One of my favourite beer writers is English beer guy Pete Brown (not to be confused with Edmonton’s monstrously creative Peter Brown– whom I also love immensely – host of CBC’s RadioActive,). The British Brown is the author of some hilarious and informative books about beer – his latest being the historically revelation-ary Hops and Glory. I go to his blog a couple of times a week because it is reliably intelligent, cozy and entertaining.
His latest post does something, from a British perspective, I have been wanting to do for ages. He does an analysis of the big corporate breweries. He doesn’t review their beer (mostly), but instead looks at how they treat beer in an existential sense. I found it to be marvelously insightful and studied. He avoids the easy path of casting them all with the same accusation of destroying beer, and tries to understand their individual cultures and their implication for good beer. You can find the post here.
The easiest thing for beer geeks like myself is to dismiss the global brewers as pariahs and lucifers intent on destroying the goodness in our favourite beverage. But that is a cartoon characterization of these corporations. The reality is more complex. Don’t get me wrong, I am not defending them here, but I do think that we lose sight sometimes that these companies are filling a demand that our favourite craft brewers can’t satisfy. There are a lot of people – I know because I have met them – who just want their beer to be cold, refreshing and cheap. An Alley Kat Full Moon or a Blanche de Chambly (two beer I consumed tonight) is not what they want. So who am I to say that their beer choice is somehow wrong?
Anyway, back to Pete Brown. What I like about his piece is that it doesn’t pre-judge the companies. He evaluates them on their actions and how they deal with the brands that they own. I disagree with him on some points, largely because we live in different locations. For example, he is far more charitable to Molson-Coors than I ever could be, especially given their ruthless closure of the historic Edmonton brewery a couple of years back (which had been operating continuously since 1913). But maybe in England their track record is better than here.
At any rate, I encourage you to read his post. It is informative and thought-provoking (at least it was for me). It is a great example of how to be a beer geek and a beer journalist at the same time. It is also a good reminder for us all that every style of beer has its place, and we need to respect it for what it is, not what it should be in some kind of beer-y Valhalla.
July 9, 2010 at 8:42 AM
re: the Molson plant closures. I also remember even further back when they closed the Regina plant in the late 90s. It was outproducing the Edmonton plant at the time… so Molson decided to shutdown Regina, and move it’s production to Edmonton. So much for that strategy…
You would think that as a result of this (and the Saskatoon Labatt plant closure in the early 90s) that everyone in SK would be drinking Great Western product. Not so. Most average folks gulp down as much “Pil” as possible – because ya’ know, Molson advertises it on every billboard here as a “Saskatchewan Tradition,” even though the brand came from Lethbridge. Why Molson didn’t choose their Bohemian brand (which was created in Prince Albert) to be marketed as a “Saskatchewan Tradition,” is beyond me… but the bottom line is that their target market simply does not care about such things.
July 9, 2010 at 5:53 PM
Mark,
I am equally flummoxed and frustrated at how no one has ever punished these companies for their outrageous behaviour, ripping away jobs and then lying to us about the pedigree of their beer. Molson didn’t see a ripple in their sales after they closed the Edmonton plant.
I often wonder what Lethbridge Pils tasted like when it was first brewed…
July 9, 2010 at 9:14 AM
I really think that everyone has their place, the big guys spend a lot of money on R&D which we all eventually get to profit from. I don’t respect a lot of what they do and I can’t stand their product but to each their own right?
July 9, 2010 at 5:55 PM
Chloe,
Thanks for the comment. I have a question, however. What kind of R&D are you referring to that we all benefit from? I realize they make advances on technical and scientific aspects, but how much does that filter down to the little guys? And it has been a long time since one of the big boys released a new beer that was any good. I guess I am not quite as forgiving as you may be on this point.
Cheers.
Jason
July 10, 2010 at 8:45 AM
I would put a lot more stock into the R&D being done at Sierra Nevada. Brewers Association acknowledged them this year for their innovation and research – http://beernews.org/2010/04/brewers-association-announces-2010-achievement-award-winners/
After visiting the brewery myself, I was simply blown away by how much effort they put into ensuring they produce a quality product, and they are constantly experimenting (a great example is their new “Torpedo” dry hopping method, which Ken himself designed). I suppose the big industrial guys are doing the same sorts of things, but Sierra Nevada is still very much a “craft brewery,” they just happen to produce 800,000 bbl/ year.
July 11, 2010 at 9:49 AM
Yes of course Sierra Nevada is more deserving of our admiration, they are so dedicated to the cause of both putting out a quality product and doing research into new and inventive ways of brewing; But before there was Ken there was an August Bush right?
I think that the technical stuff does filter down to the little guys, I spent a few years brewing for McAuslan in Montreal who were partnered with Moosehead at the time and now I have that knowledge and experience to bring to any brewing job I get, be it big, small or otherwise.
For me it’s about everyone doing their own thing.