Beer v. Wine

[A Balic]

It is most interesting reading these posts to get an impression of what people think about culture and wine/beer etc. It has been a great topic. On the whole, I would have to agree with Bux that beer, although it maybe locally significant to a particular culture, has not had the greater impact on societies that wine has. As what people consider to be the importance of wine changes from culture to culture (classic Greek lovers of wine, would have thought that the discussions on terroir were pointless as we don't dilute our wine, so what do we know about wine?), this may simply be a reflection of the aging and transportation potential of wine verses beer. Wine has been a great item of trade, being transported over long distances. This has ment that wine has had a huge global impact, even on non-wine producing countries, while beer has remained a more localised product. Imagine how different British culture and the interaction of the British would have been without wine.

On another note, when people here speak of New world wine, do they mean the US alone or do they include South America, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa etc. Also, in recently re-essablished/re-asserted wine making areas in Europe, such as the South of France, Greece and Southern Italy is it correct to refer to these wines as "Old world". Is a Super-Tuscan  an Old world wine for instance?

[Wilfrid]

I have just worked my way through this thread, and it's a cracker.  Although there may be some countries where wine consumption predominates almost to the exclusion of beer consumption, or vice versa, for many societies - England for example - you would need to make very fine distinctions between social groupings (okay, classes) and historical periods, because there really isn't one homogeneous "culture".  

Let me sketch some details.  For most of the twentieth century - okay, up to the late '70s - middle-class, working-class and sub-prole (if I may) England was predominantly a beer (not lager) culture.  This needs further qualification:  it was a public house culture, and beer was what pubs mainly served.  By this I mean, that most drinking (by far) was done not in the home, but in a communal space - the pub - and pubs were laregly owned, run by, or somehow tithed to, breweries.   Beer included bitter, mild, stout, and various ales.  Some people may have taken a glass of wine at Christmas, and of course spirits were drunk.  Nevertheless, throughout this period, the upper-middle and upper middle-classes continued the claret/champagne-centred wine drinking culture of their Victorian and Georgian forebears - although beer would have been taken too.

Now, drawing connections with culture in the sense of art/literature/etc, you will find the role played by beer or wine (in England, in this period) reflected the social background of the cultural worker or artist, or - more often the not - the social background with which they wishes to be identified.  George Orwell and J.B. Priestley, for example, identifying themselves with the workers and the sensible middle classes, respectively, would seek to be thought of as ale-drinkers.  A representative of a (gay) Bohemian artworld, like Francis Bacon, would seek to distance himself utterly from "ordinary" England, and wouldn't be seen dead drinking bitter (let alone Guinness - his background was Irish)- he would call for champagne or French aperitifs.

Oh, I could go on, but I suppose my thesis is that social/cultural preferences for wine or beer offer a rich field for analysis; and also that preferences are not straightforward - that people or groups often choose their drink not to reflect their heritage, but actually to separate themselves and indicate their difference either from other groups, or even from their own communities.

I think that adds something :confused:

[Scarpetta]

First of all, hi to everybody. I'm new to eGullet, which seems to be a great site. I'm Italian -- meaning that I live in Italy AND have an italian passport. I'm a professional cook which spends three months in the summer in a greek island feeding pizza and pasta to the tourists who are choking over moussaka and tzatziki.

This thread is quite interesting and I'd like to contribute my views. As someone already stated, it's difficult to draw any kind of comparison between wine and beer -- since wine offers such a fantastic array of sensations and variants. If we only take into consideration the olfactory range of wine - as compared to that of beer - we realize there's a complexity ratio of about 100/1 in favor of wine. (though I love to quaff a beer or four on a hot summer day...)

Let's face it, if you sniff your beer mug, you aren't exactly overwhelmed by a symphony of perfumes.

Then, when we consider wine at large we have such an incredible range of different types: besides the obvious red and white there's rosè, champagne, sauterne type, port, marsala, madeira, sherry, asti spumante, passito, and I'm sure I'm leaving out a few more. Beer is practically one-dimensional, wine is like a galaxy.

[Ron Johnson]

A Balic:  The designation "New World" would in fact encompass Australia, New Zealand, etc.  Which is further evidence that "New World" does not equal Bad wine.  New Zealand Sauvigon Blancs are a revelation.  However, these countries do exhibit "New World" tendencies by creating over-extracted, super-ripe, high alcohol, fruit bombs, which get high scores from Parker but don't show much long term complexity or evidence of their terroir.  They also do not marry as well with food.  Given their over the top style, they tend to dominate other flavors, especially subtle ones.

Your question about Super-Tuscans raises an excellent issue.  What happens when winemakers employ "New World" techniques in an "Old World" arena.  In addition to Super-Tuscans, this phenomena can also be seen in the garagistes of the right bank in Bordeaux.  My opinion would be that these wines should be considered "New World" because that title is more accurate as a description of a style of winemaking than it is a description of where the wine is made.  Just as there can be "New World" wines made in France and Italy, there can be "Old World" wines made in the U.S., Australia, NZ, etc.  In California I would point to the Edmund St. John's Syrah based wines as an example of "Old World" style in the U.S.

Cheers.

[Stone]

Scarpetta:  Even Moretti has light and dark styles, neither of which, I admit, are very good.  

[A Balic]

Quote: from Wilfrid on 10:42 pm on Jan. 22, 2002

I have just worked my way through this thread, and it's a cracker.  Although there may be some countries where wine consumption predominates almost to the exclusion of beer consumption, or vice versa, for many societies - England for example - you would need to make very fine distinctions between social groupings (okay, classes) and historical periods, because there really isn't one homogeneous "culture".  

.................my thesis is that social/cultural preferences for wine or beer offer a rich field for analysis; and also that preferences are not straightforward - that people or groups often choose their drink not to reflect their heritage, but actually to separate themselves and indicate their difference either from other groups, or even from their own communities.

I think that adds something :confused:

I am no more confused that usual  :)

. Interesting to see how difficult it is to seperate wine v beer in terms of which is the better beverage and which one has the most cultural significance. Wilfrid, your comments about Francis Bacon disturbs me somewhat, I drink Campari, but have no talent in anything, so what does that say? Curses pedestrian again!

Ron, I agree completely with your definition of Old world/New world, I wonder though how many others would. I rarely drink Australian wine here in the UK, as the wine that is imported is of the big, bold New world type. For example in Australia I would drink Riesling and Hunter River Semillion, as my prefered Australian white wines. The former is rarely seen and the latter never, but yet there are vast vats of Australian Chardonnay (complete swill, in most cases (not a pun!)) sold here! From this I would guess, that often our preception of what type of wine a country is distorted by what is avalible to us. Can you imagine what the impression of French wine would be if you had only tasted Carignan from the south and Pinot Blanc from the north.

[macrosan]

Quote: from Scarpetta

Let's face it, if you sniff your beer mug, you aren't exactly overwhelmed by a symphony of perfumes.... Beer is practically one-dimensional, wine is like a galaxy.

Clearly you know nothing of Northern European beers, Scarpetta. I have a good (Flemish) friend who will sniff and taste beer just like a wine-taster, and tell you which brewery, which year, which hopfield, which variety of hop and so on and so on, and he tells me Dutch and German beers have the same subtleties. He and I had a beer tasting evening in Brussels (with dinner) which opened my eyes and taste-buds to the fact that beer (certainly in Belgium) is as complex and interesting as any wine.

This is indeed an interesting thread. The most interesting aspect is that not a single beer expert has posted (ie someone like my Flemish friend). That maybe proves Bux's point. Wine is an accompaniment to food, beer (except in Belgium) generally isn't. So most people here at eGullet will be wine drinkers.

My knowledge of wine is limited to "I know what I like". Those whose knowledge of beer is similarly limited should not denigrate it.

[A Balic]

Quote: from macrosan on 4:27 pm on Jan. 23, 2002

Quote: from Scarpetta

Let's face it, if you sniff your beer mug, you aren't exactly overwhelmed by a symphony of perfumes.... Beer is practically one-dimensional, wine is like a galaxy.

Clearly you know nothing of Northern European beers, Scarpetta. I have a good (Flemish) friend who will sniff and taste beer just like a wine-taster, and tell you which brewery, which year, which hopfield, which variety of hop and so on and so on, and he tells me Dutch and German beers have the same subtleties. He and I had a beer tasting evening in Brussels (with dinner) which opened my eyes and taste-buds to the fact that beer (certainly in Belgium) is as complex and interesting as any wine.

This is indeed an interesting thread. The most interesting aspect is that not a single beer expert has posted (ie someone like my Flemish friend). That maybe proves Bux's point. Wine is an accompaniment to food, beer (except in Belgium) generally isn't. So most people here at eGullet will be wine drinkers.

My knowledge of wine is limited to "I know what I like". Those whose knowledge of beer is similarly limited should not denigrate it.

All this is true, but as you indicated, people here have tended to think of wine only at the good quality end, but do the opposite with beer. What does this mean in terms of cultural significance? Well it says more about us then it does of the relative merits of wine v beer, which is a completely seperate issue to how "good" it is. For instance, I would suggest that the most culturally significant wine in the US in the last twenty years is Sutter Home White Zinfandel, this doesn't mean that it is relatively better then Leffe Triple for instance (no contest there, Leffe every time), but it has had a greater recent effect on the drinking habits of the US public then Leffe has had on the Belgium public.

Oh, the last Moretti I had was sitting next to the Arno and it was very good.

[Wilfrid]

I might just add that so-called "Real Ales" in England - by which I really mean the hand-pumped beers produced on a relatively small artisanal scale, rather than the big brewers' attempts at the same - do yield subtle and complex differences in bouquet and flavor

[Stone]

Adam -- Drinking Rolling Rock or Gallo at the Arno would be good!

I, too, have been surprised that there weren't more beer drinkers writing.  When I started this thread, I really didn't see it as a competition as to which was a "better" drink.  I wanted to discuss things like beer gardens, sharing a cold one after the game, sipping port after meals, etc.

I'm really surprised, however, that some of the wine-folks are so anti-beer.  I could understand that from an American 20 years ago, when all we were really exposed to was Bud (which I love), Miller, and other so called pale-lagers (a category, I believe, created by large American brewers so they could compete).

But to ignore the major differences between lager and ale (i.e., red v. white), and the myriad classifications of IPA, pale ales, Oktoberfests, trappist ales, white ales, wheat beers, lambics, bocks, double bocks, triple bocks, etc., and then the subtle difference not just among the large brewers (and I frankly believe that the macro/micro Sierra Nevada is the best beer in America -- Kudos to Saveur) but the myriad micro brews, is really to miss out on a great drinking experience.  I would argue that a beer tasting trip through the British Isles (I admit that for my tastes, German beers aren't as interesting) would rival a similar wine tasting trip through France or Italy.

But then again, reading the wine posts, I'm reminded of an Emporer who commissioned a new set of clothes.  And when they weren't finished on time, all the fashionistas in the kingdom pantomimed draping luxurious robes on his shoulders and cooed over the beatiful workmanship of his new outfit.  Not wanting to admit that he couldn't see the exquisite robes, the emporer too extolled their beauty.  Then his minister, plainly believing something to be wrong with his eyes, commented on the precise stitching of the gold thread; the cook delivering dinner gasped over the sparkling diamond buttons and soon the whole kingdom was convinced that their naked King was the best dressed ruler in the world -- because they too saw the robes, and the robes were better than anything ever before produced.  

(Edited by Dstone001 at 7:50 am on Jan. 23, 2002)

[A Balic]

Dstone001 mate, I wouldn't be to hard on (wine)people. I think that the problem is the use of the word "cultural", as several people have pointed out it can have several meanings, so some people have used one meaning in particular then you get this whole "polarisation of opinions thing" going. It is pretty common when discussing wine/beer for the reasons that Wilfrid was talking about in his first post on this thread. I have held several wine tastings and you get this occuring on different levels: "I don't drink wine, because its for snobs", " I only drink red wine, as white wine is common" and most often "I don't drink sweet wine because it is cheap and nasty". As Wilfrid said, its about your perception of your place in the world, wine/beer is one of those ways of defining this for a lot of people.

Only rare, self-aware individuals like myself will drink anything  ;).

[Scarpetta]

Adam -- I agree, it seems that quite a few people in this thread have taken the term "cultural" as a synonim for educated, "classy" or such - hence as a qualitative term of paragon - instead of an adjective denoting the set of traditions and knowledge pertaining to a particular human activity. We're not discussing (at least, we shouldn't) about which is best between wine and beer, but rather which one we prefer, and why...

DStone -- Moretti Sans Souci is one of the best beers in Europe and anywhere else, but I respect your tastes.

Macrosan -- As I stated, I like beer and actually I've had most of those circulating in Europe. Besides -- a nose is a nose is a nose! If I can detect smells and nuances in wine, I ought to perceive them also in beer. Your Flemish friend is very impressive, though I wouldn't want to taste any vintage beer (as he does, according to you) and I may point out that my friend's truffle hound is capable of discerning even more nuances in tap water.

[Shiva]

Quote: from Scarpetta on 5:01 pm on Jan. 23, 2002

...I wouldn't want to taste any vintage beer

Hooray!  That leaves more for me.

<IMG SRC="http://gallery.consumerreview.com/webcrossing/images/vintage_ale.jpg">

Seriously Scarpetta, I suspect you're missing out on some of the most fragrant beers such as English ales, Belgian lambics and German hefeweisens.  There's more to the world of beer than factory brewed lagers.

My take on the original question:  It's all a matter of climate.  Beer developed in chilly northern Europe and wine in the south.  The differences in weather means different crops and different cultures.  Not better or worse, just different.

Shiva (Try the '99 and the '01)

[Scarpetta]

Thanks, Shiva, you taught me something I didn't know! I'm looking forward at correcting my ignorance (hoping, of course, to have fun while learning...) Ciao.

[Wilfrid]

I have just been reading Culture and Cuisine by Jean-Francois Revel - an interesting, but unashamedly Francocentric history of food.  He has this to say:

"(W)ine has become the only alcoholic drink to have spread to every corner of the globe and to be produced in very different forms, for distilled alcoholcs are drunk all over the world but each type is more or less uniform, and other fermented drinks are at most popular refrshments, closely linked with local conditions.  Despite differences...differences that fans of beer maintain that they can detect in various versions of this drink - it must be admitted that its range of flavours is rather limited."  (page 76 of the English translation)

Well, I suggest we conduct the following tasting for Monsieur Revel:  a bottle of Rolling Rock; an ice cold can of VB from down under; some Carlsberg Special Brew; a pint of McEwan's heavy; some Fullers' ESB; a pint of whichever small batch real ale is current CAMRA champion; a bottle of Newcastle Brown; a half of Guinness; some Belgian kriek; a Mackeson; and a Russian Imperial Stout.  We can then finish off with a nip of barley wine, take his car keys off him, and let him weave his way unsteadily into the night.  He might not like any of those flavours, but if he thinks the range is limited, he has got a wonky palate.

[macrosan]

Well said Wilfrid :)

The irony is that wine buffs will often complain that a 'new world' wine is somehow faulty if its taste does not match exactly that of its origins. So people like Revel will say that a Californian Chardonnay is inferior to French because its terroir or grape varietal is different. For him then to extol the virtues of variety of flavors in wine is extraordinary :)

[Ron Johnson]

Macrosan:

I don't think that Old World and New World wines shoulde be compared as which is the better wine.  There is no better wine.  Some of my friends love those monster Turley zins and big full-bodied california cabernets.  Sometimes they are exactly what I want as well.  In fact, I have much of that type of wine in my cellar.  However, my preference is Old World wines, mainly those from the Northern Rhone Valley.  For my personal taste, you just can't beat the expression of the terroir and other subtle flavors that exist aside from fruit.

The problem is that the two leading wine publications, Wine Spectator and Robert Parker, are both proponents of the New World style and have palates that reflect a clear preference for that style.  So as a result, most of the wine drinking public, who aren't certifiable wine geeks, are left with the impression that these New World wines are superior when they get scores of 97, 98, and 99 from these publications.

I think it is strictly and matter of preference, but I do find that the more subtle Old World wines do tend to pair with food better.

If you really want to get more into that topic, I suggest you read Willie Gluckstern's excellent book, The Wine Avenger.

Also to get an idea of how true Old World wines are crafted, I suggest Kermit Lynch's book.

Cheers.

[macrosan]

Quote: from ron johnson

Macrosan:

I don't think that Old World and New World wines shoulde be compared as which is the better wine

Ron, I didn't and I wouldn't

[Jason Perlow]

If you really want to get more into that topic, I suggest you read Willie Gluckstern's excellent book, The Wine Avenger

Better yet, if you live in the New York area, go to his wine classes! They are one heck of a bargain.

[Gavin Jones]

Clearly wine is the dominant model. As the homogenization and branding of a mass-marketed product which took place during the early modern period in Europe resulting in such anodyne and undifferentiated products as 'Claret' and 'Sherry' presaged the similar industrialization and branding of the beer  industry in the 18th/19th century.

Thus the relative of Madeira (dating ?? but definitely 13th C.) is India Pale ale in the 18th.

[tommy]

Quote: from Jason Perlow on 11:01 am on Jan. 30, 2002

If you really want to get more into that topic, I suggest you read Willie Gluckstern's excellent book, The Wine Avenger

Better yet, if you live in the New York area, go to his wine classes! They are one heck of a bargain.

i second that emotion.

[bigbear]

I agree with Gavin Jones. He just sounded better than everyone else.

[Stone]

It's quite intresting to read this thread again now that I know the cast of characters better.

Y'all may find this interesting -- I have a friend who used to work for a company in a certain valley North of San Francisco. They were wine "fixers". If a wine producer wasn't happy with a batch, the fixers would do their magic (filtration, additives, etc.) to alter the flavor, composition, mouth-feel, etc. and then send it back for bottling. The whole business is all very hush hush. I asked what vineyards he worked on, and, not surprisingly, he was sworn to secrecy.

By the way, eight months or so on egullet, and I've developed a much better appreciation for wine, though I still can't seem to develop the pallet or patience that others devote to it.

Cheers.

[theakston]

Let the great Michael Jackson weigh in on this

http://www.beerhunter.com/documents/19133-001715.html

Also, and I wonder if this is why this thread has been re-activated here, the James Beard Foundation recently saw fit to honor Fritz Maytag as their Outstanding Wine & Spirits Professional. The following is from the story posted at World of Beer:

Fritz Maytag, founder of San Francisco's pioneering craft brewery and head of the Anchor Distilling Company, was named the Hudson Valley Foie Gras Outstanding Wine & Spirits Professional at the 2003 James Beard Foundation Awards handed out tonight in New York City. It is believed that this is the first time a personality so strongly identified with the brewing industry has been so honoured.

So maybe the attitudes are finally changing so that beer will hopefully get more recognition as a valid gastronomic and cultural experience.