York and San Francisco, which was sweeter than Bassett's ice cream.
The hop shortage, which made brewers step back from the simple-minded "throw in 50 more pounds of hops" school of brewing "innovation." I think. We'll see.
What will I excitedly await in 2009?
Not much. This is going to be a year of small victories, I think, of holding ground. I don't expect to travel nearly as much this year, new whiskeys will likely be less common and perhaps less adventuresome, and there will probably be fewer breweries opening. I hope I'm wrong, and there are some signs already that things may not fall as far as feared, and rebound even more quickly. Much depends on the government -- which scares me -- and on the minds of the American people.
I am optimistic by nature; I have hope. But I also have perspective, and most of my hopes for 2009 are not focused on beer or whiskey, or even my own career writing about them. I have other things to hope for this year, both national and personal, and to the point that focus can help, I shall.
I do excitedly await Barack Obama's inauguration, because as a student of history and politics, I find it fascinating and hopeful. I excitedly await my 50th birthday, because it falls on the day after Friday the Firkinteenth at the Grey Lodge, and that means that 2009 -- finally! -- is a year with three Friday the Firkinteenths. I excitedly await March 22nd, my father's 80th birthday. I excitedly await December and the 20th anniversary for Cathy and I.
But for beer? I'm afraid I excitedly await 2010, when things will be better. I hope.
Prize-winning beer picture
Alan and Stonch have put on their annual beer/bar photo contest, and I get to contribute the prize -- a signed copy of New Jersey Breweries -- to Mike Maney, whose picture of a pint wound up in the third tier of runners-up.Congratulations to Mike! And thanks to Alan and Stonch for running this contest; some great images there.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Local 44 is open
I dropped in to the opening of Local 44 tonight, the new bar from the irrepressibly energetic ("Tigger," I said to Nora yesterday, "that's who he reminds me of: Tigger. He's always bouncing.") Brendan Hartranft and his charming partner Leigh Maida, they of the wonderful Memphis Taproom. Local 44 opened tonight at 5 PM; I got there about 8:00. As you can see by the picture, the place was hopping, wall-to-wall happy beer-drinking people (and yes, the TV's tuned to Penn State's ignominious shellacking in the Rose Bowl, dammit).I ran into Leigh almost immediately. Has it been like this all night? "Actually, at 5:00, it was empty," she said. "At 5:02 it looked like this, and it's been like that ever since." Still, things were running smoothly. I got my beer (Coniston Bluebird Bitter, and a nice jar of it) right quickly, the bathrooms were clean and functional, and one fellow I talked to (hello, Marvin!) said the food that had come out earlier was very nice. I finished off my beer, made my way out past the happy crowd, and headed home on this cold night.
Parking's rough -- it's University City -- and it's a bear to get there from where I am, so I probably won't get here as often as I'd like. That's too bad, because I suspect I'd like to be here often.BridgePort Raven Mad Imperial Porter
Happy New Year!
We celebrated with my parents in Lancaster County, the same way I've celebrated New Year's Day for as long as I can remember: with a big pork and sauerkraut dinner. It's what Pennsylvania Dutchmen do. If you have pork and sauerkraut on New Year's Day, it's good luck the rest of the year. Well...you at least get a good meal.
My mother let me cook the pork and kraut this year (well, actually, she followed my suggestions while I worked on my dad's computer). We patted brown sugar on the fat of the roast and put it in the 425-degree oven without a cover for 20 minutes. Then I took it out, turned the oven down to 325, laid in the lightly rinsed kraut (from a local Amish family), and poured a 22 oz. bottle of Victory Baltic Thunder all over it -- a fine sacrifice -- then covered it and put it back in the oven for two hours.
Yum! It was mighty fine, and the big bottle of BridgePort Raven Mad Imperial Porter we had with it was pretty damned good, too. The 3-D glasses had gotten misplaced somewhere, so we couldn't get the full glory of the label, but the full glory of the beer did come through. RMIP had a light burnt bitterness to it, a smooth drinkability, and a nicely understated wood/barrel character to it -- not an upside-the-head wallop -- almost like an 'easy-drinking' version of an imperial stout. Once again, BridgePort comes through with a beer that focuses on the drinker and not the person who's looking to be knocked out in one glass. At 7.8%, I could have had the whole bottle and a bit more. Wouldn't have minded that one bit, either.
We celebrated with my parents in Lancaster County, the same way I've celebrated New Year's Day for as long as I can remember: with a big pork and sauerkraut dinner. It's what Pennsylvania Dutchmen do. If you have pork and sauerkraut on New Year's Day, it's good luck the rest of the year. Well...you at least get a good meal.
My mother let me cook the pork and kraut this year (well, actually, she followed my suggestions while I worked on my dad's computer). We patted brown sugar on the fat of the roast and put it in the 425-degree oven without a cover for 20 minutes. Then I took it out, turned the oven down to 325, laid in the lightly rinsed kraut (from a local Amish family), and poured a 22 oz. bottle of Victory Baltic Thunder all over it -- a fine sacrifice -- then covered it and put it back in the oven for two hours.
Yum! It was mighty fine, and the big bottle of BridgePort Raven Mad Imperial Porter we had with it was pretty damned good, too. The 3-D glasses had gotten misplaced somewhere, so we couldn't get the full glory of the label, but the full glory of the beer did come through. RMIP had a light burnt bitterness to it, a smooth drinkability, and a nicely understated wood/barrel character to it -- not an upside-the-head wallop -- almost like an 'easy-drinking' version of an imperial stout. Once again, BridgePort comes through with a beer that focuses on the drinker and not the person who's looking to be knocked out in one glass. At 7.8%, I could have had the whole bottle and a bit more. Wouldn't have minded that one bit, either.
SBP: Is 2009 "The Year of The Session"?
The family went to Memphis Taproom for our New Year's Eve lunch yesterday, and it was excellent. I had a delicious glass of Blind Pig IPA (which beats the Plinys going away, in my mouth) and a sweet goblet of Great Divide Hibernation, and finished up with a big pint of Yards Brawler: a bold canvas of malt without the lumping thickness of 'big beer.' (Cathy agreed to drive home, so I had three without worry.)
Lunch was a Hangtown Fry hoagie, stuffed with an onion omelette and some perfect fried oysters dredged in cornmeal; the oysters were sweet and meaty, and the crust crunched with the realization of the corn. Cathy had a portobello patty melt that made me think of reubens, Nora tore up a perfect burger, and Thomas had a grown-up's chicken fingers, with rough, crunchy, spiced crust and fleshy chicken underneath. A great way to end the year at our favorite new bar.
But that's not why I posted, and certainly not why this is my first post of 2009. It was a brief conversation I had with owner Brendan Hartranft. We talked about Local 44 opening today, and that led to the 'business model' (work hard, pay it off, keep the string going), which led to talk of the possible next Brendan/Leigh operation: a cask ale pub. "Six beer engines," said Brendan, just spinning an idea (he spun others as well), "and a small place, maybe 30 seats, with a simple lunch menu, maybe five or six pasties, a couple salads. I think that could work."
Six beer engines? Great idea, makes me drool, but can you get enough real, true cask-conditioned ale to fill them? Without going into too much (secret?) detail, the answer is yes, he thinks he can, and with great session-strength stuff. Which led to this statement by Brendan: "I think this is going to be the year for session beer. We've all got a Belgian hangover, and people want to drink beer. And the beer that gets it right first is going to capture a lot of the market."
He's not the first to say this, but saying it that definitely, in Philly, is a landmark. We've got some beers that are ready (Brawler, the dry stouts from Victory and Sly Fox, EB+B's low alcohol series, General Lafayette's Mirage), we've got some bars and brewpubs that are ready. The big question is: are you ready?
I think we are. This could be the year we stop hitting ourselves over the head with beer...and start embracing and enjoying it instead. Less problems with DUI, less problems with outrage over high prices, and most likely, more local beer. All that, and the possibility of developing a true beer culture and getting more people back to bars to enjoy themselves in moderation.
Ask for session beer. It's our year.
Lunch was a Hangtown Fry hoagie, stuffed with an onion omelette and some perfect fried oysters dredged in cornmeal; the oysters were sweet and meaty, and the crust crunched with the realization of the corn. Cathy had a portobello patty melt that made me think of reubens, Nora tore up a perfect burger, and Thomas had a grown-up's chicken fingers, with rough, crunchy, spiced crust and fleshy chicken underneath. A great way to end the year at our favorite new bar.
But that's not why I posted, and certainly not why this is my first post of 2009. It was a brief conversation I had with owner Brendan Hartranft. We talked about Local 44 opening today, and that led to the 'business model' (work hard, pay it off, keep the string going), which led to talk of the possible next Brendan/Leigh operation: a cask ale pub. "Six beer engines," said Brendan, just spinning an idea (he spun others as well), "and a small place, maybe 30 seats, with a simple lunch menu, maybe five or six pasties, a couple salads. I think that could work."
Six beer engines? Great idea, makes me drool, but can you get enough real, true cask-conditioned ale to fill them? Without going into too much (secret?) detail, the answer is yes, he thinks he can, and with great session-strength stuff. Which led to this statement by Brendan: "I think this is going to be the year for session beer. We've all got a Belgian hangover, and people want to drink beer. And the beer that gets it right first is going to capture a lot of the market."
He's not the first to say this, but saying it that definitely, in Philly, is a landmark. We've got some beers that are ready (Brawler, the dry stouts from Victory and Sly Fox, EB+B's low alcohol series, General Lafayette's Mirage), we've got some bars and brewpubs that are ready. The big question is: are you ready?
I think we are. This could be the year we stop hitting ourselves over the head with beer...and start embracing and enjoying it instead. Less problems with DUI, less problems with outrage over high prices, and most likely, more local beer. All that, and the possibility of developing a true beer culture and getting more people back to bars to enjoy themselves in moderation.
Ask for session beer. It's our year.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Why We Drink
I just got this comment on a previous post, and it struck me that the timing was appropriate. I was looking for something to write about at end of year, and this challenge begs a response. Read the comment first.
Why do we drink? We drink because our ancestors and forefathers drank, with traditions going back thousands of years. The first drinkers probably drank because of the mind-expanding effects of alcohol. Alcohol is not, as is commonly said, simply a depressant. It is a much more complex drug. When they drink too much, some people weep, some laugh, some fight, some become gregarious, and some fall asleep. But all have impaired judgment, impaired attention, slowed reflexes. Drinking too much can be dangerous; drinking too much, too often, can ruin your life.
Given the potential danger of alcohol, then, why do we drink? The traditions we put around alcohol, much like the rituals we put around sex, or eating, or religion, regulate our enjoyment...if we heed them. We drink with friends, we drink in groups, and we assign a stigma to drinking alone. Cultures with stronger versions of these fences around drinking generally have a healthier attitude towards drinking. Laws have been tried to substitute for these cultural strictures, generally without success, any more than a law against puppies would succeed (yet most Islamic cultures shun dogs as unclean, resulting in dogless cities without anti-dog laws...).
So we drink in moderation. This is the concept that seems to escape the New Drys like "Anonymous." To the Drys -- not non-drinkers, but the anti-drinkers -- any drinking is being drunk. To be honest, I don't understand "why so many people have to be drunk in this country" either. But I truly do not understand why some people equate moderate drinking with drunkenness. It is as if drinking is a binary switch: don't drink, and you're sober and upright; drink one beer and you're "a drunk" and a menace. Do they believe that everyone who drives floors it as soon as they get out of the driveway?
We drink for pleasure. Drinks taste good, once one has developed the taste for them. There is nothing non-alcoholic that tastes like a good beer; if there were, we'd drink it. There is nothing non-alcoholic that tastes like whisky, or gin, or wine of any quality. The non-drinker knows nothing of these tastes, the aromas. Alcohol carries aromas in spirits and wine and beer like the alcohol in perfume; there is nothing like it without the alcohol. The effects of yeasts and distillation and barrel-aging create aromas that are too delicate to survive "de-alcoholization."
We drink to bond. Drinking is best enjoyed as a social activity among friends, family, or lovers. Moderate alcohol use leads to "social lubrication," a disinhibition of shyness, a willingness to speak without the howling mania of drunkenness. A few beers, a couple hours of conversation, and you have a fine afternoon. You can have that without the beers, to be sure, but if it is pleasant with the beers...then why the antipathy? Some cultures even tend to drink weaker beers to prolong the golden period of 'lubrication.'
We drink because we can, not because we have to. I had two beers this afternoon with lunch. I'm going to go out and have another this evening. I won't be drunk, I had no intention to. I went out for a meal, and tonight I'm going out to spend some time with my wife on a holiday. I could do it without alcohol, and oftentimes I do. I don't really know of anyone who drinks with every meal, and I don't know where anti-drinkers got that idea. "You can have fun without drinking," is the constant refrain, and they're right. But you can drink without getting bust-up drunk, too. Drinking is optional, though if I'm at Oktoberfest, I'm having a beer. If I don't want a beer, I'm probably not going to go to the beer hall in the first place.
We drink despite the disapproval of non-drinkers. "Anonymous" feels left out, looked down on, because they don't drink. Yet drinkers are looked down on all the time, oppressed even: that's why there are "sin taxes" on booze, that's why there are laws that disallow drinking to all because of the actions of the few who overdo drinking. I don't know of any laws that punish non-drinkers, I don't look down on them...so long as they don't look down on me. "Anonymous" crosses that line. But you know? Despite that, I'll probably have a drink later. And more tomorrow, when we toast the New Year with family. And no one will be drunk, or "lost in a liquor fog."
We drink because we like it. Those who choose not to drink do so for their own reasons. If a person is over-served, and becomes an annoyance -- to a majority, not one whiny teetotaler -- then sanctions should be imposed: cut off, sent home, shaming. But if a person is simply enjoying a beer...where exactly is the harm? There is none. Indeed, there is a benefit. Booze means jobs: production, transport, retail, advertising, sales, marketing...even writing. Booze means taxes (unfortunately). Booze means places to go for fun, because sales keep restaurants afloat. Towns in the South that have been dry for decades are turning to booze because restaurants don't want to be in dry towns. No one forces anyone to drink, but why do some people get to force others not to?
That is why we drink. I doubt this will clear anything up for "Anonymous." But I will sign my name to it.
-- Lew Bryson 12/31/08
No offense to you, but I just do not understand why so many people have to be drunk in this country. It seems like if you are not a "drinker", then society looks down on you. Why?This screed sums up a lot of what passes for anti-alcohol, New Dry "thought:" everyone who drinks is a drunk, the only reason people drink is to get blind drunk, children will all drink alcohol at every opportunity, alcohol is an evil that society must be protected from by the government and societal strictures, and life can be enjoyed without alcohol. As such, it deserves a response. "Anonymous," here's my look at "Why We Drink."
I am 35 years old, never drank and have no desire to. I live in Maryland, a state that denies anyone to smoke in public, even considering a ban on smoking in your own home yet you can drink til the cows come home. I was at a restaurant where the manager received a complaint about a smoker standing outside the entry so he called the police and they made the person leave the property. Yet during the same visit to this place [Fuddruckers in Columbia], they sell beer to anyone who has the money. There are open containers of beer on pretty much every table in the place on a weekday afternoon. This drinker [aka: loser], he got up to go to the bathroom, and while gone, two kids maybe 11 or 12 years old walked up and drank from that bottle of booze.
During my visit there, this same person drank 2 beers and looked like he had some before getting to the restaurant too. When I complained to the guy and the manager, everyone acted as if I was from another planet. Like nothing is wrong with everybody getting boozed up and stumbling around and allowing minors to have free access to illegal products.
It seems to me that america is seriously flawed in their values now, we have major issues going on currently including a "depression" hitting the economy, jobs being lost daily, shitty healthcare standards, and so much more. Yet our leaders are focused on blocking marriage to those that want it, are entitled to it, etc. I bet a guy could marry his keg of beer though if he wanted to!!!
In closing, I just don't get it. Want is the fascination with drinking.......is life that sad that everyone would rather be lost in a liquor fog that to face realty and deal with life 1-on-1.
Why do we drink? We drink because our ancestors and forefathers drank, with traditions going back thousands of years. The first drinkers probably drank because of the mind-expanding effects of alcohol. Alcohol is not, as is commonly said, simply a depressant. It is a much more complex drug. When they drink too much, some people weep, some laugh, some fight, some become gregarious, and some fall asleep. But all have impaired judgment, impaired attention, slowed reflexes. Drinking too much can be dangerous; drinking too much, too often, can ruin your life.
Given the potential danger of alcohol, then, why do we drink? The traditions we put around alcohol, much like the rituals we put around sex, or eating, or religion, regulate our enjoyment...if we heed them. We drink with friends, we drink in groups, and we assign a stigma to drinking alone. Cultures with stronger versions of these fences around drinking generally have a healthier attitude towards drinking. Laws have been tried to substitute for these cultural strictures, generally without success, any more than a law against puppies would succeed (yet most Islamic cultures shun dogs as unclean, resulting in dogless cities without anti-dog laws...).
So we drink in moderation. This is the concept that seems to escape the New Drys like "Anonymous." To the Drys -- not non-drinkers, but the anti-drinkers -- any drinking is being drunk. To be honest, I don't understand "why so many people have to be drunk in this country" either. But I truly do not understand why some people equate moderate drinking with drunkenness. It is as if drinking is a binary switch: don't drink, and you're sober and upright; drink one beer and you're "a drunk" and a menace. Do they believe that everyone who drives floors it as soon as they get out of the driveway?
We drink for pleasure. Drinks taste good, once one has developed the taste for them. There is nothing non-alcoholic that tastes like a good beer; if there were, we'd drink it. There is nothing non-alcoholic that tastes like whisky, or gin, or wine of any quality. The non-drinker knows nothing of these tastes, the aromas. Alcohol carries aromas in spirits and wine and beer like the alcohol in perfume; there is nothing like it without the alcohol. The effects of yeasts and distillation and barrel-aging create aromas that are too delicate to survive "de-alcoholization."
We drink to bond. Drinking is best enjoyed as a social activity among friends, family, or lovers. Moderate alcohol use leads to "social lubrication," a disinhibition of shyness, a willingness to speak without the howling mania of drunkenness. A few beers, a couple hours of conversation, and you have a fine afternoon. You can have that without the beers, to be sure, but if it is pleasant with the beers...then why the antipathy? Some cultures even tend to drink weaker beers to prolong the golden period of 'lubrication.'
We drink because we can, not because we have to. I had two beers this afternoon with lunch. I'm going to go out and have another this evening. I won't be drunk, I had no intention to. I went out for a meal, and tonight I'm going out to spend some time with my wife on a holiday. I could do it without alcohol, and oftentimes I do. I don't really know of anyone who drinks with every meal, and I don't know where anti-drinkers got that idea. "You can have fun without drinking," is the constant refrain, and they're right. But you can drink without getting bust-up drunk, too. Drinking is optional, though if I'm at Oktoberfest, I'm having a beer. If I don't want a beer, I'm probably not going to go to the beer hall in the first place.
We drink despite the disapproval of non-drinkers. "Anonymous" feels left out, looked down on, because they don't drink. Yet drinkers are looked down on all the time, oppressed even: that's why there are "sin taxes" on booze, that's why there are laws that disallow drinking to all because of the actions of the few who overdo drinking. I don't know of any laws that punish non-drinkers, I don't look down on them...so long as they don't look down on me. "Anonymous" crosses that line. But you know? Despite that, I'll probably have a drink later. And more tomorrow, when we toast the New Year with family. And no one will be drunk, or "lost in a liquor fog."
We drink because we like it. Those who choose not to drink do so for their own reasons. If a person is over-served, and becomes an annoyance -- to a majority, not one whiny teetotaler -- then sanctions should be imposed: cut off, sent home, shaming. But if a person is simply enjoying a beer...where exactly is the harm? There is none. Indeed, there is a benefit. Booze means jobs: production, transport, retail, advertising, sales, marketing...even writing. Booze means taxes (unfortunately). Booze means places to go for fun, because sales keep restaurants afloat. Towns in the South that have been dry for decades are turning to booze because restaurants don't want to be in dry towns. No one forces anyone to drink, but why do some people get to force others not to?
That is why we drink. I doubt this will clear anything up for "Anonymous." But I will sign my name to it.
-- Lew Bryson 12/31/08
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)