The news last week of the shadowy Portman Group's abandonment of its efforts to "remove interestingness caused by the more clever smaller competition"¹ from beer shelves of Britain at least in relation to one beer, Orkney's Skull Splitter, is neatly summarized by Roy Beers in The Publican today, including this telling passage:
It mattered nothing to the Portman Group that (“Mr, to you”) Skull Splitter – nickname for Thorfinn Hausacluif – was historically the 7th Viking jarl of Orkney; or that he has as much right to have a beer named after him as, say, Harald Godwinson or Hereward the Wake. Or William the Bastard. It didn’t signify, either, that the typical Skull Splitter drinker is over 35, possibly a member of CAMRA, and has exceedingly good taste in the matter of high quality strong beer. Of the sort you can savour by a great log fire. Exactly why it has taken the Portman Group so many years to discover this potentially havoc-wreaking brand is a mystery, but perhaps what’s most encouraging about the story is the overwhelming support for the brewery and its beer, with prominent politicians joining the clamour for Skull Splitter’s survival.
I would also add this: why did it take the shadowy Portman group that many years to discover Britain has a Viking history. I am an immigrant's kid over here in Canada and I - by my name and the village of my mother's birth - was well aware that Skull Splitter was a reference to the actual Viking history of the actual people in the actual land. That is the thing about your self-appointed betters - if they were actually your betters, you wouldn't need the self-appointment because they would carry the authority that comes with making good sense.
¹Not quite the actual charge laid in the case.