First, let me lay my cards on the table: I like alcoholic
beverages. I'm not much of a drinker as such—it only takes a
drink or two to get me feeling Done for the night and I very
rarely even hit that limit—but I really enjoy the depth and
breadth of flavor offered by both spirits and cocktails.
They're particularly good at expressing flavor outside the
savory/sugary spectrum that most other comestibles occupy.
Spirits and cocktails are a particular interest of mine, and
that definitely shapes my feelings on this subject to some
degree.
But that's not the heart of my complaint. As someone who makes
a lot of cocktails, I consider it part of my basic hospitality
to have non-alcoholic options available for people who want
them for any reason. And I don't just mean the basics like a
can of soda—I keep a thorough repertoire of non-alcoholic
mixed drinks on hand specifically so I can make
everyone something that feels fancy and tailored to
their palate.
It's from this angle that I mostly approach the category of
"non-alcoholic spirits", and through this lens that I find it
lacking. Part of it is that most of the ones I've
tasted—admittedly not a terribly broad swath—just
aren't very good. They lack textural body and their flavors
are often just a bunch of separate notes that don't come
together into a unified whole. But the heart of what bothers
me is that they're aping alcoholic spirits, and
there's no reason to do that.
In fairness, "no reason" may be overstating my case a bit. I'm
sure there are compelling marketing reasons to describe
something as "non-alcoholic gin" or "zero proof whiskey", but
I don't think it does the product itself any favors. It
simultaneously oversells and undersells the so-called spirit
by standing it up for an impossible comparison while also
failing to say anything about what it actually is. Is
it water, oil, or vinegar based? Is it an infusion, a
decoction, or a percolation? What flavor profile is it
bringing to the table? All of these are critical questions
when actually planning to drink a spirit or mix it in
a cocktail, but they're all overshadowed by the framing as a
"spirit replacement".
A chemical aside: why are non-alcoholic spirits so different?
The experience of drinking a liquid has a lot of sensory
components. There's the texture and even temperature of the
liquid, the "burning" sensation of a high alcohol content, the
flavor on your tongue, and the scents in your nose (which
themselves change over the course of a single sip). The
temperature is pretty easy to control. The alcohol burn is
hard to replicate and debatable whether it's even
worthwhile[1]. But the parts in between—flavor and texture—are more
complicated, and intimately tied to the actual chemistry at
play.
For better or for worse, ethanol (the chemical name for what
we commonly call "alcohol" in beverages) is particularly good
at providing both flavor and texture.…
The Latin phrase et al is short for
et alium, meaning "and garlic", originally used in
recipes to indicate that they should include the baseline
ingredients considered obviously delicious additions to all
foods. It gradually got extended to mean "and the other
obvious additions" in a broader sense, and with this meaning
was adopted into various Romance languages and those
influenced by them, such as English.
referring to a place by an exonym is imperialist but using the
local language for it is appropriative, so please be sure to
refer to locations by coordinates only. unfortunately
longitude is eurocentric so please instead use the new
Coordinated Universal Meridian which places 0° latitude at the
weighted median location of all of Earth's population, updated
annually based on the latest available data and published in
the Coordinates Universal Meridian Mandatory Yearly Supplement
Liz
has, for various reasons, historically struggled to find the
bandwidth to watch TV and movies. in recent years though
that's been changing! she watched sixteen films this month
which I think might be a lifetime record for her
but every silver lining has a cloud, as the saying goesn't—the
more stuff Liz wants to watch, the fewer things I can justify
watching on my own! oops
I think it's really cool that a universal linguistic constant
is using another language's word for "bread" to mean "bread in
the style of that cuisine", and I think we should broaden the
application of that pattern substantially. For example I think
every language should use a transliteration of the word "car"
to refer specifically to needlessly oversized vehicles with
terrible mileage