While I think Pete makes a very good point about most people really not caring much about the quality or even qualities of what they drink, the news out of Vancouver has me wondering about whether I might ever go out to drink with Canadians ever again:
If there ever was a reason for Vancouverites to celebrate, the 2010 Winter Olympics are it. If you're like most of us, you'll be watching the gold medal hockey games in someone's living room with a bunch of friends. But if you have to get out of the house, may we suggest a few other party spots?
A list then is provided of which party spots to hit and what to do: drink, drink ice-cold Heineken, drink lots of Molson Canadian, drink beer and wine and drink at Club Bud. Fabulous. But is it to be derided? Pete puts it very well when he says most do not "appreciate the flavour, but to look and feel good while they're drinking it, and to manage their arc of inebriation in a way with which they feel comfortable."
I like that - the comfort of the arch of one's inebriation. But it raises questions. Why should I care to evangelize to the already comfortable let alone celebrate with them? What is in that weary fight for me? Why would I take on that task with any more glee than taking on trying to convert Olympians to Northamptonshire skittles? Sure, we all know the lugers would likely get skittles right away but it's not like the skiers would. You can't imagine lugers settling for the comfort of the arch of their inebriation even if the hoards of waxed plankers clearly would. I think the analogy holds and even illuminates.
If that is the case, are the Olympics the macro beer of sports, really not worth the evangelical touch or even celebration? And, if so, what's sport is the match for good beer? Is it really skittles or is it more like lawn billiards? Maybe it depends on the beer. Saison? Definitely lawn billiards.