"Remember that your sense of humor is inversely proportional to your level of intolerance."
- Serge Storms
There may have been a spelling error. I think he was supposed to win "Potemkin of the Year."
(FYI, although I write for Malt Advocate I have no role in their awards.)
"STFU...un-intelligent...sheep...lame..." Steff, did my wife put you up to this?? No wait, there would have been a dipshit, in there, too.
Anywho, I've tried some of the HW concoctions. And, I in fact, find them quite good. And, I really don't care how they got there....Really! It's just that when I think of the word "pioneer", I think of something more....substantive?...than, blending. I think of building things, making things from scratch, something from nothing, venturing into new areas (blending's been done, is being done, and will continue to be done. Even with whiskies from different distilleries), pushing the envelope of things that haven't been tried. I don't know, honoring the blending of someone else's investments just seems kinda...flat...to me. Maybe, it's our new love affair with everything "mixologist". Ya know, I would have been more OK if one of HW's whiskies was named "Whiskey of the Year", or "Rye whiskey of the year", or something like that. But, "pioneer", not so much.
"Every bottle is its own learning experience." -- Sensei Ox-sama
Okay, here's the real deal. Perkins got caught trying to pass off sourced whiskey as something he made. He quickly invented this story about the fine art of blending and his greatest accomplishment is that he got so many people to fall for it. "Hustler of the Year" is more like it.
Part of it is that people who have invested the considerable price for his product feel better about themselves if they cast themselves as defenders of an unfairly pilloried artisan instead of as what they really are, which is dupes.
But everybody is entitled to their opinion.
Last edited by cowdery; 02-24-2011 at 15:19.
Sorry for the harsh words.
I think I should moderate my participation in discussions on this forum. Our basic definitions and approach to the world of whisk(e)y simply doesn't match. Nor does the logic of argumentation. And it's too hard to discuss matters with people if you don't share some kind of basic foundations
Originally Posted by ggilbertvaOriginally Posted by Ryan
Chuck would you elaborate on 'got caught' part, within whatever limits of discretion to which you may be bound.
By "caught" I mean "exposed." People like me started to write about how this great new rye from a little distillery in Utah was actually from a great big old distillery in Indiana. That's when he suddenly discovered his inner blender.
Also, I don't think the dupes characterization is appropriate. I buy High West products will full knowledge that they are sourced whiskey (and have always known it to be so). I do so because I like the product, the same reason I buy Compass Box Scotch. What's the big deal?