One of the best things about Lew Bryson is that I am pretty sure he does not struggle that much with labels or categories or stuff like that. He just has an excellent understanding of the details, the effects, the process, ingredients, people and reasons. Yet we have an excellent post by Andy Crouch this week. And another excellent one by Boak and Bailey this very evening. All about, one way or another, the intersections amongst identify, affiliation and interest. It broke out on twitter even, over the meaning of "mixologist", which is a term oddly and hip-ly revered due only to its 1860s sourcing... granted validity through sheer hang time unlike, say, "ballist" or, you know, urban living without public health. So, there must be something to it. Which means there must be unexplored terminology for those who seek to understand themselves more deeply:
♦ "Sessioniare": a term to be adopted by those like Lew to bolster the good cause. They might adopt a beret, too, as part of the campaign. Alternative adulterating forms for the more passionate - aka irritating - are "sessionista" or, with red sash and placard, "sessionatchik"... depending on where you sit on the Mark-Lenin-Mao politico-neediness scale.
♦ "Abbots": those so obsessed with the charms of Belgian maltiness twinned with spicy burlappy yeasts. Stan? Stan the Abbot? Why not? And as friars live in a Friary, Abbots in habit a, what, priory? Hence "priorians". Or, if you like 1980s Doctor Who, "prions" - makes sense, right? Sectarians of high degree yet pure of heart...mostly.
♦ "#825ers": building on the B+B scale and adopting the logic of the beer style identification program of the Ministry of Confusion, there needs to be a number system under which each unique approach to liking beer is individually assigned and allocated. So many numbers need to be given out that nothing can be actually ascertained through consideration of the system. There is nothing new about this compared to other systems except that it is too obvious to ignore.
♦ "Les Collaborateurs": those obsessed with the expenditure of excessively large sums for special releases, anniversary ales and collaboration beers made when brewers holiday together, all too often at the drinkers' expense, never reflected in the bottle. Like all Quislings, they have a vested interest, a personal branding even. And are well aware that ultimately your dollar may become theirs.
Don't fit in? How unfortunate. Surely, the "you" that is "you" must be able to identify the "they" which would be your "we"? You must. Otherwise how can the marketeers and niche-a-tarians get to you, aggrandize themselves before you to make you follow their will for a fee or a web page usage impression?