A Good Beer Blog

-------

Have you read The Unbearable Nonsense of Craft Beer - A Rant in Nine Acts by Alan and Max yet? It's out on Kindle as well as Lulu.

Maureen Ogle said this about the book: "... immensely readable, sometimes slightly surreal rumination on beer in general and craft beer in particular. Funny, witty, but most important: Smart. The beer geeks will likely get all cranky about it, but Alan and Max are the masters of cranky..."

Ron Pattinson said: "I'm in a rather odd situation. Because I appear in the book. A fictional version of me. It's a weird feeling."


Comments

Comments are locked. No additional comments may be posted.

Chris -

You don't think Parker's influence is a little too pervasive? One of the things I enjoy about the perception of beer is that one critic doesn't have the ability to determine a beer's success the way Parker often can with wine. It seems a little more likely for there to be a consensus with beer criticism, or at least a variety of opinions that have equal respect.

Alan -

Not sure the beer discourse needs a strong figure to create homogeneity. Unless that is the Jackson legacy. The burden of style categorization. Still, not much good comes of top down consensus. A lack of discussion about value and the buying public jerked around like a kid on sugar breakfast cereal watching Saturday morning TV ads for toys just before Christmas. No, we could use some disagreement.

Chris -

Agreed. Conensus wasn't the right word, I meant more... let's say an averaging out of equally respected opinions, as opposed to one over-arching opinion setting the agenda. I think we're more likely to have the former with beer.

Alan -

But why do we care? I do not want manufactured disagreement anymore than contrived consensus but given the artifice of "community" I come back again and again to the question of who benefits from homogeneity? Status quo benefits established interests. So organizations like the BA and CAMRA are stifled and stifle in the cause of continuing established interests. It is a deeply conservative and even regressive underlying principle that suggests a very heavy oligarchical hand. But money does that, undermines the marketplace.