Beer Styles

There is an interesting discussion going on within British beer blogs about styles and whether they matter right now.  The overview of where this discussion is coming from is on Pencil and Spoon, linked here, Pete Brown provides a more skeptical take here.  As is often the case, the really interesting back and forth happens in the comments.

I'm a BJCP guy, but I don't read the style guidelines as gospel.  (In part because I know many of the people responsible for putting the document together and I know the debates they have among themselves.  And I know that someone like Gordon Strong is not dogmatic about the styles, even though he is an evangelist for them in a certain way.  This gets theologically complex...)  What I will say is that it's worth noting that a good portion of the discussion gets caught up with the Brewers' Association proliferation of styles, which has always struck me as stupid.  I know it has a purpose in the industry, but it just reeks of "everyone gets a gold star!"

Regardless, I responded to the discussion on Pete Brown's blog, and I thought I would add the text of my comments here, since it sums up what I've been saying privately on the subject for some time.

I really don't understand the way that a lot of the discussion tries to distinguish between creativity and styles. (And let me say right out front that I agree, it is stupid for the BA to have so many styles -- it seems designed for the sole purpose of handing out as many medals as possible.) 

Styles are not the rigid things that they are made out to be. Sure, some styles (often German ones) are narrower -- proper German style pilsners have certain characteristics, fall into a narrow gravity range, and so forth. But they are evolving things, and for most of us there is no rule to say we have to or even should brew rigidly to style. 

So why bother with the styles? Adrian Tierney-Jones was right to point to novels. I think painting is a better metaphor. There are certainly artistic styles that are recognized. Most artists want to make their own mark, and yet understanding the styles and how they evolved is important to most serious painters. Also note how even the innovators spend a lot of time mastering the tricks of different styles before they figure out how to make their own break from them. Picasso did a lot of copies of older masters. Rauchenberg and others have more recently done their own copies of Picasso! 

To take Pete's example in a different direction, cooking is similar. Maybe the average cook can do seven (or whatever) recipes. But if you are aiming to be a chef -- that is, make a mark with your own twist on cooking, for example in your own restaurant, then knowing the tricks of given cooking styles and flavors (which themselves emerge in different regions as a result of different climates, crops, and cultures) is important. Admitting that there is a recognized style of Southern Italian cooking (or Thai, or Gujarati or whatever) is not the same as saying that nothing new can be done. 

The point is, beer styles are a way to start a productive conversation with beer drinkers and brewers. It's hard to have a conversation without any common language or set of working concepts. No one has to brew "to style" but knowing some common points of reference is still a good thing.