Filmmaking, Writing, Beer, Insularity, History, and Other Topics More-Or-Less Related to “Beer Wars,” Part 2

Part 1 --- Part 2 --- Part 3 --- Part 4 --- Part 5 --- Part 6 --- Part 7 Part 8 --- Part 9 --- Part 10 --- Part 11 --- Part 12 --- Part 13

NOTE: When I moved to a new site, this "Beer Wars" series was mangled/destroyed during the move. I've reconstructed it by copying/pasting another copy of the original posts. I also lost the comments in their original form. I've copied/pasted the comments, but had to do so under my own name. So although it looks as though I'm the only commenter, I'm not. In each case, I've identified the original commenter.

_______________________________

 Fast forward to early 2009: Anat had finished the film. The economy was in freefall; it was (and is) harder than ever for indie filmmakers to find distribution, but Anat, being Anat, came up with a plan: She partnered with Fathom Events to show the film one night in theaters. (Fathom has developed a successful business screening such special events.) 

The film would be followed by a half-hour live discussion by some of the people in the film. She asked me to participate in that discussion because I’m a historian, not a beer person, and therefore I’d add an outsider’s perspective.

Anat’s production company, her publicity firm, and Fathom began promoting the film: They used a website, Anat tweeted, publicists sent out press releases, etc.

The blogosphere chatter began. And sailed along a predictable trajectory: the “beer geeks” pissed and moaned about how this film was no good, the idea was old, there is no “beer war.” 

“Rhonda Kallman is in the film? Why? She’s not a craft brewer!”

“Who the hell is Anat Baron? She’s not a beermaker. How can SHE know anything about beer?” 

“Sam’s in it. That’s good. But why not other craft-gods? And who cares about distributors? That battle is over! Why bother to make a film about it?”

Mind you, NO ONE HAD SEEN THE FILM. 

The pre-release chatter consisted of mindless knee-jerking on the part of people who claim they want “craft beer” to be noticed, loved, and consumed, but who are, at the same time, irrationally dedicated to denouncing anything and everything that does not fit their vision of what craft beer is and how it ought to be portrayed (and revered and adored.)

They complained about the price of admission, about the fact that it was one night only, about the fact that only 400-s0me theaters would be airing the film. (The event was broadcast via satellite; not every theater is equipped with satellite streaming equipment; therefore not every theater could show the film.)

Even the fact that Anat was promoting the film pissed people off: They complained about the overdose of press releases, emails, etc. They seemed not to realize that the “beer world” was not Anat’s only target. She wanted anyone and everyone to see the film. So of course she launched a PR blitz: she’s trying to fill seats in a theater.

But beer folks see the world through their prism and they didn’t understand that this was a film first, and only a beer film secondarily. Anat didn’t make the film for the beer world. She made the film because she was trying to explore and make sense of the logic of capitalism. Beer simply provided a lens through which to examine the topic. (I understood that intuitively: My book about beer was a work of  history that explored one aspect of American society. I used beer as the vehicle for that exploration.)

Next: The nature of “group think” and the creative process.

Speaking of E-Quarius and Other Matters: Wine Guy Makes Like Craft Brewer; Goes Small

So in the interest of continuing the conversation about beer, the age of E-Quarius, and so forth: Here's an article from today's New York Times about a winemaker who's seen the light and downsized. I think he and Greg Koch oughta have a chat. And I'll check back with him in ten years. And contemplate the ways in which all the parts of the world are connected.

Filmmaking, Writing, Beer, Insularity, History, and Other Topics More-Or-Less Related to “Beer Wars,” Part 1

Part 1 --- Part 2 --- Part 3 --- Part 4 --- Part 5 --- Part 6 --- Part 7 Part 8 --- Part 9 --- Part 10 --- Part 11 --- Part 12 --- Part 13

NOTE: When I moved to a new site, this "Beer Wars" series was mangled/destroyed during the move. I've reconstructed it by copying/pasting another copy of the original posts. I also lost the comments in their original form. I've copied/pasted the comments, but had to do so under my own name. So although it looks as though I'm the only commenter, I'm not. In each case, I've identified the original commenter.

_______________________________

Several people asked me if I planned to comment on Beer Wars and the events surrounding it -- and I thought, “hey, good idea.” (‘Cause, doh, it hadn’t occurred to me to do so . . . ) Good idea because I’d like to offer a larger, more textured perspective than has been dished out thus far.

So. You guessed it: Another! Multi-part! Series!

First some background to the saga, which unfolded over the course of several years: My beer book came out in September 2006, about a week prior to the Great American Beer Festival, and so I headed to the festival to sign copies of the book. While I was there, a refreshingly sober, decidedly chic woman -- Anat Baron -- introduced herself. She explained that she was making a film about the brewing industry. (At that point, she’d been working on the project for about a year.) 

By coincidence, I was scheduled to be in St. Louis in November for a book signing on the same day that she planned to be in that city to do some filming. So we met up in St. Louis and she interviewed (filmed) me for about two hours, asking questions about brewing history, etc. (Because I’d been involved in several documentaries, I know that an hour of filming equals about a minute of “air time,” so I knew that my part in the final product would be small.)

Over the next several years, we stayed in touch by email and compared notes as we both wrestled with our respective projects -- her film and my new book, a history of meat in America. Because we communicated so often, I quickly realized that writing a book and making a film are nearly identical processes. We both had to find our “story,” identify our “characters” (which, in both our cases, were real people), construct a narrative arc based on the characters’ stories; do lots of research; collect and sift through mountains of raw material; write, edit. Edit again; and then edit some more.

I also got to know Anat. She’s extremely intelligent, blunt, intelligent, determined, self-confident, self-assured, talented, intelligent. Did I mention that she’s intelligent? And talented? And self-confident? Perhaps fearless is a better word.

Next: "Beer Wars" collides with the beer world.

When Schuhmacher Speaks, You Oughta Listen

Yesterday I got a long email about "Beer Wars" from Harry Schuhmacher, who runs Beer Business Daily.

As I would have expected, his take was thoughtful, nuanced, and suffused with long-view, big-picture perspective --- precisely the perspective that was not given its due during the "Beer Wars" saga. (If I seemed to be aggravated while on stage, it was because I was holding my tongue and not saying "Greg, Todd, Sam, Charlie! You're full of shit. Get some perspective." Or words to that effect.)

Anyway, I intended to ask Harry if I could post his email here at my blog, but he beat me to the punch and posted it at his own blog. It's worth noting that, ahem, he's not seen the film -- but in this case (unlike so many others), his comments are absolutely worth reading.

"Beer Wars"? Jay Says It Better Than Anyone

As is often the case, my pal Jay Brooks pretty much sums up the nature of the sheer, well, um, stupidity of the beer-blogosphere's reaction to Beer Wars.

Thanks for the "Beer Wars" Twitters and Other Communcations

I just got home late last night from California and am only now trying to catch up with what accumulated in my absence -- including a slew of Twitter replies and direct messages. (*1)

Anyway, thanks to all of you who saw Beer Wars, who commented, who wrote to me, etc. Much appreciated.

The one thing all of the panelists said immediately after the panel ended was "Too bad we didn't have 90 minutes for that segment. We definitely could have had a good shouting match." (Which we'd sort of had earlier. No, we don't all agree. Or, more accurately, I don't agree with any of the other panelists or with Anat.) (Which, of course, is why I was there: the outsider perspective, because as I keep reminding people: I'm not in the beer industry. I'm a historian who just happened to write a book about beer.)

The film's producer/director/creator, Anat Baron, hopes her project will provoke some discussion. I hope so, too, although what I hope for is a larger discussion among Americans, not just beer geeks.

The most frustrating aspect of this experience is that, thus far, all the commentary has come out of the beer world and so is focused on the beer industry. But Anat was trying to make a larger point about American society and capitalism. For example, I hope the films sparks discussion about Americans' attitudes toward alcohol, which to me is the main issue from which all other things flow.

Eg, the original purpose of the 3-tier system was to place barriers between Americans and alcohol. It was not created so that big brewers could screw little ones. Indeed, historically in the past 50 or so years, large and small beermakers have cooperated more than they've warred -- a point that's lost on just about everyone in today's "small" brewing industry. Anyway: onward, onward, onward.

_________

*1: I tried last night and a day or so ago to wade through the Twitter-mass -- but what the fuck was up with Twitter? Was it me? Or was the entire system totally haywire???