I picked up a copy of the latest issue of TAPS magazine, a photo contest prize giver, this morning while we were out at Chapters. Well worth the $6.95 I paid and, frankly, so well worth it I thought I would write a post setting out why. This may seem an obvious motivation for a blogger on a Saturday afternoon but there are a number of points that should be made about this magazine and how it is developing. And I make them not, as Canadians too often do, in relation to other things Canadian but in relation to the pantheon of world magazines.

• The Audience Is Defined: I have a sense that TAPS is getting close to a sweet spot that not enough other beer magazines have sought. It is not just a shill for large breweries. It also appears to have abandoned the beer ponging brand hugging chuggers that might be attracted to the incredibly well titled magazine Beer which I had a disappointed look at in the fall of 2007. But it also forsaken the extreme fringe focus of a periodical... or rather movement... like Beer Advocate magazine which I reviewed last summer. I think that this middling ground among interested beer buyers is where curiosity meets mobility and is the best bet for growth.
• Solid Production Quality: If beer is somewhat recession insulated, so are magazines. But if I am going out to treat myself on a special brew or read, I want it to be well made. And TAPS is. Heavy stock glossy paper shows off the thoughtful photography. Plenty of white space in the layout and an attractive font give it an easy feel. But these production choices also makes the typos stick out a bit more: page 8's use of "one's" for the plural faces the spelling "Itallian" in a heading. Blogs can handle that sort of thing. Glossy quarterlies can't.
• Don't Fear The Macro: Being a Maritimer, I am aware that Moosehead is a decent regional brewers of the sorts of beers I wouldn't buy anymore. But it is good that TAPS includes an interview with Andrew Oland, the owner of Canada's largest remaining independent brewery. It balances the more niche topics like the three fine food and beer articles. And the stories on specific beer bars and brewpubs is good - that is where people meet their beer as often as not.

What would I do to improve the magazine further? First, ditch the national bubble and the gold stars while still keeping the overall tone Canadian. That odd hint of neediness inherent in the Great White North shines through the sub-heading "Canada's Beer Magazine" as well as statements like "[o]ur writers are the best in Canada on the subject of beer." They do very well and I have a very merry emailing relationship with many of them but there are at least a few other good and more experienced Canadian beer writers we all can name. How about being comfortable enough in your skin just say that TAPS features some of Canada's more interesting beer writers? I can live with that.

Second, seek out the stories that might be unlike the ones readers see on the web or in All About Beer or Beers of the World, the closest US and UK comparables. Bill White's feature on his trip to Germany was fine but it is a bit like Roger Protz's recent feature on a trip to Germany in All About Beer and, worse, not likely anything 1% of the readership might ever experience. How about a regular column about making the dash south or even to the next province for the weekend or just to fill the trunk with those thousands of beers we cannot buy around the corner, something that is actually the great pastime and obsession of the Canuck strain of beer hound.

Lastly, but on a related note, has Premier Gourmet or any other border beer shop been asked to place an ad? And - while we are at it - where are the other craft brewery and provincial beer lobby association ads? An effort like TAPS is putting out needs their support as part of the larger beer scene available to the Canadian beer fan. Sadly, we seem too often to be a culture that does not truly believe a rising tide raises all boats in these sorts of situations. So, if you control that sort of ad placement decision and are reading this, consider yourself smacked in the ear if you are not supporting TAPS.

All in all, TAPS is certainly a magazine I can support even if it does not necessarily speak to me on each and every page because it aims at describing where the beer scene is in Canada now. Sure, adding a little coincidental web interactivity would be nice as well as a review that might give you a heads up that the beer in question might not be worth your time. These things should come with the maturity and accompanying security of market share that TAPS deserves.

2006. Isn't it still 2006? I got all woozy about 1998 and really never been right since about the year it is. And I have to admit that I gave up worrying about numbers when I last left Chaldea. Numerology is a bit of a mug's game and don't we all know that New Year's Eve parties prove it. But, given the hope that The Session will return to its original program in about 30 days, who am I to break my string of postings? So my look back and look forward.

[Ed.: ...make wavy fading spinning images like a bad 70s TV sci-fi show transition sequence....]

Missing About 2008?

Nutting much. Never liked it as soon as I had a good look at it. Calls for lighter flavourable session beers went unheeded. IPAs like Minwax contested with ashtray stouts. Who needs it? And anything I liked I would do again so I ain't gonna miss it. Folks can come visit from time to time if they bring good beer. You know, I didn't travel as much as in 2006 or 2007 and I want to hit the road more. But generally people are nice and I was happy to get fine samples, surprising support from advertisers and sponsors and also humped kegs for the first time in years. See? Nothing much worth anything is expected to go. Remember: life is one warm bath once you hit 43 or so...well, until the Years of Crap begin that is.

Looking forward to 2009?

I have no frigging idea. It is not here yet. I could say I look forward to doing stuff I can't really imagine but that is not very detailed. Yet that is what happens year after year. I don't have any trips planned, I am running low on the good stuff and sooner or later I will panic and dash to New England or Ohio but most likely the same places in NY to stock up again. Hey - maybe I won't have 50,000 extra maltose-based calories that I don't really need. Like that'll happen. Not much chance of that. Hmmm...there gotta be something. Vlogging! That's it!!!

[Ed.: ...more wavy fading spinning images like a bad 70s TV sci-fi show transition sequence....]

So there you go. A veritable Carol Burnett show of warm feelings and walks down memory lane. Where's my Barbara Streisand albums? "Memories...like the corners of my mind...misty water-coloured memories...." See you next month when we get back on track. How about some posts about, you know, a beer style? That'd be good. Can't wait.

There. It is done. To say that the Yule 2008 Beer Blog Photo Contest and Rodeo was not a startling success would be an utter and complete lie. You would have to be a fibber of the highest degree to suggest that. Frankly, one peep like that and I send in the Daleks - and not the draught serving ones.

I understand I have now forwarded notices to all prize winners and all prize pledgers to ensure the gifts start winging their way...some might already have arrived. If you have not received an email from me over the holidays and you think you have a prize yet to give or one awarded but not noted, please email me at your first opportunity.

And if you want to start thinking about next year's photo contest - not to mention the spring poetry contest - please feel free. I am working on improving my mass emailing coping skills already.

New Year's Day is a very good day to think about this. Many have that shaggy, slightly pained outlook on the day from a bit (or more than a bit) of the merry, merry clinky-drinky last night. And why not? It is the western world's mass culture day for celebration - a holiday that really only celebrates celebration. Do any of you actually care that the last numeral has shift from an 8 to a 9? Even with the approval that accompanies our tradition, however, I am not entirely comfortable with over doing it and ofter the standards of others and sometimes myself as to what falls short of over doing it. A friend once described his resulting gnawing remorse as something he had to work on. Perhaps he was speaking from a point in his life where choosing to have a beer was for him a little bit of a play on the idea of choice. I think this is a bit more common than we would like to think - it is not for nothing that I have a picture of a monkey up there from time to time. So, it is with support but not whole-hearted agreement that I read Lew's thoughtful response to one anonymous comment maker who asked the question "why?" - especially the outset of the response which started with this characterization of the questioner:

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."

Pretty strong stuff. Lew and Jay and others talk about the "New Dry" movement and, to be fair, I think it is something that really has and has historically had far less traction up here in Canada given the limited reach the more general idea of social conservatism has in the Great White North. Conversely, I am not as worried by efforts of organizations like MADD to raise awareness of the dangers of drinking. I think I have to admit I do believe that too much drinking is very dangerous and I think Lew and Jay would agree in large part. But I am also tired of the slew of limited release beers that are all too strong, overloaded beer fests that go on too long in the day and social lives that revolve around having that drink. I have found myself leaving sessions far earlier than others for some time now, finding the second half of the night far less interesting than the outset. And I try to make sure there are many non-drinking activities in the social calendar hopefully giving beer the place somewhere closer to a treat than a daily necessity.

But that is just me. It seems entirely natural to me that someone like Lew's anonymous comment maker would see some drinking habits and some scenes in bars odd and distasteful. Frankly, I would complain to a bar manager, too, if I saw an eleven year old sneak over to clean off the remains of a beer at an abandoned table. Actually, I would have likely just dealt with the boy myself, standing up and intervening before the first sip. Does that make me a prude or blind to a danger to my liberty? I don't think so. But that is just me.

What do you think?

No picture. Had one of these last night and it was only later I realized it was 12%. The most more-ish 12% beer in the history of the universe, me thinks. Masses of layers of flavours the specifics of which you can fill in at your own discretion - but with a smooth core like a wee bit of lactose in there. A semi-demi-hemi sweet quad stout...that just has to be that next new style just waiting to be declared. BAers go all gooey. Stonch approved...and he took a photo, too.

This is my best photo of 2008. I now feel that it is a bit of cheek suggesting I even have a best photo given both the quality that comes through the Yule photo contest as well as the simple fact that I did not take the variety of photos in 2008 that I did in years past. I like the stability of repeated use that the corner of the cold room provides for the bottle portraits that accompany reviews. Plus my current camera just isn't up to the task.

But I like this picture. Click for a bigger view. The picture comes from the end of an evening in April which found me sharing fine beer with fine company. I like the fact that the photo is so dark. It's closing time. I like the glow of the cooler as well as its reflection like a flame. The glowing "OPEN" sign across the street. The lack of people. BeerBistro! was actually still relatively hopping at that point in the night and the under exposure was entirely by fluke. But, as you know, I actually get out into the world of beer and beer people so rarely that it is the recollection of making it to closing time on a Saturday night in fine form at one of the great beer spots in the continent that this picture brings back.

See, if I write "Part One" it means I don't really have to write a full post while at the same time I can put off all those emails for the contest winners I was supposed to have gotten out by now. It's coming along - almost half are out - but even you have to admit that there is no way I ever expected we would have to be awarding over 40 prizes. I am fighting my urge to play Wii, the Christmas gift of the decade so far. The only way to deal with this set of conflicting demands is to play the first Devo album as I think about this problem...and the question of what was the best of my year in beer. Here is what I have so far:

• Best Event: there is no doubt about it - the visit by Stan and Daria which had added to it visit by Steve from Beaus and John from Church-key. I think I learned more about how to drink beer watching those four than I had learned from five years of beer blogging. There were other contenders like the Southern Tier launch in Toronto as well as the night I was a beer roadie but if this one evening triggers regular beery conferences of some sort, that would be good.
• Best Book: this was a bit of a funny year for beer related books going by my reviews. I read about the Xhosa of Africa as well as England just before Michael Jackson. I really enjoyed Amy Mittleman's book but would have liked a more engaging narrative and found, conversely, CAMRA's Good Beer Guide West Coast USA a bit too much of an in-joke. In the end, I think the best book about beer that I got my hands on this year is one that you can't get your hands on, Martyn Cornell's Amber, Gold and Black, a digital guide to the history of British beer styles. You can buy your own copy for the extremely low price of five pounds and you should because you really need the full story on Cornish White Ale.
• Best Defense of Good Beer: this has to be the good fight that BrewDog is waging against the jurisdictional monopoly imposed upon them by their oligopolistic macro-brewing competition through that wacko quasi-legal thing called the shadowy Portman Group.

Well, that's me put off the emailing long enough. More of the best of 2008 tomorrow. Including best picture which is not the overly fragrant, slightly fey one I took up there to the comic relief of some of you.

I am not against Quebec separatism. Heck, I am not against separatism anywhere as long as the people actually want to separate. I have tartan clothes, you know. Just saying these things can happen. But this news today in the National Post (but noted by Rick Lyke weeks ago) seems to hint strongly that there is still much work to do to ever gain the support of the majority in la belle province:

It is a marketing coup that is meant to brew up support for Quebec sovereignty -- literally. Thirsty sovereigntists have launched a beer called l'Independante, in hopes of stirring up ailing support for sovereignty. The pale ale dubbed "the beer that will never give in" sports a blue logo with a patriotic-looking woman, her fist in the air. The slogans are unequivocal: Vive la biere libre! (Long live free beer!) and Qui prend biere prend pays (Choosing your beer is choosing your country). With support for sovereignty at a low of 37% according to recent polls, the beer might be the closest Quebecers will get to independence in the short term.

Marketing coup? Maybe if there is no other way to take power, I suppose. Les Bâtisseurs Indépendants is something of a double entendre as the brewery is a contract outfit with its offices on the third floor of a building south of Mount Royal. Looking for reviews of this new phase of the struggle that sorta began in 1608. Let me know if you find any yourself.

Instant Update: Is it this? Likely that would be more in the treasonous category given those reviews at RateBeer. No, this looks like it. Better, though the response does seem to mirror the recent election results.

I recall a George Carlin news item joke that I may have posted somewhere here somewhere before: "scientists have discovered that saliva causes cancer but, fortunately, only when taken over a long period of time in small amounts." That is the sort of reaction I had when I read today's beer and health news:

Drinking only one pint of beer a day increases the risk of liver and bowel cancer by a fifth, a health expert warned yesterday. A large glass of wine or a couple of spirits can have the same damaging effect, she said. Rachel Thompson, science programme manager for the World Cancer Research Fund, warned that just two units of alcohol a day increased the risk of bowel cancer by 18 per cent and that of liver cancer by a fifth.

Dr. R. Thompson does appear to have a strong research record but this news does beg the question of who funded the research and why there is no effort to aggregate the findings of such health researchers into a "yea or nay" sort of document. It begs the question of should we drink or shouldn't we given there is so much research indicating tee-totaling is quite dangerous to human health. Plus, there is another question that has an underlying idea: "how would you like to die?" You see, we will all die. If we have good health and are careful with what we eat and exercise regularly and pray to the gods of your choice...we will all die. So, while it is one thing to put off eating glass shards and sipping a little bleach every day, are we to be entirely obsessed with living to 95 having had avoided club soda for fear of bubbles - or should we live a reasonably healthy life that includes a rich, rewarding and traditional diet in which having a few drinks a week or even a day is a part?

Wouldn't this sort of science serve us best if it avoided puritanical and objectifying presumptions or at least admitted the assumptions inherent in its conclusions or even the assumptions embedded in each selected hypothesis?