NORTH AMERICAN BEER IS NOT A BEER CATEGORY!

[dhurtubise]

Borderline,

You are doing alot of double talking here.

What sparked the whole discussion on this thread is that you were catagorizing Unibroue beers (and still are) and Denison's Weiss in this nebulous catagory you chose to call North American style. You have to be careful with this kind of broad generalization based on a finite sample. I think you argue much the same way my wife does using exceptions and generalizing whole systems through them... LOL.

Perhaps you might benefit from perusing through what are accepted style categories of beer based on international standards. The authority on beer styles is the BJCP and you can access the style descriptions on their website:

http://bjcp.org/style-index.html

By the way, as much as this might pain you, Unibroue beers, as good as they are, are not incredibly distictive by belgian standards. And for every one of their beer (save QQC), I could make it very difficult for you to identify them in blind taste tests. They are excellent and something that we as Canadians should be proud to be producing but they are not unique, stylisticly speaking.

You can argue about styles until you are blue in the face but by the way wheatsheath and trub man were arguing their points, my guess is that, like myself, they have gone beyond the simple act of drinking in this wonderful beer hobby we share. There is no better beer education then actually brewing the stuff.

It is true that some beers actually defy categorization, but these are usually very strange beers, not for the faint of heart, that are purely experimental (like a garlic pilsner for example). Brewing is a very old and established practice and it is rare that truly new styles manifest themselves.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dhurtubise on 2004-02-08 11:44 ]</font>

[borderline_alcoholic]

No, I am not trying to generalise ridiculously. I think I just come at this from a different angle. As such, I will try to explain my standpoint instead of simply arguing specific points - which is really getting us nowhere.

Essentially, whatever Country you are in - the local beers are from there and that is what you call them. This is less the case when you actually live there, but still applies (eg in neither England nor Belgium does anyone talk about English-stlye or Belgian-style beers, but that is what they are to outsiders).

Within whatever Country you are in there are then various styles - and that Country typically has a way of doing things which marks it as different from elsewhere. In the case of Canada, there are not really enough differences from the US brewing system that it is worth pondering it on its own (IMHO), so I am talking about North America vs European brewing Countries from here on in...

Consequently, I do actively approach North America looking for what marks it as separate from other Countries - as that is what denotes the characteristics of that Country's beers from the standard they are building upon (and differences here are a good thing BTW). The differences are fairly obvious to me, as these were all new beers at the same time and they did share characteristics which the English and Belgian beers that they were copying did not have.

I am trying to make a supportive argument for North American beer as I am noting how it differs and is distinctive and impressive - as frankly, with issues of freshness aside, what is the point in brewing your own beer if it is exactly the same as someone elses?

Within my first post in this thread I have pointed out that I was getting a tad carried away when I called Unibroue's beer a North American style (and that was more in relation to a post from Josh Oakes where he talked about a North American srtle and then said that the idea the North American beer is no good is not the case anymore - I replied that I agreed and also brought in a few other notable North American breweries which follow other non-English/Scottish originated styles mainly because they are stand-out beers within this market). This is not the case, but there are characteristics which make it different from beers made in Belgium and if that holds true of the other Belgian style North American beers, then there are by definition North American characteristics to these beers, which makes North American Belgian-style beer a meaningful term.

As I only have Unibroue to go on at this stage, I consider the differences between it and Belgian-originated beer as being what marks a North American attempt at a Belgian beer. This is almost certainly naive, but it is a legitimate starting point.

I also completely agree that Unibroue beers are a bit 1-dimensional compared to Belgian examples. This is also, unfortunately, a property of North American beers in general, which is also a part of their generalised characteristics. They (in general, I hasten to restate) are lacking in finish in particular. I try not to say this too explicitly, as I do not really want to offend brewers too much, but it is sadly true when you consider this continents beer output as a whole.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: borderline_alcoholic on 2004-02-08 02:53 ]</font>

[borderline_alcoholic]

And furthermore...

On 2004-02-08 00:15, dhurtubise wrote:

I think you argue much the same way my wife does using exceptions and generalizing whole systems through them... LOL.

I am probably mainly arguing exceptions as the vast majority of North American beer that I have been exposed to has been frankly rubbish (in real terms that is probably what characterises North American beer, but that would be a bit mean when there are good things to ponder).

Where it is good is by definition exceptional, and it is there that I am doing comparisons. Because what really is the point of even considering overly thin copies of beers developed elsewhere? They are just poor, which is hardly worth considering too deeply.

Thus I am considering the exceptional North American beers vs the better (IMHO) UK and Belgian beers and there are differences, which is all that I am pointing out. So far, as an outsider, I tend to naturally distinguish what is different in the beers here compared to beers elsewhere, so it is much easier for me to see and generalise accordingly.

[dhurtubise]

"as frankly, with issues of freshness aside, what is the point in brewing your own beer if it is exactly the same as someone elses? "

It is not the same as someone else's but it can still within the same style as someone elses and taste completely differnetly.

There are loads of personal justification for brewing. First of all, brewing is actually alot of fun and satisfying and you get to reap the rewards of the hobby which can be an incredible bonus. Freshness can be a big reason for brewing certain styles such as Hefe Weizen, Wit, Pale Ale, and most lagers for that matter. Most beers are actually much better when fresh. There is hardly anything more satisfying in breweing then when you have 6 gallons of fresh, fantastic beers you have made yourself, for example, I just finished off a keg of some fantastic Weissbier that I wish had been magically bottomless.

Another great reason for brewing is style availability. For example: how many barleywines are available right now in Ontario - probably none. So you can brew one and your batch lasts 2-3 years (cause it is a big beer). You can also brew according to your own tastes(which still usually allows the beer to fall within the style of beer you are brewing- and IMO which is probably where the essence of our disagreement lies).

For example if I like a very malty full bodied ESB, there are things I can do to acheive this result. Conversely I can produce a thinner ESB that would still fall within the style guidelines. What I chose to brew, in terms of style, has nothing to do with geography; the style is reflected mostly by the choice of ingredients, their quantity and brewing technique, which can be acheived on any continent.

Some of the best german wheat beers (weissbier/hefe weizen)I have ever had come from Toronto, Austria and Hungary.

Some of the best belgian style beers (encompasses many different substyles) have been brewed in North America (Terrible falls in my top 10).

Excellent English style beers are brewed by Wellington, Durham, Cameron, and Mill Street Breweries.

It is important to look at the historical aspects surrounding a particular style. Belgian Witbier brewed in NA, should never be called North american style - North american (sure), but not style. And it doesn't matter if you add anise to a witbier or that it is impossible to find a belgian example that uses that spice in that style: it is still a witbier, just a rather imaginitive one (Dieu Du Ciel, by the way brewed an equisite witbier, spiced with pepper, anise and nutmeg). It is still a witbier, and not a witbier North American style (unless all witbiers brewed in NA were uniformly brewed with these spices - but that will never happen.

[Wheatsheaf]

At the end of the day, you can think about beer styles however you may like. Personally, I just don't see the need to categorize beers so precisely as to capture every geographic and technical nuance.

For example, "barley wine" is such an open-ended style that it doesn't imply much more than strong and top-fermented. That's good enough for me. There are examples brewed in England, Belgium, and North America. I don't think that there is anything to be gained by creating a sub-style called "North American-style barley wine". How would you define it? Does it imply a hoppy beer like Sierra Nevada's Bigfoot? A sweeter beer like Victory's Old Horizontal? What about something more intense like the Vintage Ale that McAuslan brewed a few years ago? I'm content to just lump them all together with beers like Thomas Hardy's and Bush Ambree, call them simply "barley wines", and enjoy them on their individual merits.

Regarding Unibroue, I agree with dhurtubise that it would be extremely difficult to distinguish between, say, Terrible or Trois Pistoles, and a range of similar Belgian ales. I don't think that they have any characteristics that set them apart any more than every good Belgian ale has things that set them apart. The fact that they might not stand out as being "different" or "unique" doesn't mean that they are lesser, or one-dimensional, beers--quite the contrary. They would be hard to pick out simply because they are as good, if not better, than similar beers brewed in Belgium. There is nothing stylistically "North American/Canadian" about them; they stand out solely because of quality.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wheatsheaf on 2004-02-08 16:00 ]</font>

[borderline_alcoholic]

On 2004-02-08 11:41, dhurtubise wrote:
It is not the same as someone else's but it can still within the same style as someone elses and taste completely differnetly.

Which is largely what I was discussing when I talked about a lack of diversity within styles across regions within North America. And it is these similar characteristics of North American renditions of styles which I am contemplating when talking about what distinguishes North American beer from other Countries' offerings.

I stated pretty clearly near the beginning of this thread that I was being a bit OTT by going so far as to claim that these characteristics were indicative of a separate stlye, so I am not sure why that is still being argued.

With that now neatly understood by all, we can all happily continue to categorise beers in our own different ways rather than continuing this discussion, in which none of us are actually changing our positions on how we think about beer and nor, I suspect, are we likely to.

Oh, and I was not saying that Unibroue beers are 1-dimensional because they are hard to distinguish from Belgian style beers brewed within Belgium, I was considering the differences between aroma, initial taste and finish. In general, beers made within North America including many of Unibroues beers, have the same flavour throughout each of these stages. That is what I mean by "a bit 1-dimensional". I happen to quite like some of these beers anyway, but I would hope that this evolves over time to produce further more-complex beers.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: borderline_alcoholic on 2004-02-08 16:39 ]</font>

[borderline_alcoholic]

On 2004-02-08 11:41, dhurtubise wrote:
Excellent English style beers are brewed by Wellington, Durham, Cameron, and Mill Street Breweries.

On another note, while I would say that Durham and Mill Street do make some reasonably good beers IMHO, currently I do not rate anything brewed by Cameron or Wellington as anything that comes close to good, much less excellent. Mediocre is a word which leaps immediately to mind when considering their output at this time.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: borderline_alcoholic on 2004-02-08 16:29 ]</font>