Skip to main content

The Ingenuity of Humanity

Image
By

It is remarkable the uses to which the creativity of our species is turned. The same cognitive abilities that create the iPhone and The Odyssey summon up sarin gas and cluster bombs. It also turns itself to finding a myriad of ways to make alcohol, and this is on display in Amy Stewart's The Drunken Botanist, a natural history that represents a near-exhaustive catalog of all the plants we use to create the drinks that many of us love. If a plant is palatable and non-toxic, someone, somewhere has tried to ferment it. 

While there is little of depth in this work, the sheer breadth is remarkable. Starting with the usual suspects we are accustomed to in our booze, from barley and grapes to rye and potatoes, Stewart proceeds to take us on a whirlwind journey through some of the lesser known plants that make an appearance in some of the alcohol we love--and some we may not even consider trying, like sorghum beer, wine made from the nuts of the monkey puzzle tree, or tobacco-infused brews. There is banana beer, aloe-infused bitters, an assortment of spices and herbs, and plenty of trivia along the way (George Washington was a brewer of sorts, and Mount Vernon still produces a limited number of bottles of rye whiskey to this day). Of course, a book of this sort wouldn't be complete without a number of recipes for cocktails and mixed drinks throughout. 

The benefit of this book is the same as its drawback. Those looking for a unified history are likely to be disappointed. That is not the aim of this book. With entries for each plant, this work is more like an encyclopedia of alcoholic botanical knowledge; the reader can just as easily pick out a few plants of interest as read start to finish. Many of the entries left me wanting to know more than was available, and while Stewart has two sections of recommended reading, they are on cultivating the plants involved, and recipes, rather than anything historical. Still, with a dash of wit, Stewart is the perfect guide for this journey, and it is an entertaining, often fascinating one. 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

By
Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...
18 comments
Read more

How I Left Creationism

By
There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...
23 comments
Read more

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

By
Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...
11 comments
Read more