A semiotic analysis of the common cocktail
(Unfinished lecture notes on semiotics, Anthro 324)
First of all, let us begin with the apex or focal member of the cocktail family, the martini.
The martini is the prototype cocktail. (Wikipedia “The martini has become a symbol for
cocktails and nightlife in general; American bars often have a picture of a conical martini
glass with an olive on their signs.”) ‘Above all, the martini is a modern cocktail. You
could say it’s the modern cocktail.’
(http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1997/4/1997_4_32.shtml) What
this means is that when asked to concretely imagine a specific example of the generic
class of cocktails, generally one will imagine a martini glass with a cold clear fluid in it.
Just what exactly that cold clear fluid is, is unclear (we will get to that later).
A cocktail is itself a somewhat ‘fuzzy’ category, basically denoting a mixed drink, a
mixture that usually contains two components: (wikipedia): “A cocktail is a style of
mixed drink. A cocktail usually contains one or more types of liquor and flavourings,
usually one or more of a liqueur, fruit, sauce, honey, milk or cream, spices, etc.” In
essence, central to the definition of a cocktail is (1) mixture, (2) a ‘hard’ (liquor)
component (containing the bulk of the alcoholic content) and (3) a ‘sweet’ (liqueur, juice,
wine etc.) component (flavourful). By being a mixture, cocktails as a class are separated
from unmixed liquors (shots of any given liquor that can be drunk ‘straight’) and also
unmixed liqueurs and other drinks, those of which can be drunk straight.
For example, a martini can consist of two different components, either of which can be
drunk straight, though seldom are, the ‘hard’ component is either gin or vodka, and the
‘sweet’ component is usually vermouth. Both contain alcohol, but the former are ‘spirits’
while the latter is more closely related to wine. Interestingly, these drinks form a kind of
hierarchy of drink, correlated with purity and strength of the alcohol content, ranging
from the ‘sweet’ liqueurs at the bottom of the hierarchy, to the ‘hard’ alcohol delivered in
pure shots at the top. This hierarchy is also in some sense a gendered hierarchy: gender,
normally a property of persons, becomes a property of objects, in this case drinks and
drinkers, so that the pure, more alcoholic drinks are more masculine, the sweeter drinks
lower in alcohol are more feminine. Usually the purer ends of the hierarchy are called
‘dry’ and the sweeter end ‘sweet’, and this can apply within categories as we will see.
This hierarchy is nestled within another opposition where all alcoholic drinks (masculine)
are opposed to all non-alcoholic drinks (especially sweet ones) (feminine).
Object Features
Pure
Hard liquor
Mixed
Liquor + Liqueur
Pure
Sweet Liqueur
Subject features
‘dry’
Masculine
(Cocktail)
‘sweet’
Feminine
This system of classification is widespread and in some sense applies to all alcoholic
beverages, regardless of their composition. Beer and wine are interesting cases here,
since they appear to fall outside the classification, but it seems clear that the opposition of
the object world in sweetness is probably the operative condition here: beer is not sweet
and therefore masculine, wine is or can be relatively flavourful and is therefore feminine.
Beer mixed with any sweetener (lager and lime, for example) is, however, relatively
feminine, just as beer mixed with any hard alcohol (a boilermaker) is relatively
masculine.
In place of strong, bracing cocktails, fern bars offered fruity, fun drinks like Fuzzy
Navels, Tootsie Rolls, and Lemon Drops. “Girl Drinks.” This didn’t deter “Real
Men” from ordering them, just as the popularity of fruity martinis of today cannot
be squelched. We offer these recipes in the spirit of nostalgia; however, pour any
one of them into a martini glass and you’ll be right into 2006. One word of
caution: sweet concoctions produce the worst kind of hangovers!
Although the high alcohol content and strong flavors of these cocktails make them
difficult to match with food, they are relatively accessible to people who are just
beginning to explore the world of cocktails. Please, take care to mix them
correctly. It should go without saying that balance among the elements is crucial
in well-constructed cocktails. Unfortunately, most of the drinks poured in the
world are too sweet, which may be the reason these types of cocktails have such a
questionable reputation. Without fresh citrus juice, most of these drinks are not
worth making or drinking. Underlying each of these drinks is a basic outline of
three parts: an alcohol base plus a sweet element plus a sour element. It’s true that
they are not very complex drinks, but you may want to give them a chance; when
well made, they’re refreshing and pleasant. If you’re interested in creating your
own cocktail or making any sweet-sour cocktail a little more complex, you can
add a bitter element; Campari works terrifically and makes a much more
interesting drink. (http://www.srqmagazine.com/eat/eatArticle.cfm?eatID=55)
Since ‘gender’ is a category that applies to drinks (and it is not clear yet whether drinks
are gendered because the respective drinks resemble men or women or because they are
appropriate for the consumption by men or women), it makes sense that one can
stylistically place oneself on a gender continuum by what drinks one chooses, and that,
on the other hand, one’s stylistic choice in drinks can be restricted (or at least informed)
by ones status features of class, race, age and most of all gender. One pub ethnography
classified the drink choices of different British patrons this way.
WC
Female
Pint(beer) Shot
Cocktail Dry
(hard
(dry)
wine
liquor)
-X
X
X
Sweet
wine
X
Cocktail Half(sweet) pint
(beer)
X
X
Soft
drink
X
MC
female
Student
Female
MC
male
WC
male
--
X
X
X
X
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
--
--
--
X
X
X
variable
--
--
--
--
--
In this context class and gender interact strongly to predict the ‘gender’ of the drink.
Perhaps surprisingly, masculinity is encoded by accepting the greatest number of
restrictions on drink, while femininity is enacted by the greatest number of freedoms.
Gender is most relevant for the Working class, as drinking patterns for this class are most
differentiated, and it is here that the pint versus half pint distinction is retained. The
opposition between dry and sweet cocktails is also a class opposition, not only are dry
cocktails more masculine, they are also more ;middle class’, with sweet cocktails being
restricted to the female working classes.
Working-class females have the widest choice of beverages, in terms of social
acceptability. Pub etiquette allows them to drink almost anything that
takes their fancy , from creamy or sweet liqueurs and cocktails, to the full
range of soft-drinks, designer-drinks, and beers. The only minor restriction
is on the size of glass from which they may drink their chosen beer. In
many working-class circles, drinking pints, is considered unfeminine and
unladylike, so the majority ofwomenin this social category drink halves.
Next in order of freedom of choice are middle/upper-class females.
They are somewhat more constrained, in that the more sickly-sweet liqueurs
and cocktails are regarded as rather vulgar by this social group, and
to order a Babycham or a creamy chocolate liqueur would raise a few eyebrows.
Female pint-drinking, however, is now acceptable, particularly
among students, the under-25s and the aristocracy. Among students, our
researchers found that females often felt they had to provide an explanation
if they ordered a half rather than a pint. Middle/upper-class females can also
partake freely of all wines, spirits, ciders, sherries and soft-drinks.
Lower on the freedom-scale are middle/upper-class males, whose choice is
far more restricted than that of their female peers. In the pub, they may
drink only beer, spirits (with or without mixers), wine (dry, not sweet) and
soft-drinks. Sweet or creamy beverages and fanciful cocktails are regarded
as suspiciously .feminine., and ordering them will cast doubt on your masculinity.
Finally, the working class males, who have very little choice at all. They
can drink only beer or spirits, everything else being effeminate. Among
older working-class males, even mixers may be frowned upon, gin-andtonic
being a possible exception. Younger males in this socio-economic
group have slightly more freedom: among the under-25s, vodka-and-Coke
is acceptable, for example, and etiquette allows young males to consume
the latest novelties and .designer. bottled drinks, providing they have a reasonably high
alcohol content. But as a rule-of-thumb, you would be wise to
assume that anything other than beer or straight spirits is likely to be seen as
a ‘girly’ choice. If you want to drink soft-drinks, say that you are driving or
invent some rare tropical disease. (Fox 1996: p. 51)
So the category of ‘cocktail’ is one that can be located between two ‘poles’: ‘dry’ (high
alcohol content) and ‘sweet’ (flavorful, low alcohol content). This opposition is created
on the basis of the properties of the objects themselves, namely, alcohol content, liquor or
liqueur, sweetness, etc. These are also oppositions that are treated as having something
to do with gender, at least partially because in some contexts drinking one or the other is
treated as a ‘girly’ thing to do, and is or is not an option depending on your own gender,
age and status. So there is a transference of properties of drinkers (persons) to drinks
(things). The ‘dry-sweet’ opposition is also the opposition between ‘masculine’ and
‘feminine’. This is why the sweeter drinks are called ‘girl drinks’.
At this point we may want to ask what it is about these drinks as objects that makes
them take on properties of persons, producing associations between objects and persons
that seems to have real effects on who can consume what.
Conventionality. First of all, the association is probably conventional, as opposed
to something given naturally. What we mean by this is that it is part of a cultural system
that somewhat arbitrarily selected from among the sensible features or qualities of the
objects in question a pair of opposed qualities (what we are calling ‘dry’ and ‘sweet’) of
the objects that could be related in some way to a pair of opposed qualities of persons,
namely masculine and feminine. Once this pair of qualities was selected, however, and
the two were brought into alignment, it leads to changes in behavior so that, in retrospect,
just by pure association, one finds that men do not drink sweet drinks (girl drinks) and so
on, and that can lead to one assuming that this is a natural association. We often think
that the way we categorize objects in the world is simply given by the properties of the
objects themselves, when in fact it is demonstrably variable historically and culturally, so
cannot be determined simply by the objects. When this happens, we speak of the
naturalization of convention.
For example, the fact that some drinks have changed their position on the hierarchy
of masculinity and femininity indicates that the linkage is culturally constructed (either
that, or some or all of the human race has mutated and can no longer be called ‘human’,
properly speaking, that’s really the only other choice). For example, within the category
of ‘beer’, there is no question in my mind that the most masculine beer of all is a pint of
Guiness, a dark Irish beer. However, it is a matter of recorded fact that in 1930s England,
guiness (drink in gills or half pints), was markedly a feminine drink. Except, and this is
crucial, for low class Irish unskilled labourers, who drank pints of Guinness (‘navvies’).
It is probable that as Irishness and lower class navvies came to represent a kind of
imitable masculinity, that the association of Guinness with masculinity arose, by
association with a group of people of indubitable masculinity who drank Guinness by the
pint. The masculinity of the martini is something that has, in general, increased over
time, in direct correlation with its ‘dryness’:
The martini, dry and powerful, was now a man’s drink, to be contrasted with sweet
“girl drinks,” the kind with umbrellas and tropical fruit. There were historical
ironies here, since the masculine saloons out of which the martini had come had
served equally sweet liquid toothaches. But there was no time for irony. There were
standards to uphold, and behind the obsession with dryness lay the fear that despite
apparent social orderliness, something was going wrong. Countless jokes and
cartoons reinforced the point, like the angry executive on a train who fumed, “This
is a hell of a way to run a railroad! You call that a dry Martini?”
(http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1997/4/1997_4_32.shtml)
For another point, just as the way we express gender has little to do with the
biological givens that attend sexual dimorphism, and we know this because there is
plenty of variation to show that it is so, so too there is no necessary way that drinks
naturally suggest that the best way to categorize themselves is into ‘dry’ and ‘sweet’, any
more than that these should in turn be linked to categories of persons. For Georgians,
inhabitants of a country bordering the east coast of the black sea in the Caucasus
mountains, for example, beer is an informal drink linked to masculine sociability, but it is
clearly outranked by vodka and wine as drinks by which one expresses masculinity in
ritual occasions. This is because wine and certain forms of vodka can be made out of
grapes. For Georgians, alcoholic drinks can be divided into two groups, those that are
drunk on ritual occasions and cannot be drunk except by being ‘blessed’ with a toast, and
then must be drunk to the bottom, and all other kinds of drinks. Beer is an intermediate
case, in that toasts can be said to beer, but they are always said in jest, and usually mean
the opposite. Cocktails, recently added to Georgian bars and cafes, are drunk like beer,
not like wine or vodka, because they are not ‘pure’, they are mixed, and any mixture
takes something out of the sphere of ritual drinks.
Another example, Mayans classify basically all substances in terms of whether they
are ‘hot’ or ‘cold’, and are expected to have correlative effects on human bodies, which
are also ‘hot’ and ‘cold’. If we look at a list of things that go into each group, we are not
going to see any immediate correlation with our own notions of the properties of heat and
coldness of things or persons, and we can see that our own drink classification list is
spread throughout:
Appendix 1: Hot versus cold classifications of foods, drinks and diseases in among a
Mayan group
Always hot
chiles
garlic
oranges
beef
Temperate-Neutral
Foods:
bread
maize and maize tortillas
chicken
Always cold
avocados
raw sugarcane
limes
pork
cactus leaves
forest game animals
Drinks:
mezcal
(made from Blue Agave)
Coca-cola
Beer
aguardiente
(made from sugarcane juice)
Alka-seltzer
Diseases:
diarrhea
pneumonia
smallpox
sunstroke
sore throat
stomach ache
tonsillitis
Given that we have established that there is no necessary or natural reason we have
chosen to classify drinks and their relationships to persons in this way, we should try and
figure out whether there is, nevertheless, some culturally recognized motivation that links
the properties of persons to the properties of objects. We have seen that once the
correlation is established, it tends to restrict drink choice based on the gender and other
status characteristics of the drinker and the image they wish to project genderwise
(stylistically). The linkage between qualities of objects (dry-sweet) and properties of
persons (gender) becomes an observable one in consumption practices and is an empirical
association in behavior (established by the conventional association). This can lead to
one form of naturalization, that is, a seemingly empirical basis for the conventional
association. Namely, concrete empirical association, anything is a girl drink if primarily
girls drink it, and anything is a boy drink if boys drink it. Girls drink sweet drinks, boys
drink dry drinks, hence, sweet drinks are girl drinks, etc… Such a linkage by actual
empirical relationship we call an indexical linkage, and we suspect, for example, that the
‘masculinity’ of Guiness may have come from the masculinity of the lower WC Irish
drinkers of Guiness by indexical association. The transference of properties between the
object and the person, and vice versa, is based on the fact that such and so type of person
has a real relationship with that object, in this case, habitually consuming it.
Another kind of relationship, other than the conventional (which sets up the
relationship as an entirely arbitrary association by a cultural rule) and the indexical
(which works by the fact that the object is really empirically associated with the person),
is the iconic, the relationship by resemblance. In this case, the qualities of girl drinks
and boy drinks are linked to girls and boys respectively because girl drinks in some
respect or quality resemble girls and boy drinks resemble boys. In order to investigate
this we need to look into the various qualities that are significant in making the
opposition (we occasionally use the hybrid word qualisign for sensuous qualities [quali-]
that are potentially or actually significant [-sign]). For example, girl drinks are usually
‘sweet’, for one, and often have a host of other sensuous properties or qualities that are
actually ‘sensual’ (color, texture, etc). As the famous ‘girl drink drunk’ kids in the hall
episode puts it ‘it tastes like candy’. One of the key properties of the sweetness of a girl
drink is that it masks or hides the often very high alcohol content which also carries with
it a specific taste and odor (see bundling):
Kevin: Ray, I guess you're wondering why I asked you here tonight. [Dave nods]
Well, the board had a little meeting today and unless my eyes deceive me I think
I'm facing the new vice-president in charge of distribution! Congratulations Ray!
[Kevin and Dave shake hands]
Dave: Thank you Mr. Barnes.
Kevin: Please. Call me Russell. Let's celebrate with a drink!
Dave: Oh uh I'm afraid I don't drink, Russ.
Kevin: Grown man like you Ray?
Dave: Well I've just never liked the taste of alcohol.
Kevin: Oh come on Ray. What about a Chocolate Choo Choo? It's a girl drink.
Tastes like candy. [in low-pitched voice] Don't disappoint me Ray.
Dave: Okay uh, sure Russ. I'll have a... Chocolate Choo Choo.
Kevin: Great! I hate to drink alone. Can I have a Chocolate Choo Choo for my
friend please and I'll have a scotch-and-soda!
(http://www.kithfan.org/work/transcripts/three/girldrnk.html)
Sweetness, we have seen, is a defining feature for the class, it is the one quality
associated with ‘girl drinks’ that has become criterion for membership in the class.
We will call the qualities of an object that are used to distinguish it from other relevant
classes of object the distinctive features. The term is borrowed from the study of sound
systems, Phonology, where of all the features of sound that any given sound has, only
those features that oppose that sound to other meaningful sounds and are shared by all
instances of sounds that count as the same sound are distinctive. The sound ‘p’ in
English, for example, is opposed to the sound ‘b’ by the quality of voicing (vibration of
vocal chords, which ‘b’ has and ‘p’ lacks), it is opposed to the sounds ‘t’ and ‘k’ by the
place in the mouth where it articulated (the lips as opposed to further back in the
mouth), and so on. However, two different instances of the sound, that are really
difference, namely, the instance found in the word ‘pit’ and the instance found in the
word ‘spit’, differ quite audibly in that the former is aspirated and the latter is not. Since
no meaningful difference is found here, aspiration is not a distinctive feature, it is not
used to define membership in a culturally or linguistically meaningful class. Distinctions
between sounds in language are usually focused on ‘distinctive differences’, usually,
human interest in sounds outside of poetics and sound symbolism ends there, the fact that
the sounds are different is enough, and it doesn’t really matter what they are. However,
in classifying objects, especially for example, objects we consume, it is the positive
sensuous properties of the object (not merely that it ‘tastes different’ but that it ‘tastes
good, tastes sweet, tastes sour, etc.) that are important.
But really, sweetness is just one of the more salient qualities of an object that go
into making it a ‘girl drink’. Girl drinks typically broadcast their girl-ness on a number
of bandwidths of qualitative contrast, including not only qualities that appeal to taste and
smell but also visual (colors, decorations), tactile (creaminess, for example), temperature,
and so on. Here are some definitions taken from opinionated webloggers
A martini is SO not a girl drink. Girl drinks have certain distinct characteristics:
1) If it's not a shot, it must have ice in it.
2) It must consist of sweet alcohols, like amaretto or rum.
3) It must be sickeningly sweet, which usually means it contains sour mix or coke.
4) Your penis must shrivel back into your body if you sip one.
((http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/archive/000092.html))
“Tutti-frutti beverages that typically come in a stemmed glass resplendent
with any matter of flora and fauna.”
"Keep in mind that gentlemen, as a general rule, prefer their beverages
dry, or of the less sweet variety. Such cocktails as Manhattan, Martini, Gibson, etc.,
etc., are most pleasing to them. While many of the fair sex follow closely with the
men folks in this regard, there are many others who prefer the richer preparations,
such as those containing portions of egg, much cordial or syrup."--"Cocktail Bill"
Boothby's World Drinks and How to Mix Them (1930).
JULY 6, 1998:
The legendary mixologist "Cocktail Bill" Boothby summed it up quite succinctly.
There do seem to be differences in the drinks that men and women choose to quaff.
Although nowadays men and women can be seen to consume martinis and cigars in
nearly equal quantities, these differences were once quite pronounced, giving rise to
a whole category of frothy, colorful drinks relegated forever to "Girl Drink" status.
Most of the legendary "Girl Drinks" were developed during Prohibition when the
lousy taste of bathtub gin needed to be masked by a blenderful of juices, cremes and
cordials. A 1951 survey of bartenders in America and Canada found 32 mixed
drinks that are "definitely preferred by women," 30 drinks "drunk mostly by men"
and 23 drinks that "enjoy equal popularity among men and women." The top three
drinks for the gents were: Martini, Whiskey Sour and Old-Fashioned. The top three
for the ladies in the house were: Daiquiri, Tom Collins and Bacardi. ….
Here then are a few infamous Girl Drinks for the more "feminine" ladies out there
... and for the occasional man who's secure enough in his sexuality to order a giant
pink drink with an umbrella in it.
(http://weeklywire.com/ww/07-06-98/alibi_food.html)
This extends even to the way they are named, many of them also have names that
make flippant reference to sex (‘sex on the beach’). Part of this is a made possible by
‘bundling’, the fact that the single ‘distinctive quality’ (sweetness) is necessarily attended
by a number of other qualities, which, while not distinctive, are important and significant
in various ways. For girl drinks, the distinctive feature (sweetness) can be accompanied
either by high alcohol content (which the sweetness hides, making for a class of girl
drinks that are more potent than the average ‘boy drink’) or low alcohol content, they can
be packaged with a whole wide variety of other qualities that appeal to sight (colors,
umbrellas, etc) and tactile qualities (creaminess and so on).
Part of the appeal may have something to do, then, with the way commodities in
general are gendered by virtue of their mode of presentation, and this persistent and
ubiquitous gendering of the humanly created environment (‘second nature’) makes the
related category of gender applied to humans seem more natural and more relevant to
every aspect of social life. Girl drinks, for example, not only can hide the taste of their
often significant alcohol content under a mask of sweetness, so that girl drinks of some
types are often extremely potent. They also have packaging features that mark them in
general as ‘feminine’ rather than ‘masculine’ commodities:
A vast number of ordinary commercial objects are ‘gendered’ according to what
appear to be consistent patterns. For example, where objects are destined for males
it is more likely that machine parts will be exposed to view. When typewriters
switched from being mainly associated wqith male clerks to being used largely by
female secretaries the keys were enclosed; likewise when the motor scooter was
developed as a female equivalent to the male motorbike it not only enclosed its
engine but took its lines from the familiar children’s scooter (Miller, citing hebdige
p.404)
This sort of consideration seems to lie behind the way Guinness (now a masculine
drink) was considered a feminine drink in 1930s England. The pub ethnographer
collecti1ve of that period (Mass Observation) observes that in choosing alcoholic
beverages in 1930s pubs:
Men are guided by price first. Women, who often have men pay for them, go more
for taste and the externals. It is more ‘respectable’ for women to drink bottled beer,
mostly bottled stout or Guinness, seldom mild. Brewers have found nationally a
preference for beer in amber bottles, rather than green bottles. They don’t know the
reason. (Mass Observation, The Pub and the People, p. 34)
As far as the quality of sweetness goes, girls are, as the children’s rhyme has it,
made of ‘sweetness and spice and everything nice’, and girl drinks certainly are defined
by having these as ingredients as well. Girls are, moreover, in our society, treated as
sensual and/or sexualized entities, and girl drinks present themselves to the eye in a
manner that is designed to be decorative, to appeal to the senses in various ways.
Compare that to the more masculine drinks, which are presented in the most plain manner
possible visually speaking, as if the presentation was entirely unimportant, and it was ‘all
about the content of the glass, the alcohol content’. Boys are made of ‘snips and snails
and puppydog tails’, however, and no boy drinks incorporate these. They are also said to
be made of ‘mutilated monkey meat’. Rather, boy drinks seem a lot like ‘plain vanilla’
drinks, they are usually pure alcohol and have no associated ‘bells and whistles’ or other
decoration, or even flavouring other than that of the alcohol itself. What does this tell us
about masculinity of drinks? One is possibly that alcohol content is what is important
here, but surely one can get as drunk or drunker on a girl drink much more rapidly (so it
is not in fact purely utilitarian, based on the idea that boys are all about the drunkenness
or holding their alcohol successfully or whatever way masculinity is assumed to express
itself through alcohol consumption). Certainly the ‘no nonsense’ quality of unadorned
drinking does make sense in terms of expressing masculinity, considered in relation to the
adornments and frippery of girl drinks.
Marked and unmarked. This brings us to an important observation about the two kinds
of drinks, which is this: you probably have heard the term ‘girl drink’ before, but you
probably have never heard the term ‘boy drink’, because I made it up to have a term to
use to describe the opposite of a girl drink. Girl drinks have a lot of qualities or
properties that positively announce their membership in the class, and there is even a
name for the class that is recognized. Boy drinks are a nameless group of drinks that are
defined by absence of those properties that define girl drinks, in a manner that sort of
parallels the way that vanilla, while a flavor, is treated as a non-flavor of ice-cream (plain
vanilla) opposed to ‘flavors’ like chocolate, strawberry, etc. In fact, the way we talk
about them, we usually say ‘drinks’ and then specify if we mean ‘girl drinks’. When we
have an opposition between two things, one of which has definable properties and the
other of which is defined by the absence of those properties, we say that the one with the
definable properties is marked (girl drink) and the one that is defined by the absence of
those properties is unmarked ([boy] drink). In a sense, the opposite of ‘girl drink’ is not
‘boy drink’, it is ‘drink’, so that ‘drink’ can be used as the opposite of girl drink (boy
drink) but also as the more general term (drink) that logically includes girl drinks as a
more specific term.
So if girl drinks are marked and boy drinks are unmarked, we can simplify our
labels for the opposed terms ‘dry’ and ‘sweet’ and instead use the single quality/qualisign
of the object [Sweet] to categorize drinks. Girl drinks are positively marked for this
characteristic, we mark that as [+Sweet], boy drinks are unmarked, the term drink can
either mean all drinks, whether or not they are sweet [+/- Sweet] or specifically those
drinks which are not sweet [-Sweet]. We could do the same with the ‘gender’ of drinks,
Girl drinks, as the name implies, as marked as [+Feminine], drinks are unmarked [+/feminine] and residually opposed to Girl Drinks as [-Feminine]. This might explain why
women [+Feminine] are allowed to drink either Girl Drinks [+Feminine} or any other
drinks [+/- Feminine], while Working Class men in particular in the sample above must
specifically avoid those drinks that are marked as [+Feminine].
Interestingly the same thing is true of the way we categorize gender of persons.
Consider the untutored use of the term ‘man’ versus the term ‘woman’. When we say the
term woman, the marked term of the opposition, we are always considered to be
specifically denoting that the entity in question is [+Feminine]. When we use the term
man, as in ‘that man over there’ and ‘since the beginning of time, man has looked up to
the sky’, we can see there are two distinct kinds of uses happening here. On the one
hand, ‘that man over there’ is definitely as masculine as ‘that woman over there’ is
feminine, so we use [-Feminine] for that use of ‘man’. But the second use ‘since the
beginning of time, man has looked up to the sky’, we really mean any human in general,
so we use the term [+/-Feminine] to show that in general, any use of ‘woman’ always
specifically denotes the gender of the person as [+Feminine] (Marked), while the term
‘man’ really requires additional information from context and is intrinsically unmarked
for gender [+/- Feminine]. This isn’t just a property of these words, but is generally a
property of most terms that indicate gender, for example pronouns, the feminine pronoun
she is always used specifically to denote the gender of the person [+Feminine] and is the
marked term, while he is frequently used (like it or not) when one is indifferent to the
gender of the referent, and is therefore the unmarked term. Some terms for professions,
like cop, seem to have an unmarked gender where unless one specifies otherwise,
masculinity may or may not be assumed (one says cop to mean either one is indifferent to
the gender of the role, but since there is a stereotype that police are generally male, if one
does specify gender one will say female cop, rarely male cop). For these terms,
masculinity is unmarked. For other terms, where the stereotypic association is that the
profession is typically feminine, like ‘nurse’, we find the collocation ‘male nurse’.
[Discuss markedness reversal]
I suspect that there is something to all three of these dimensions establishing
linkage between properties of objects and properties of persons, it will be more fruitful to
look at specific examples below.
So we have seen that all alcoholic drinks can be ranged against sweet-non-alcoholic
drinks by something like this opposition (WC males do not drink non-alcoholic drinks,
which are ‘sweet’ without the alcohol), and we have seen that the category of ‘cocktail’
can be ranged against other alcoholic drinks by being somewhere in the middle. Lastly,
within the category of cocktail, as within the category of wine, the opposition between
‘dry’ and ‘sweet’ (masculine and feminine) is used again to oppose ‘dry’ cocktails to
‘sweet’ (girl drink) cocktails. We could present this as a complex continuum like so
(leaving beer and wine out for the minute)
Hard Unmixed Liquor
Dry Cocktail
Sweet Cocktail
Liqueur
Dry
Masculine
Soft Drink
Sweet
Feminine
But really, what we have is in fact a RECURSIVE nestling of the same oppositions at
different levels of analysis, where an opposition (dry-sweet) that worked at one level, for
example, to oppose alcoholic drinks (dry) to non-alcoholic soft drinks (sweet) is used
again within the category of alcoholic drinks to oppose hard liquor (dry) to liqueur
(sweet) and cocktails (mixture of dry and sweet), and is used again within the category of
cocktails to oppose ‘dry’ cocktails to ‘sweet’ cocktails. When an opposition works this
way, we say it is recursive. So the continuum we just created looks more like this
Hard Liquor (straight) dry
Dry cocktail dry
Alcohol dry
Cocktail
dry + sweet
Sweet Cocktail sweet
Liqueur /wine
Non-alcoholic
(soft drink)
sweet
sweet
This is the same continuum as we had before, but now we can see how it is organized, by
applying the same opposition (dry-sweet) over and over again to terms already classified
in terms of that opposition.
Gradient and Prototype classifications: There is a problem with this polar
opposition between sweetness and dryness, which is that it is really not a polar
opposition, because the opposite of sweet is not dry, and vice versa. Dryness is in effect
a classification of a drink based on purity of alcohol content, which is only indirectly
correlated with sweetness. Hence, other hierarchies are possible, and web pundits create
them with abandon. For example, cocktails can be classified, and often are, in terms of
their relative efficacy in getting you very very drunk, leading to metaphoric comparison
with hurricanes or earthquakes in terms of destructive capacity. Still, many of these play
with the categories of ‘alcohol content’ and ‘taste’ (sweetness) as if they were in inverse
correlation, only to reveal that in many such classifications, ‘sweet drinks’ appear on
either side of the standard cocktail. Let’s take a look at such a hierarchy taken from the
web:
In the midst of all this, our friend Steve, in his continuing explorations through the
world of cocktails, asked if there was a potency scale for cocktails that is similar
to the one for hurricanes, measuring not sophistication of flavor but destructive
potential. Here's the one I came up with:
Category 1 cocktail:
Wine-based cocktails, such as the Vermouth Cocktail, Lillet Tomlin, and any drink that has little
or no spirits (only or primarily wines and liqueurs).
Category 2 cocktail:
Cocktails heavy on liqueurs, milk and/or cream; the so-called "girl drinks" or "ladies' drinks"
(which can still do a lot of damage, not unlike a Category 2 hurricane with its 96-110mph winds).
Category 3 cocktail:
Classic cocktails, such as Manhattans, Martinis, Margaritas, Daiquiris, et al.
Category 4 cocktail:
Tropical drinks, tall and heavy on strong rums: Hurricane, Zombie, Scorpion, Navy Grog, et al.
Category 5 cocktail:
Any drink which is more concerned with its strength than with how it actually tastes. Any drink
containing Everclear, Bacardi 151 and/or Jägermeister. Any drink invented by a college student.
Skylab, Purple Jesus, Hand Grenade, and their ilk.
Michael liked my scale, but disagreed on a few things. "Mine is maybe more of
a 'wussy scale' than a straight intensity scale." Here it is [my comments in
brackets]:
Category 1: Drinks That Will Get You Carded
Weak, typically sweet mixed drinks popular with teens, such as Fuzzy Navels or anything where
wine is the main alcohol (except "breakfast" drinks, see below).
Category 2: Girl Drink Drunk
Similar to Chuck's Category 2. Creamy drinks, often with ice cream or lots of crushed ice, that are
more shake-like or milk-like than booze-like. Also "breakfast" drinks like the Mimosa and Kir
Royale, which are saved from Category 1 wussiness because they are typically drank early in the
day. Also most tropical drinks and daiquiris, since as typically served they hide the taste of the
small amount booze included in them (but, see Category 4). ["Kids in the Hall" fans might
particularly like this category.]
Category 3: Basic Mixed Drinks
This is what most people think of when they think of a mixed drink, with between 1/3 - 1/2
distilled spirits (80-100 proof) and the rest some type of mixer. Jack and Coke, gin and tonic,
screwdrivers, margaritas, etc. [I must note that although this category would include Margaritas as
made at most establishments, a real Margarita belongs in category 4, as it is meat to be a proper
cocktail consiting of tequila, Cointreau and fresh lemon/lime juice only, and no feckin' bottled
mix.]
Category 4: Moderate Destruction Cocktails
Cocktails that are mostly distilled spirits (80 to 100 proof), typically served up and chilled. The
Martini, the Gibson, the Manhattan, etc. I'll also include strong tropical drinks here. If you can
taste the rum through all the sweetness, it will definitely lead to Moderate Destruction. I'll even
include the Skylab here.
Category 5: Extreme Destruction Cocktails
Similar to Chuck's Category 5. Stupid cocktails that aren't intended to taste good but are simply
intended to get you very drunk, very fast. The booze equivalent of Dave's Insanity Sauce.
We could be on to something here. First the Richter Scale, then the Scoville
Scale, now the Taggart-Pemberton Scale?
(http://www.gumbopages.com/looka/archive/2004-09.html)
At first blush, it looks like the two are trying to create a gradient classification, a
scale of intensity, because they based it on the categories used to classify hurricanes.
For example, hurricane classifications are gradient in that they are organized on a single
scale of a measurable property (in this case, wind speed), and this continuous scale is
divvied up into categories with arbitrarily chosen cut-off points, where each category
differs from the others in terms of having more or less of the same property (wind
speed):





Category One -- Winds 74-95 miles per hour
Category Two -- Winds 96-110 miles per hour
Category Three -- Winds 111-130 miles per hour
Category Four -- Winds 131-155 miles per hour
Category Five -- Winds greater than 155 miles per hour
But neither of these classification’s underlying logic is really one of intensity. A true
measurement of intensity would have to choose a single property that can be measured
not in terms of categorical presence or absence (either it is there or it isn’t) but in
terms of gradient categories of measurable presence, for example, one could measure
alcohol content per ‘drink’ and come up with a chart like this
Beverage Alcohol content (%)
Beers (lager) 3.2 - 4.0
Ales 4.5
Porter 6.0
Stout 6.0 - 8.0
Malt Liquor 3.2 - 7.0
Sake 14.0 - 16.0
Table wines 7.1 - 14.0
Sparkling wines 8.0 - 14.0
Fortified wines 14.0 - 24.0
Aromatized wines 15.5 - 20.0
Brandies 40.0 - 43.0
Whiskies 40.0 - 75.0
Vodkas 40.0 - 50.0
Gin 40.0 - 48.5
Rum 40.0 - 95.0
Aquavit 35.0 - 45.0
Okolehao 40.0
Tequila 45.0 - 50.5
The underlying logic of these two folk classifications is a trade-off between taste and
strength (sweetness and dryness), the same two properties that are usually used to
organize cocktails, but they admit an important truth: that sweet can actually correlate
with strength. Also, like all such classifications, each conjures up a notion of a kind of
drinker (under-age, girl drink, and talented amateur (college student)), except the one in
the middle, the Goldilocks of drinkers. But at the core, these are only slightly gradient
(intensity only applies to distinguish category 2 from categories 3, 4, 5), mostly they are
categorical oppositions of taste and alcohol content (category one is defined by
sweetness and by wine as opposed to liquor, and is opposed to all the others on this basis,
1, 2 and 4 are opposed to 3 and 5 by taste (sweet), 5 is opposed to 1-4 by having no taste
or bad taste, 3-5 are opposed to 1-2 by being ‘strong drinks’).
1. Sweet, wine-based (Teen drink)
2. Sweet, weak liquor based (Girl Drink)
3. Not sweet, strong liquor base (basic or unmarked cocktail)
4. Sweet, strong liquor based (Tropical Tiki Drink (Girl drink))
5. Foul tasting, strong liquor based (College Student Drink)
Basically these hierarchies place martini somewhere in the middle and then make
two ways that other drinks differ from these, categories 1 and 5 are limiting cases of polar
opposites, sweetness (without alcohol) and alcohol (without sweetness, or positive flavor
at all indeed, often foul tasting brews), categories 2 and 4 (or 3) are similarly opposed as
weak and strong versions of the ‘sweet drink’, in the latter version the sweetness is
specifically designed to mask the hideous strength of the brew. The basic category (3 or
4) is treated as the Aristotelian golden mean, a Goldilocks drink that involves neither
excess. An important feature of this kind of classification is that it is really not a
hierarchy of strength, but rather, it is really a classification that defines the category of
cocktails as one with a centre (defined by the ‘classic cocktails’ such as the martini, the
manhattan) (3) and a periphery (1-2, 4-5) which are defined by their difference from this
central, defining set of characteristics. With respect to taste, a cocktail should neither too
sweet (teen, girl and tropical drinks 1-2, 4), nor prepared without regard to flavor at all
(5); with respect to taste, a cocktail must contain liquor, not wine (1), and must contain it
neither in quantities that are too low nor too high.
Strength
Wine
Sweet
Weak Liquor
Teen (1)
Strong liquor
Girl (2)
Tropical (4)
Centre
Cocktail (3)
Taste
Flavourless
Or Bad flavour
Student (5)
Back to the martini. All of which brings us back to the martini. The martini, as a
drink, holds a special place as the prototypical exemplar of the ‘cocktail’ category. It has
a special glass, the martini glass, which can be used for other cocktails, and this glass is
often used as a convenient symbol to stand for the whole class of cocktails. Indeed, the
class of cocktail has become so martini-centric that the class of cocktail is sometimes
defined in terms of its resemblance to a martini ‘cocktail can mean any drink that
resembles a martini, or simply any mixed drink.’
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_cocktail). As we will see, this focality where
the more general term ‘cocktail’ becomes roughly interchangeable with its most
exemplary specific sub-type (‘martini’) in untutored usage has lead to an veritable
‘genericide’ of the martini in some quarters, the rise of the ‘fauxtini’, discussed below.
If the classic cocktail is the prototype used to evaluate the cocktailness of all other
‘deviant’ cocktails, then the martini is the prototype of all other such cocktails. To
understand the organization of the field of cocktails, I think, we need to understand the
core of the cocktail field.
The martini is usually taken to be the antipodal opposite of the ‘girl drink’ (I will
look at this below again under the topic of fauxtinis). One blogger was very irritated at
the mistaken conflation of martini with girl drink. Girl drinks for this blogger are defined
by mixture (with ice), sweet alcohols and sweetness, and lack of masculinity, whereas a
martini, while like all cocktails a mixed drink, is, still, basically pure alcohol, and only
mixed with savoury decorations (olives, onions) which will never be found in girl drinks.
A martini is SO not a girl drink. Girl drinks have certain distinct characteristics:
1) If it's not a shot, it must have ice in it.
2) It must consist of sweet alcohols, like amaretto or rum.
3) It must be sickeningly sweet, which usually means it contains sour mix or coke.
4) Your penis must shrivel back into your body if you sip one.
Martinis are pure alcohol. Sure, it's in a kind of fruity-looking glass, but you can probably get one in
a lowball, if you're not secure enough in your manhood.
Most importantly, martinis contain olives, or perhaps olive juice. No girlie drink will contain an
olive. Perhaps a cherry or an orange slice, but never an olive.
Nevertheless, I tend to drink Dewar's, neat, in order to establish my drinking prowess, before I move
on to the less manly libations.
Posted by: The Hearn at January 28, 2004 02:47 PM
So the martini is, within the class of cocktails, the one that defines the class, but it is also
the least sweet, most dry of that class. And yet, within the category of ‘drinks served in a
martini glass’ (not the same thing as a martini), we can see the opposition between
‘sweet’ and ‘dry’, ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ drinks, recurs (recursion).
Masculine/Dry
Feminine/Sweet
Classic Cocktail
Girl Drink
Martini
Dry Martini
Manhattan
Wet Martini
Cosmopolitan
(Fauxtini)
This becomes clearer if we compare the martini to other drinks that come in the same
style of glass, the manhattan and especially the cosmopolitan (a relatively recent addition
to the ‘classic cocktail’ list from the 1980s). Sometimes any drink served in a martini
glass is called a ‘martini’, an extension we will get to in a moment. What is the
cosmopolitan? ‘Three things give the Cosmo its class: #1 being served straight up in
a classic cocktail glass, #2 the sophisticated sounding name and #3, being chock full
of liquor. The basic Cosmopolitan calls for two parts vodka, one part Cointreau and
one part cranberry juice with a squirt of lime.’ A Manhattan (cocktail made with
whiskey, sweet vermouth, and a dash of bitters) has similar properties of sweetness to a
Cosmopolitan, and indeed, on the show ‘sex in the city’, they are both consumed as
relatively sophisticated urban versions of the ‘girl drink’ or relatively feminine versions
of the martini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_cocktail).
Visually, Both manhattans and cosmopolitans are striking opposed to martinis as a
coloured (red or pink) drink to a clear one:
Cosmopolitan and Martini
(http://www.detailsart.com/ProductImages/1032_lava_enterprises/1032-A-0018-P1MD.jpg)
Martini and Manhattan (http://nohatnocattle.com/jibbajabba/cocktail-2.jpg)
According to some, the cosmopolitan is opposed to the martini as girl drink to classic
cocktail: “ The martini, a.k.a. the King of Cocktails, is a universe away from girl drink
status. The Woo Woo is a girl drink. The tequila sunrise is a girl drink. The Cosmopolitan
is the quintessential girl drink.” others, however, treat the cosmopolitan as being
intermediate: ‘I consider the Cosmopolitan (or Cosmo) to be a halfway point between a
Girl drink drunk and something serious. It has enough liquor to be set on fire, yet still has
a lovely pink colour which enables me to cling to my girlie ways.’ Perhaps the
cosmopolitan’s ambiguous status has to do with the the fact that it a relatively established
form of girl drink in a martini or ‘cocktail’ glass, but there is no question that several
features ‘gender’ it as a girl drink: sweetness (martinis are not sweet) and color (martinis
are colorless) being the main ones, it resembles the martini in that, like the martini, it is
mostly alcohol. However, an index of its pop-culture ‘girliness’ can be deduced from its
emblematic prominence in the show Sex in the City, where the Cosmopolitan was in fact
the emblematic logo of the show; it is also stereotypically associated as a ‘gay man’s
drink’. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmopolitan_cocktail). However, in contrast to
other girl drinks, the cosmopolitan, like the manhattan, go together with the martini as an
expression urban chic and class (female professionals ala sex in the city consume these
beverages).
So, the opposition between ‘masculine’ ‘dry’ drinks and ‘feminine’ ‘sweet’ drinks can be
found in classic cocktails within the class of cocktails served in a martini glass. But what
about martinis themselves? Is there a parallel opposition within martinis, another way in
which this recursive opposition recurs again within the most central member of the
cocktail class? This is actually a complex topic, so let us begin with what we can call
‘classic cocktail culture’. There are probably as many named variations on the martini as
there are named cocktails other than the martini, at any given time in history and in
general (since named cocktails come and go very quickly). First of all variations within
the martini over which there is endless debate include the following polar opposites. For
some people the following pairs are established as polar opposites, neither one of which
is more basic or unmarked than the others, and hence one’s choice must be specified:
Shaken (James Bond) vs. Stirred (Sommerset Maugham)
Olives vs. Onion garnish (Gibson)
Gin vs. Vodka
There are also many other more obscure variations. The type of basic alcohol used leads
to (unmarked) martini (meaning with gin) being opposed to marked versions like vodka
martini or tequila martini. The mixer can be varied, instead of (unmarked) dry vermouth,
opposed to marked ‘perfect martini’ (sweet and dry vermouth), ‘sweet martini’ (sweet
vermouth), ‘burnt martini’ (scotch instead of vermouth), and one supposes a ‘dirty
martini’ (which adds brine from the cocktail olives) goes here. Similarly, the garnish
used can be various, including olives (usually unmarked), opposed to marked onions
(‘gibson’), no garnish (‘dickens’), and a ‘gin salad’ (3 olives and 2 onions as garnish).
For some people, even the relatively well established ‘james bond martini’ (the vodka
martini, shaken) is a contradiction in terms, hence according to strict definitions, only
the most unmarked martini will count as a ‘martini’, and martini ‘speaking loosely’ for
such people will count the more ‘marked’ versions. If this is the case, there is little doubt
that a martini, strictly speaking, is taken to be a dry gin martini with olive garnish.
These variations and many others relate to taste of the drink, but are really, for most
people, not significant in the sense of relating to ‘gendering’ the drink. However, the
opposition between a ‘dry’ martini and a ‘wet’ martini is. Simply, martinis have grown
progressively ‘drier’ since their invention, and have become increasingly correlated with
masculinity. Dryness in general refers to the ratio of mixture between hard alcohol and
flavourful vermouth. The dryer, the purer the alcohol content of the drink. This is a
gradient property, ranging from a ‘Churchill’ which is defined as ‘dry gin, stirred, with an
unopened bottle of vermouth waved above the shaker’ to a standard dry martini which
simply uses less vermouth. The dry martini is the defining martini, the unmarked
prototype of the martini, and is the opposite of any ‘sweet’ drink, by virtue of lacking
sweetness and refusing mixture entirely. We know this because, for example, certain
martinis that use ‘sweet’ substitutes (sweet vermouth) or garnishes (sweet vermouth plus
maraschino cherry, apple schnapps and/or apple slice), are sometimes reclassified as not
being martinis but ‘cosmopolitans’ (‘apple martini’ or ‘apple cosmopolitan’), hence, this
property, but not the others, is significant (for example, dirtiness of the martini implies
that it is dry, but otherwise has no effect on the martini at all). At the ‘sweeter’ end of the
martini group, some members fade into the opposite ‘feminine’ sweet drink, the
cosmopolitan. Categories where there is no clear boundary of inclusion or exclusion we
call fuzzy categories. It appears the Martini category is a fuzzy category, in that it seems
to be defined around a single, focal, prototype, the ‘dry martini’, and as members move
away from certain features typical of the dry martini (and only in relevant features), the
drink tends to become more of a ‘cosmopolitan’
Sweet/Feminine ‘girl drink’
Dry/ Masculine
(Dry) martini
Wet martini
Sweet Martini
Apple Martini
Cosmopolitan
Apple Cosmopolitan
Of course, this slipperiness ‘fuzzy category’ brings us to the ‘fauxtini’, raising the
important question of conflict over category definitions, and also, exactly how fuzzy can a
category really be before it essentially ceases to exist as a category?
First of all, what is a ‘fauxtini’? For many people, they are just another kind of martini
(because they are served in a martini glass), for others, they are an abomination or a
contradiction in terms. Essentially a marketing ploy of the nineties, a series of drinks that
were clearly ‘girl drinks’ were marketed to add a certain air of sophistication by being
served in a cocktail or ‘martini’ glass, thus upping their cachet significantly (and
following in the footsteps of the Trojan horse, the cosmopolitan). Fauxtini’s have some
properties aside from the glass:
1) Vodka or flavoured vodka base. As opposed to gin, which is flavored with a
specific range of botanicals that are part of its definition, vodka by itself is
completely lacking in flavor, but traditionally flavoured versions of vodka are
available. The fauxtini as a class is a species of the vodka martini, as is the
cosmopolitan, and relies on this non-property of vodka (or the flavors of specific
flavored vodkas) to create the drink. Many of these drinks can be quite strong.
2) Sweet without sour. The Manhattan, like many other cocktails and even the
martini, contains not only some sort of sweet mixer but also a balance of sour
(bitters). The fauxtini often dispenses with the sour/bitter component entirely,
unless it includes it using a faux sweet-sour mix (puckers). A lot of them look
like, and possibly taste like ‘candy’.
3) Rimmed glass: seemingly borrowed from the margarita, these drinks often have
glasses that are rimmed with flavorings.
4) Specific types of ingredients, other than vodka, for example, a classic girl drink
with a stupid name like ‘sex on the beach’ is defined by vodka, peach schnapps,
and a mixture of 3 juices, whereas a fuzzy martini has the same ingredients but
only the basic, pineapple juice.
5) Colors and Flavors: most important to these kind of martinis is the choice of
ingredients to produce a series of festive colors and sweet, fruity flavors.
Chart
Image/ name
Cosmopolitan
Alcohol base
Absolut Vodka,
Mixer
&
Garnish
Cointreau, splash cranberry juice, splash
lime juice, garnish w/ lime slice.
Appletini
Absolut Vodka,
Apple Pucker, Midori, green apple slice,
rim glass w/ apple sugar
BLUE MARTINI
Absolut Vodka
Island Blue Pucker,
splash 7-UP
Espresso Martini
Stolichnaya Vodka
Lemon twist
Espresso, Tia Maria, and sugar.
Chocolate Martini
Metropolitan
Vanilla Vodka,
Stoli Razberi Vodka,
Godiva White & Choco, Bailey's, half & half,
garnish w/ choco swirl & rim glass w/ crushed
oreo cookies
Blue Curacao, splash orange and 7-Up, garnish
w/orange slice
kies.
The key to the slippage seems the glass itself. That is, for some, the definition of the
martini lies not in the specific mixture that is involved, as above, but the fact that it is
served in a distinctive glass (technically a ‘cocktail glass’ but so strongly associated with
martinis that it is usually called a ‘martini glass’), and therefore, anything served in such
a glass can be called a ‘martini’. Moreover, the existence of the vodka martini (and the
cosmopolitan, also a vodka based drink) seems to have lead to this proliferation, since
vodka is intrinsically flavorless, it can be mixed with any flavor (hence raising the outcry
against ALL vodka martinis based on the post-cosmopolitan proliferation of fauxtinis,
which are all a species of vodka martini, in a sense):
Vanilla, strawberry, chocolate, sour apple, blueberry, watermelon, Creamsicle, red grapefruit,
mint. No, this is not a list of summer ice pops. It is not a rundown of ice cream flavors, either.
These are flavor fads in beverages drunk out of martini glasses. The martini glass, and the image it
evokes, is seen as the ultimate in sophistication. Ditto for the very name martini.
Call them spicitini (Tabasco), bluetini (blueberry puree), mintini (mint leaves and creme de
cacao), for starters. Order a Creamsicle martini and you'll get vanilla- flavored vodka and orange
juice. Ask for a "cream soda” and you'll get vanilla vodka with Sprite. The "yin” martini contains
more sake than gin, and the "yang” is the reverse, said Dale DeGroff of West Hempstead, who
tended bar at the Rainbow Room and is now a consultant to the Distilled Spirits Council of the
United States. These drinks and dozens more have little to do with the traditional martini, except
that, like it, the new martini contains a base of hard liquor, almost always vodka instead of gin.
Unquestionably, the martini is "the superstar of the cocktail,” said DeGroff. He traces the current
martini craze to the creation of the "Hennessey martini,” stirred, not shaken, made with cognac
and a lemon twist (some add a dab of fresh lemon juice) and served in a martini glass. "Some
Hennessey guys came to the Rainbow Promenade Bar in the early '90s,” said DeGroff, "and they
asked how they could make their product more appealing to the younger crowd. I answered, ‘Put it
in a cocktail glass.'” They did, and the rest is history. Some of the new-age martinis are designed
to go with food, and the term "bar chef” is used to describe bartenders who create a menu of
cocktail concoctions to pair with food. Vodka infused with cucumber pairs well with sushi, for
example, said DeGroff. Nobu in Manhattan serves citrus vodkas with sushi. But something more
is going on. Glassware is key, and it is the reason these offbeat cocktails are being called martinis.
In a Tom Collins glass or a highball glass, the same drinks would somehow taste more ordinary.
You could put a drink in a martini glass and call it a margarita, but it wouldn't have the same
panache, say beverage experts. (http://www.kingcocktail.com/Newsday1.htm)
This is a relatively sympathetic cooing one expected from the ‘everything which is, is
good’ press. For the devotees of the traditional martini definition, of course, drinkers of
the fauxtini are simply displaying their complete and utter lack of distinction and
sophistication, rather than arrogating it to themselves by enjoying a chocolate choo choo
in a martini glass. For example, one exasperated weblogger pointed out that what a
fauxtini is, is in fact an abomination.
A chocolate martini is a contradiction in terms. Ditto for the apple martini. We can say,
emphatically and in no uncertain terms, that a drink that is anything other than a ratio of gin/vodka
and vermouth, with either an olive or a lemon twist, is not a martini. If we want to be charitable,
we can call these pretenders "cocktails." In most cases, however, we should call them what they
are: abominations.
Or
When you overhear someone order a “chocolate martini,” chances are that person doesn't like the
taste of liquor. Cocktail sacrilege has run wild because most people don't want to taste booze. So
somehow, adding “martini” to the end of a syrupy-tasting, brightly colored mix makes imbibers
feel good about their drinks, even though what they're sipping on is nothing more than the
illegitimate half-brother of a fizzy wine cooler.
In terms of the way drinks are organized in traditional cocktail culture, there is an
argument here: if the dry martini is the polar opposite of the ‘girl drink’, and the
centerpoint of the cocktail category, then calling girl drinks stuffed into martini glasses
‘X martinis’ (apple martini, chocolate) or ‘X-tini’ (appletini, etc.) produces a problem
within the category system. Certainly it represents a certain dedicated philistinism, a
rather unpersuasive attempt to ‘playfully’ appropriate the style and panache of the
martini, but many would argue a fauxtini stands to a martini much as a tee-shirt that with
a ‘tuxedo’ design resembles a tuxedo.
[Or does it? The attempt to redefine these drinks are martinis does not rely simply on the
glass, but the focality of the category of martini itself to the definition of ‘classic [and
sophisticated] cocktail’. By recursively bringing this sort of drink into the centre, one
merely reproduces the centre/periphery opposition within that centre.
Drinks and spatial associations and tropical drinks
Drinks are, of course, not only redolent of gender, establishing the opposition between
the classic cocktail and the ‘girl drink’, but the categories that link up drinks with persons
are also categories that link up drinks with spaces. For example, the martini glass with its
classic modern design is redolent of urban chic, which explains for many why
surburbanite sports bar devotees want to appropriate that glass but fill it with drinks that
share most of the essential properties of elegant and sophisticated drinks going by names
like ‘sex on the beach’. The manhattan, for example, and the attempted interloper,
cosmopolitan, have names if not locations of invention that are redolent of urban
sophistication, and doubly underlined by Manhattan chic oriented shows like ‘Sex in the
City’. In fact, the classic cocktail, the martini, is, for many, strongly associated with
extreme forms of urban modernity, and cannot be drunk outside of them:
But Prohibition did more than boost the martini’s popularity: It gave the martini
an attitude. In the face of the Volstead Act and the Woman’s Christian
Temperance Union, to drink was to defend the values of modern civilization. It
was, as the writer William Grimes has observed, the worldly urbanite’s defiant
retort to Bible Belt intolerance and “Victorian” repression. Jerry Thomas had
spoken for nineteenth-century mixology when he told his readers that the cocktail
“is generally used on fishing and other sporting parties.” Now Prohibition
changed this and gave the martini an urbane sophistication it still retains. Bernard
DeVoto, the staunch and eloquent Cato of traditional martini virtue, put it best:
“The Martini is a city dweller, a metropolitan. It is not to be drunk beside a
mountain stream or anywhere else in the wilds, not in the open there or even
indoors…. A martini is never bad and 1 could not be brought to dispraise it but it
does not harmonize with campfires and sleeping bags.”
(http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1997/4/1997_4_32.shtml
)
Like the martini, all the other drinks that used to typify a martini glass are similarly
charged with urban attitude. The Manhattan, as the name suggests, is intrinsically
associated with the quintessential urban center, but in the wake of Sex in the City, the
Cosmopolitan (invented elsewhere, possibly miami) has taken up a certain urban quality.
In American folk structuralism in more recent years, the imaginary geographic opposition
between the city and the country has given way to a ‘bicoastal’ imaginary in which the
city (New York) is opposed to Los Angeles and California in general (depending on
whether one accepts the proposition that California has cities at all in the usual sense
[other than the usual exception for San Francisco]). If the imaginary source of all drinks
in a martini glass is NYC, then the source of all ‘girl drinks’ is California. Certainly the
second Trojan horse of all fauxtinis, the apple martini or appletini, is a Los Angeles drink
in origin, just as the cosmopolitan appears to have a Miami origin. The colorful,
sweetness of the fauxtini drinks themselves and the philistinish disregard for established
canons of taste that is referred to as ‘eclecticism’ in Californian culture, in nouvelle
cuisine as with cocktails, seem to be of a piece. Of Course the fauxtini came from the
place that put salads on top of pizzas, and started putting berry flavors in beers, where
else? So, in a sense, the opposition between the martini and the fauxtini resembles the
opposition between the way the urban culture of the two coasts is imagined, just as the
opposition between dry martini and fauxtini resembles the relationship between
masculine and feminine genders. Here it is the relationship between two things that
resembles the relationship between two others, but there is also a sense in which a
Fauxtini remind us of other features of California culture, compared to the Martini (for
example, bright colors in drinks and clothing).
Thus, we found that in recursion the same opposition applied to one of its members at
different degrees of specificity. What this means is that the opposition between
‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ applies to classic cocktails versus girl drinks, within cocktails
to martinis versus, say, cosmopolitans, and within martinis to dry martinis and, for
example, sweet martinis (A stands to B as A1 stands to A2, etc., or A : B :: A1 : A2, etc,
where ‘:’ means ‘stands to’ and ‘::’ means ‘as’). Here we have a relationship where the
opposition between, say martinis and fauxtinis, resembles the opposition between
masculine and feminine and the relationship between New York City and California (A
stands to B as C stands to D as E stands to F, or A : B :: C : D :: E : F).
This brings us to another kind of drink, many of which were invented in California during
the end of the prohibition, the Tropical Drink, or Tiki Drink. Many of these are assumed
to have been invented in the tropics, but were actually invented in California (one or two,
like the Singapore sling, were in fact invented in the tropics). These drinks are typically
based on rum with a heavy addition of fruit juices, and they are served in all manner o
festive glasses, often specific to the drink itself. They have a lot in common with girl
drinks, and many consider them to be the same thing, except that tropical drinks are
typically very strong, and with tropical drinks, the spatial association with the tropics
dominates over the gender association of girl drinks.
The spatial imagination involved in tropical drinks depends heavily on a prior
imagination of the universe that arose with European colonialism, that, just as European
‘orientalist’ imaginations divided the world into Europe and Asia, divided the world
between the ‘temperate’ and ‘tropical’ climes, with Europe and North America going in
the former. (add discussion). Now, from the colonial contact with tropical Asia ceratin
kinds of alcoholic beverage arose, most famously the original mixed gin drink, the gin
and tonic, associated with British club houses in India, and presumably the Singapore
Sling has a similar colonial heritage. Interestingly, IPA beer is also a tropical drink, but
doesn’t concern us here.
Tiki culture in the United States began in 1934, when Donn Beach, a.k.a. Don the Beachcomber,
opened a Polynesian-themed eatery in Hollywood that served Cantonese cuisine and exotic rum
punches with decor featuring flaming torches, rattan furniture, flower leis and brightly colored
fabrics. Three years later[1], Victor Bergeron, better known as Trader Vic, adopted a Tiki theme
for his restaurant in Oakland, which grew to become a worldwide chain.
Several years later American soldiers returned home from World War II, bringing with them
stories and souvenirs from the South Pacific. Americans fell in love with their romanticized
version of an exotic culture, and Polynesian design began to infuse every aspect of the country's
visual aesthetic, from home accessories to architecture. Soon came integration of the idea into
music by artists like Les Baxter, Arthur Lyman, and Martin Denny, who blended the Tiki idea
through jazz augmented with Polynesian, Asian and Latin instruments and "tropical" themes
creating the Exotica genre. This music blended the elements of Afro-Cuban rhythms, unusual
instrumentations, environmental sounds, and lush romantic themes from Hollywood movies,
topped off with evocative titles like "Jaguar God", into a cultural hybrid native to nowhere.
There were two primary strains of this kind of exotica: Jungle and Tiki. Jungle exotica was
definitely a Hollywood creation, with its roots in Tarzan movies and further back, to William
Henry Hudson's novel Green Mansions. Les Baxter was the king of jungle exotica, and spawned a
host of imitators while opening the doors for a few more genuine articles such as Chaino, Thurston
Knudson, and Guy Warren.
Tiki exotica was introduced with Martin Denny's Waikiki nightclub combo cum jungle noises
cover of Baxter's Quiet Village. Tiki rode a wave of popularity in the late 1950s and early 1960s
marked by the entrance of Hawaii as the 50th state in 1959 and the introduction of Tiki hut
cocktail bars and restaurants around the continental United States.
Tiki exotica is enjoying a resurgence in popularity, and Tiki mugs and torches that once collected
dust in thrift stores are now hot items, largely because of their camp value.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiki_culture)
Now, the tropical or tiki drink is firmly based in this imagination of the tropics, and most
of these drinks, though they are also girl drinks, and were designed primarily for
Californian venues in Los Angeles, are specifically designed to draw attention to their
tropicality, and all of which contrast with the plain modernist simplicity of the dry
martini. First, they are all rum drinks, and rum, as we know from the old Andrew
Sister’s song ‘Rum and Coca-Cola’, is a tropical alcohol (this time, from the Caribbean
tropics), that was also the cheapest available, but whose taste required considerable
masking. This is the first thing that separates the tropical drink from the usual girl drink,
which are nowadays vodka based, and from the traditional cocktail, which is gin or
whisky based. Tequila, another alcohol that has a generally horrible taste and association
with tropicality, probably should be mentioned here. This is the Caribbean tropics
contribution to the tropicality of the drink. The second is that a tiki drink usually
involves a certain amount of fruit juice, the cheapest and most plentiful being pineapple
juice, but also coconuts and so forth. These juices link the drink up to the pacific island
version of tropicality. The last component, the glass and decorations, in general are quite
festive, like girl drinks and like the tropics themselves.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A martini is SO not a girl drink. Girl drinks have certain distinct characteristics:
1) If it's not a shot, it must have ice in it.
2) It must consist of sweet alcohols, like amaretto or rum.
3) It must be sickeningly sweet, which usually means it contains sour mix or coke.
4) Your penis must shrivel back into your body if you sip one.
Martinis are pure alcohol. Sure, it's in a kind of fruity-looking glass, but you can probably
get one in a lowball, if you're not secure enough in your manhood.
Most importantly, martinis contain olives, or perhaps olive juice. No girlie drink will
contain an olive. Perhaps a cherry or an orange slice, but never an olive.
Nevertheless, I tend to drink Dewar's, neat, in order to establish my drinking prowess,
before I move on to the less manly libations.
Posted by: The Hearn at January 28, 2004 02:47 PM
What th' Hearn said. Besides, a real Martini's made with GIN, an alcohol at which the
ladies wrinkle their noses.
Posted by: Twn at January 28, 2004 04:33 PM
Monkeystein was clearly still hammered from all of that flavored vodka when he wrote
this. No sober man would ever assert that a martini is a "girl drink." The martini, a.k.a.
the King of Cocktails, is a universe away from girl drink status. The Woo Woo is a girl
drink. The tequila sunrise is a girl drink. The Cosmopolitan is the quintessential girl
drink.
But Monkeystein is certainly correct that the word "martini" has been coopted by dark
forces. A chocolate martini is a contradiction in terms. Ditto for the apple martini. We
can say, emphatically and in no uncertain terms, that a drink that is anything other than a
ratio of gin/vodka and vermouth, with either an olive or a lemon twist, is not a martini. If
we want to be charitable, we can call these pretenders "cocktails." In most cases,
however, we should call them what they are: abominations.
I agree with everything The Hearn said, with one exception: no olive brine!
I agree with Twn entirely.
Posted by: Bob K. Chen at January 28, 2004 05:20 PM
The "Woo Woo"? Oh my stars.
Imagine walking up to the bar, waving over the bartender, and then -- "I would like a . . .
Woo Woo!!"
Posted by: Twn at January 28, 2004 09:01 PM
Any guy(in this case, I mean he still has part of his unit) who drinks MANDARIN
ORANGE CLUB SODA in his vodka has no business telling real men that a martini is a
girl drink. Don't spill any of your MANDARIN ORANGE on your panties--I hear it's
hard to get the stain out.
Posted by: DBW at January 29, 2004 09:43 AM
(http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/archive/000092.html)
Girl Drink Drunk
Most of my drinking career has been an homage to what Claire calls the "Girl drink
drunk." Tutti-frutti beverages that typically come in a stemmed glass resplendent with
any matter of flora and fauna. I want to grow up, I want to drink some terribly fancy
single malt ambrosia like the rest of you. But, my junior, retarded palette just doesn't
want to play along. I'm lost in a sea of sweetness.
I tried a Martini once. I fell over. I've tried whiskey on a number of occasions but most of
the resulting tales can't be repeated here - though I discovered at Spy one night that a
Blow Popped dipped in whiskey is tolerable.
It all started with the Singapore Sling. My selecting this beverage should have screamed
underage drinker to the cocktail waitress. That was Ottawa and I guess you were allowed
some sort of reward for scaling the six foot snow banks that littered the landscape.
Rye and ginger followed. The favourite of Mrs. T across the street. Shortly after my
mother passed away, she teetered across the street, drink in hand. She stared nonplussed
at the large metal sculpture of a Great Blue Heron that had stood in our front window for
years. "I thought that was the vacuum cleaner." I reconsidered Rye and ginger on the spot
though it did follow through a number of the University years. I was a sucker for the silk
tassel that decorated the self-named bottle.
Margaritas are very good. They have multiple personalities with rocks 'n salt, frozen and
the fruity flavours. You have to gauge the tenor of the bar. Will they tolerate the frozen
fruity kind without silently sneering? El Teddy's makes the best Margaritas in New York.
They aren't the frozen kind but they come with the fancy shaker and appliances are
always good.
I consider the Cosmopolitan (or Cosmo) to be a halfway point between a Girl drink drunk
and something serious. It has enough liquor to be set on fire, yet still has a lovely pink
colour which enables me to cling to my girlie ways.
But I fell off or perhaps onto the wagon last night. The girl at the next table had
something pretty and green. It had a cherry and I fell in love. "What's that?" "A Midori
Sour, it's supposed to be both sweet and sour." She said the magic word. "Sweet."
May 15, 2000
(http://www.harrumph.com/girldrinkdrunk.html)
Kevin: Ray, I guess you're wondering why I asked you here tonight. [Dave nods] Well,
the board had a little meeting today and unless my eyes deceive me I think I'm facing the
new vice-president in charge of distribution! Congratulations Ray!
[Kevin and Dave shake hands]
Dave: Thank you Mr. Barnes.
Kevin: Please. Call me Russell. Let's celebrate with a drink!
Dave: Oh uh I'm afraid I don't drink, Russ.
Kevin: Grown man like you Ray?
Dave: Well I've just never liked the taste of alcohol.
Kevin: Oh come on Ray. What about a Chocolate Choo Choo? It's a girl drink. Tastes
like candy. [in low-pitched voice] Don't disappoint me Ray.
Dave: Okay uh, sure Russ. I'll have a... Chocolate Choo Choo.
Kevin: Great! I hate to drink alone. Can I have a Chocolate Choo Choo for my friend
please and I'll have a scotch-and-soda!
(http://www.kithfan.org/work/transcripts/three/girldrnk.html)
Girl Drink drunks, as parodied on Kids in the Hall, are also a barrel of laughs, largely
because we've all been through this phase. The Girl Drink drunk is unable to stomach the
taste of alcohol unless it is diluted with fruit juice, milk, or soda pop. The funny thing
about Girl Drink drunks is they're usually young males, so they should really be called
Young Guy Drink drunks. Nevertheless, Girl Drink drunks will pound four or five
*censored*tails in no time before the inevitable occurs -- they complain they can t taste
the booze in their drink. So they demand doubles, triples, and even quadruples next time
around and, needless to say, this type of souse can get stupid drunk. A few words for Girl
Drink drunks: You can't taste the booze in your drink because you ruined it with Sprite,
pineapple juice and grenadine. If you want to taste the booze, ditch the mix.
(http://pist.ca/article.php?story=7_what_drunk)
The Starbucks Frappuchino Bottled Coffee Drink is actually more a sugar drink than a
coffee drink. It is sweet and smooth but it does not have the caffeine kick and acidity of
the Doubleshot. I mean don't get me wrong you can still get a coffee buzz if you drink
enough of these but it is more from sugar than caffeine. It is sort of if you took a
Starbucks Doubleshot and mixed it with a bottle of milk and a pound of pure refined
sugar.
I have to wonder if Starbucks is targeting women in their marketing. This is sort of the
"Girl Drink" of coffee drinks. It tastes more like sugary milk than coffee black as night
and serious as a heart attack.
It is not bad just not to my tastes. I am going to get some Boss Coffee from Japan
next time I am in Seattle.
(http://www.8bitjoystick.com/archives/jake_review_starbucks_frappuchino_bottled_coff
ee_drink.php)
Viva Martini!
Al Stankus,
I read your column in the Dig every week and particularly enjoyed this latest one, in
which you decry the theft of the word "Martini" by the girl-drink set (Standard + Pour,
#7.12, 3.23.05). Your analogy about calling anything drunk from a beer glass "beer" was
right on.
Amen Bruh! I've been a (gin, though I shouldn't have to clarify) martini drinker since
college in the early '90s, just before everything old became new again. Now when I order
it I get asked, "What kind of Martini?" I feel like grabbing the server by the neck and
spitting: "Do I look like a wuss? I want a Martini, as in THE Martini!"
If you want to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. There oughta be a law: No drink
shall be called a Martini unless it contains an olive. That would allow vodka (as a
grudging nod to the James Bond crowd) but keep out Kahlua, Pucker, Godiva and the
rest. They should be called “Cosmos”: a cocktail ripe for a beating of its own.
Keep up the good work!
MATTHEW LEINGANG
VIA E-MAIL
Al Stankus,
(http://www.weeklydig.com/index.cfm/issueID/87eceb2a-4e53-4709-88c9e96136829eb3/fuseaction/Article.view/issueID/a6e88263-6b17-434e-b76b9a1b19461251/articleID/024eada9-a57f-470a-8371-8007661d4294/nodeID/1f8d80f11d63-4759-b277-66449307b413)
MARTINIS: MORE THAN A GLASS
ACT
Al Stankus
If you're reading this, you're probably a tippler-no doubt you have a few beer glasses in
your cabinet. I'd also wager that on occasion, juice, soda and even water have been
poured into these said “beer glasses.” Now, let me take a gamble and insist that if I, or
anyone else, saw you sipping one of these non-alcoholic beverages out of a designated
beer glass, and asked, “Hey, whatchya drinkin'?” you would never in a million years
answer with “beer!” That'd be plain stupid.
So, then, why is it that when someone is drinking a vile concoction of vanilla vodka,
Kahlua and espresso topped with a few coffee beans out of a martini glass, they feel the
burning desire to call it an “espresso martini?” By the same token, why do most swanky
bars feature a drink list that is more often than not dubbed a “martini menu?”
At one time, making a martini was considered the true test of a great bartender. That was
when a good, dry martini was made with gin and a dash or three of dry vermouth, and
was perfectly chilled and garnished. Now when you hang around a bar, you're more apt to
hear some nitwit bragging about how the bartender at Club Saccharine “really knows
how to make a great lemon drop martini.” Please, pass me a barf bag.
The martini, it seems, has morphed from an established drink to a generic cocktail-world
term, and bartenders can no longer assume that those who order it want the real thing.
The word martini is tossed around so haphazardly, it's virtually lost all meaning. I hate to
be a stickler for labels, but the truth is that these not-ready-for-primetime drinkers should
be referring to their orders more globally as “cocktails” and reserve the term “martini” for
the true barflies.
Of course, restaurants and bartenders are as much at fault as their clientele who belly-up
for sickly sweet green apple martinis. Hey, I know it's a business, but can I ask for a little
respect for the age-old, classically made version of the martini? I'm all for bringing back
the sleek design of a martini glass, but is it too much to ask for a simple switch to the
word “cocktail”? It may be so.
Every study of the spirits industry tells us that when a customer orders a “martini”despite the heritage of the drink being gin-based-vodka now outsells gin by nearly three
to one. It's from this most neutral of bases that flavored vodkas mixed with flavored
liquors, in addition to all manner of garnishes, have pushed the drink beyond the realm of
taste, let alone good taste.
When you overhear someone order a “chocolate martini,” chances are that person doesn't
like the taste of liquor. Cocktail sacrilege has run wild because most people don't want to
taste booze. So somehow, adding “martini” to the end of a syrupy-tasting, brightly
colored mix makes imbibers feel good about their drinks, even though what they're
sipping on is nothing more than the illegitimate half-brother of a fizzy wine cooler.
(http://www.weeklydig.com/index.cfm/issueID/ec919e1c-2fd6-4a66-827284a7f7c49d7c/fuseaction/Article.view/issueID/ec919e1c-2fd6-4a66-827284a7f7c49d7c/articleID/53261c0e-bd8f-4219-b072-73cfa3b070b4/nodeID/5281e9d1b493-43c5-9b63-0a3264d6b730_
By Guest Bartender Tim Glazner
No, The Cosmopolitan is not The Millionaire's erudite brother, but a swank potent
potable. One's first instinct might be to shun this red drink. It has the look of a girl's
drink. But lay aside those bigoted thoughts. First of all, if it's a Cosmo worth drinking
(not watered down), it will actually be pink, not red. That's even worse for those who
fear an insult to their manliness!
The origins of the Cosmopolitan are unclear. It has a couple of relatives. The Cape
Codder is close, but you may get blank looks ordering one. The Kamikaze is another
cousin. That little shooter is for college kids on a jag. The Cosmo is more refined
than either. Three things give the Cosmo its class: #1 being served straight up in a
classic cocktail glass, #2 the sophisticated sounding name and #3, being chock full
of liquor.
The basic Cosmopolitan calls for two parts vodka, one part Cointreau and one part
cranberry juice with a squirt of lime. Pour it in the shaker over ice and stir until you
get frost on the outside. Strain it in a chilled cocktail glass. You can play with the
recipe quite a bit. Absolut Kurant and Citron make for very lovely versions of the
original. Some like lemon instead of lime. It shouldn't make much difference. I've
had a quite eye-pleasing version with a sliver of curled lemon peel tossed in. My own
personal refinement calls for one part vodka and one part gin. You can call that drink
The Swanky, I won't mind. Using three or four parts vodka isn't too bad either.
Vodka has to be one of the most versatile liquors. If it can go with cream in a White
Russian and orange juice in a Screwdriver, it must mix with anything. And believe
me, it does. The better the vodka, the smoother it goes down. Stoli is great, but for
pure, unfettered drinkability, go for Absolut. Avoid fancy bottles like Skyy. Good
vodka does not need a gimmicky bottle.
A really nice bar will serve you a Cosmopolitan, like a Martini, with an extra serving
in a chilled carafe on the side. Remember the bar that does this for you. It's a
keeper.
Another nice thing about the Cosmopolitan is how it has its way with the ladies. The
fact that it is pink makes it look rather innocent. Having one in front of you on the
bar will often cause ladies to ask you what it is. And this usually results in their
trying one. You rogue, your foot's in the door! Order one for your date and she'll be
impressed. It's a lovely drink for her, and for him. Two or three for her and you're
best friends before you know it!
So be bold. Show you have a tight hold on your manliness that no pink cocktail can
shake! Get that cosmopolitan air! Live it up!
(http://www.mrlucky.com/html/cocktails/cosmopolitan.htm)
Cocktail Culture
By Devin D. O'Leary
"Keep in mind that gentlemen, as a general rule, prefer their beverages dry,
or of the less sweet variety. Such cocktails as Manhattan, Martini, Gibson, etc., etc., are
most pleasing to them. While many of the fair sex follow closely with the men folks in
this regard, there are many others who prefer the richer preparations, such as those
containing portions of egg, much cordial or syrup."--"Cocktail Bill" Boothby's World
Drinks and How to Mix Them (1930).
JULY 6, 1998:
The legendary mixologist "Cocktail Bill" Boothby summed it up quite succinctly. There
do seem to be differences in the drinks that men and women choose to quaff. Although
nowadays men and women can be seen to consume martinis and cigars in nearly equal
quantities, these differences were once quite pronounced, giving rise to a whole category
of frothy, colorful drinks relegated forever to "Girl Drink" status. Most of the legendary
"Girl Drinks" were developed during Prohibition when the lousy taste of bathtub gin
needed to be masked by a blenderful of juices, cremes and cordials. A 1951 survey of
bartenders in America and Canada found 32 mixed drinks that are "definitely preferred
by women," 30 drinks "drunk mostly by men" and 23 drinks that "enjoy equal popularity
among men and women." The top three drinks for the gents were: Martini, Whiskey Sour
and Old-Fashioned. The top three for the ladies in the house were: Daiquiri, Tom Collins
and Bacardi.
Jack Townsend and Tom Moore McBride in their tome The Bartender's Book (1951)
summed up this dichotomy much less decorously than did Señor Boothby a score before:
"It is safe to assume that the invasion of speakeasies by women was a major cause of the
god-awful drinks of the time, since some of the worst, such as the Pink Lady, are still
drunk almost exclusively by women. Happily, the ladies have become more civilized as
they drink more frequently; our bartenders report that they are now inclined to duplicate
the orders of the men they're with, rather than to call for syrupy slops."
Here then are a few infamous Girl Drinks for the more "feminine" ladies out there ... and
for the occasional man who's secure enough in his sexuality to order a giant pink drink
with an umbrella in it.
(http://weeklywire.com/ww/07-06-98/alibi_food.html)
Apr 19 2005, 01:08 PM
Post #1
From Ted Pincus' column in today's Chicago Sun-Times:
"...A great icon is disappearing from the American cocktail scene.
The hordes of thirsty, trendy philistines who insist on change,
idolizing the next new thing have provided a ready market to be
eagerly exploited by those who've been grandly bastardizing this
hallowed beverage with forgeries: the nation's greedy, mischievous
bartenders, restaurant menu-writers and ad copy chiefs. It's the
proliferation of the Fauxtini..."
participating
member
Posts: 132
and the kicker:
Joined: 5-April 04
Member No.:
"...Let them freely call it a Ghirardelli Splash or a Peach Panache or
16,919
Rasputin's Raspberry Razzamatazz. Let them drown it in crushed ice,
drench it with pomegranate juice, infuse it with huckleberry essence,
shake it with eucalyptus crystals, doll it with a strawberry sipping
straw, top it off with sea urchin foam and perfumed peacock plumage,
and ignite it with lighter fluid.
But please, don't ever, ever try to take a fluid composition that is not
four heavenly ounces of genuine Beefeater, Boodles, Bombay or
Tanqueray and seven measured drops of imported dry vermouth, all
stirred gently with 10 ice cubes in a freezing cold stainless steel
shaker, and have the temerity to call it a martini..."
I'm not sure why Mr. Pincus, who normally writes about business
topics, is all afire over fauxtinis. Well, that's not entirely true. I agree
completely that most cocktail inventors of recent years have
abandoned even the pretense of effort in naming their concoctions.
Yet I find it amusing that Mr. Pincus has devoted an entire column in
pointing this out.
I disagree completely with his assertion that fauxtinis are kiling off
the Martini. In fact, I believe that fauxtinis are sometimes "gatewaytinis" but are always a means of keeping cocktail culture alive. I also
think Mr. Pincus spends too much time protesting fauxtinis and not
enough in praise of the Martini. But, yeah, how about a little
imagination when the time comes to name one's latest concoction?
Oh, and while Mr. Pincus has fine taste in gin it sez here that he
needs to pick himself up a bottle of Plymouth and to not be so stingy
with the vermouth!
Kurt
Chef Shogun
Apr 19 2005, 01:20 PM
Post #2
Some people want to drink martinis, but they don't want to drink
Martinis. It's an image thing. Take the same tarted up fusion drink,
give one a cutesy and ideally vaguely humorous or ironic name, and
call the other some kind of Martini, and I'd imagine you'd sell a lot
more of the 'martini' one than the other one.
-------------------participating
Matt Robinson
member
Prep for dinner service, prep for life! A Blog
Posts: 649
Joined: 16-June 04
From: Arlington,
VA
Member No.:
19,263
kvltrede
Apr 19 2005, 01:33 PM
Post #3
QUOTE(Chef Shogun @ Apr 19 2005, 02:20 PM)
Some people want to drink martinis, but they don't want to drink
Martinis. It's an image thing. Take the same tarted up fusion drink,
give one a cutesy and ideally vaguely humorous or ironic name, and
call the other some kind of Martini, and I'd imagine you'd sell a lot
more of the 'martini' one than the other one.
participating
member
Posts: 132
Joined: 5-April 04
Member No.:
16,919
I imagine you are correct, sir. Then again, I'm the kinda guy who
hates it when people use the terms "offense" and "defense" when
discussing baseball. The correct terms are, of course, "hitting" and
"fielding". Unfortunately, this too is a lost cause.
Oh, well, I try to keep my ranting on either subject to a minimum. If
anything, the futility of both topics is as good a reason as any to have
another cocktail instead letting one's blood boil. And that's precisely
where an ice-cold Martini blows away ALL competitors and
pretenders to the throne.
Kurt
winesonoma
Apr 19 2005, 02:08 PM
Post #4
Some people think it's the name of a glass not a drink. Fuck them.
Gin dammit, it's Gin I say.
-------------------Bruce Frigard
Quality control Taster, Château D'Eau Winery
"Free time is the engine of ingenuity, creativity and innovation"
participating
111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321
member
Posts: 1,582
Joined: 7-January
04
From: Sonoma, Ca
Member No.:
14,400
slkinsey
manager
Posts: 6,451
Joined: 13-May 03
From: New York,
New York
Member No.:
8,505
Apr 19 2005, 02:20 PM
Post #5
It's definitely the case that unimaginitive bartenders have a tendency
to call drinks a "[something] Martini. But I don't think it's entirely fair
to attribute all this to a lack of imagination. It's also definitely the
case that this practice tends to be a good business choice in most bars
in the country. It is a simple fact that it's easier to sell a drink named
"Apple Martini" than it is to sell the same drink named "Apple Core"
-- never mind something more whimsical like "Fall in New England."
I think that most of America has caught on to the idea that cocktails
are cool, but most of America also doesn't know much about cocktails
or appreciate the flavors of liquor. Chef Shogun nails it on the head, I
think, when he suggests that many people want the image of
sophistication that goes along with drinking a "martini," but don't
actually want to drink a Martini. An unkind person might suggest that
such people would like to appear to have a sophistication they largely
lack. When a customer reads "Apple Martini" they know they are
getting an apple-flavored sweet drink in a V-shaped glass. To a
certain extent, the V-shaped glass makes it easy to pretend it's not a
girl drink.
I actually don't have too much of a problem with a drink using the
word "martini" (or "sidecar" or "manhattan" and so on) when it is a
drink that is clearly riffing on the martini concept or is reasonably
related to the idea of a martini. A dry, clear drink that focuses clearly
on the flavor of the spirit... go ahead and call it a "Somethingorother
Martini" if no other inspiration strikes. You're mixing gin with dry
sherry instead of vermouth and want to call it a "Spanish Martini?"
Okay with me. You're cleverly twisting the cognac, Cointreau and
lemon juice in a classic Sidecar formula and want to call it a "Tantris
Sidecar?" Good, I say -- it tells me something about the drink I might
not have otherwise known. But I do draw the line at a drink made
with Godiva liqueur, vanilla vodka and cream being called a
"Chocolate Martini."
It should also be pointed out that there are plenty of cocktail
categories one can easily and correctly adapt. Okay... to be correct,
they weren't originally considered "cocktails," per se, but rather
distinct categoriess of libation unto themselves. I speak of things such
as the Fizz, Daisy, Mule, Punch, Crusta, Julep, Sling, etc. -- even the
Cocktail. If you come up with a drink involving a base liquor, a little
liqueur and a splash of sour fruit juice that's shaken, poured into a
cocktail glass and dosed with a bit of seltzer water, there's no reason
not to call it a Somethingorother Daisy. That would be entirely
correct. In fact, although a true cocktail historian like Dave might
protest the renaming of the odious Sour Apple Martini as the Sour
Apple Cocktail, I would find this a much more appropriate name. But
that, of course, would necessitate having bartenders and beverage
directors (not to mention customers) who knew about and cared about
these things. Unfortunately, although there are many exciting things
going on with cocktails right now, it's still a fact that the cocktail
enthusiast is much more likely to be served a well-prepared drink in
someone's home than over a bar.
-------------------Samuel Lloyd Kinsey, aka "slkinsey"
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, New York and Fine Spirits and Cocktails Forums
slkinsey@eGullet.org
DrinkBoy
Apr 19 2005, 02:22 PM
Post #6
QUOTE(Chef Shogun @ Apr 19 2005, 01:20 PM)
Some people want to drink martinis, but they don't want to drink
Martinis. It's an image thing. Take the same tarted up fusion drink,
give one a cutesy and ideally vaguely humorous or ironic name, and
call the other some kind of Martini, and I'd imagine you'd sell a lot
more of the 'martini' one than the other one.
participating
member
Posts: 213
Joined: 2-June 03 Um..... which is EXACTLY the problem.
From: Seattle
The Martini is "a" cocktail, not a big-brush-stroke generality to apply
Member No.:
to any cocktail you are trying to get the public interested in.
8,905
I totally agree that the cocktail-neophyte "wants" a Martini, but in
truth isn't really ready for one yet. I also don't really have a problem if
they "think" they are having a Martini just because it is served in the
same glass that a Martini traditionally comes in.
The problem however, is that it doesn't stop there. There needs to be a
"guidance" phase of the process, where this cocktail-neophyte, after
having a few beginner cocktails, mistakenly refers to a "lemon drop"
as a Martini, at which time the bartender, or their drinking buddy,
politely corrects them.
QUOTE
"George, I can understand how you might get that impression, but a
Lemon Drop really isn't a Martini. It's just a cocktail."
"Really? Then what's a Martini?"
"A Martini is gin, dry vermouth, and if you're lucky a dash of orange
bitters. And if you prefer vodka to gin, you can order a 'Vodka
Martini', but you have to qualify it like that."
At issue, is that neither the majority of bartenders, nor the majority of
their customers, realize this. We have been operating at "critical
mass" of cluelessness about cocktails and Martini's for far too long,
and so people don't realize what they don't know about this fine drink.
It is up to the devoted few of us who seem to take this personally to
re-educate the masses.
Viva la cock tail!
mjr_inthegardens
Apr 19 2005, 02:39 PM
Post #7
If I drink a sidecar out of a martini glass does that make it a
sidecartini?
This post has been edited by mjr_inthegardens: Apr 19 2005, 02:40
PM
-------------------participating
“As I ate the oysters with their strong taste of the sea and their faint
member
metallic taste that the cold white wine washed away, leaving only the
Posts: 400
sea taste and the succulent texture, and as I drank their cold liquid
Joined: 20-October from each shell and washed it down with the crisp taste of the wine, I
03
From: Browsing in lost the empty feeling and began to be happy, and to make plans.” Sahadi's,
Ernest Hemingway, in “A Moveable Feast”
Brooklyn, NYC
Member No.:
Brooklyn, NY, USA
12,579
winesonoma
Apr 19 2005, 02:48 PM
Post #8
QUOTE(mjr_inthegardens @ Apr 19 2005, 01:39 PM)
If I drink a sidecar out of a martini glass does that make it a
sidecartini?
That makes it a Sidecar. Properly drunk out of a sidecar attached to a
high powered motorcycle.
participating
member
Posts: 1,582
Joined: 7-January
-------------------04
From: Sonoma, Ca Bruce Frigard
Quality control Taster, Château D'Eau Winery
Member No.:
14,400
"Free time is the engine of ingenuity, creativity and innovation"
111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321
JAZ
Apr 19 2005, 02:54 PM
Post #9
For more opinions on the subject, check out this older thread.
manager
-------------------Janet A. Zimmerman, aka "JAZ"
Dean, eGullet Culinary Institute
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, Fine Spirits and Cocktails
jzimmerman@eGullet.org
Posts: 2,045
Joined: 13January 03
From: San
Francisco
Member No.:
7,258
Lan4Dawg
Apr 20 2005, 07:50 AM
Post #10
just to ramble along the same subject lines....
I remember years ago before the "martini glass craze" hit--& let's face
it the craze is not w/ martinis them selves but the glass in which they
are served--we joined another couple for dinner and met at the bar.
participating
The bar tender took our order and "M" could not decide what she
member
wanted. I ordered my usual, "Bombay--if you have it--martini, about
Posts: 316
8-1, very well chilled w/ a twist, thank you". "M" chimed in, "that
Joined: 13-July 03 sounds good. I will have one as well."
Member No.:
9,724
The bar tender returned a moment later and apologized b/c they were
out of martini glasses (as I said this was before the craze hit and
finding a true V-shaped glass in a bar was hit or miss). My response
was, "not a problem, what ever glass you have is fine w/ me". "M"
was appalled and had to order some thing different. It was not the
drink but the glass she wanted. "It just looks so cool holding that
glass" she explained.
We tease about the Cosmopolitan but at least they had the decency to
call it by a real name and not a "cran-tini" or some thing similar. Of
course I did have some one once order a "Cosmopolitan martini". I
assumed it was a regular Cosmopolitan and prepared same to their
delight.
I do have a problem w/ the craze going so far as to take basic
cocktails and changing their names to reflect the "martini glass
craze". Upon picking up a "cocktail menu" at an establishment
recently I noticed a mud-slide as a "mudtini" and a White Russian as
a "coffee & cream-tini" w/ a Black Russian as a "coffee-tini", a Salty
Dog as a "Grapefruitini", &c. I have enough problems playing twenty
questions w/ a bar tender when I order a martini as it is---gin or
vodka?, twist or olive?, straight up or on the rocks? (seldomly asked
any more)? how much vermouth?, type of gin? that I do not need to
spend another ten minutes specifying if I want cranberry or apple
juice, a flavored vodka or gin, some bizarre liqueur that is trendy or
just got a marketing boost by making a new-fangled drink w/ it, &c.
Just, to quote Peter Benchley, "Quick! get me out of these wet clothes
and in to a dry martini!" Every one knew exactly what he wanted.
-------------------in loving memory of Mr. Squirt (1998-2004)-the best cat ever.
slkinsey
Apr 20 2005, 08:07 AM
Post #11
QUOTE(Lan4Dawg @ Apr 20 2005, 10:50 AM)
Just, to quote Peter Benchley, "Quick! get me out of these wet clothes
and in to a dry martini!"
Er... I believe it was Robert Benchley who said, "let’s get out of these
wet clothes and into a dry martini." Peter Benchley, his son, is more
famously known for things like, "the great fish moved silently
through the night water, propelled by short sweeps of its crescent tail"
and "aaaaaaaaugh! A shark just bit my freakin' leg off!"
manager
Posts: 6,451
Joined: 13-May 03
From: New York, QUOTE(Lan4Dawg @ Apr 20 2005, 10:50 AM)
Every one knew exactly what he wanted.
New York
Member No.:
At that time... probably something that would hardly be considered
8,505
"dry" by today's standards -- and better for it, too.
-------------------Samuel Lloyd Kinsey, aka "slkinsey"
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, New York and Fine Spirits and Cocktails Forums
slkinsey@eGullet.org
trillium
Apr 20 2005, 09:51 AM
Post #12
QUOTE(slkinsey @ Apr 19 2005, 01:20 PM)
An unkind person might suggest that such people would like to
appear to have a sophistication they largely lack. When a customer
reads "Apple Martini" they know they are getting an apple-flavored
sweet drink in a V-shaped glass. To a certain extent, the V-shaped
glass makes it easy to pretend it's not a girl drink.
participating
member
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 21-August
02
Member No.:
6,123
While we're correcting termonology, let me point out that it's a girly
drink not a girl drink.
Thank you.
I have a friend who loves girly drinks. I try and try with him
(Aviations, mojitos, rum punch, etc) but what he really loved best
was the pina colada I made with that disgusting stuff from a can.
Sometimes there is nothing you can do.
regards,
trillium
Lan4Dawg
Apr 20 2005, 10:10 AM
Post #13
QUOTE(slkinsey @ Apr 20 2005, 08:07 AM)
QUOTE(Lan4Dawg @ Apr 20 2005, 10:50 AM)
Just, to quote Peter Benchley, "Quick! get me out of these wet clothes
and in to a dry martini!"
participating
member
Posts: 316
Joined: 13-July 03
Member No.:
9,724
Er... I believe it was Robert Benchley who said, "let’s get out of these
wet clothes and into a dry martini." Peter Benchley, his son, is more
famously known for things like, "the great fish moved silently
through the night water, propelled by short sweeps of its crescent tail"
and "aaaaaaaaugh! A shark just bit my freakin' leg off!"
I knew it was one of those Benchleys and am forever confusing the
two.
I wonder if that shark drank a martini--or enjoyed some other
libation--before dinner. ":^)
-------------------in loving memory of Mr. Squirt (1998-2004)-the best cat ever.
birder53
Apr 20 2005, 10:13 AM
Post #14
QUOTE(winesonoma @ Apr 19 2005, 04:08 PM)
Some people think it's the name of a glass not a drink. Fuck them.
Gin dammit, it's Gin I say.
participating
member
Posts: 512
Joined: 29-August
Please, tell us what you really mean!
02
From:
This post has been edited by birder53: Apr 20 2005, 10:13 AM
Martinsville, NJ
Member No.:
6,220
-------------------KathyM
Chef Shogun
Apr 20 2005, 07:27 PM
Post #15
Noveltini?
-------------------Matt Robinson
Prep for dinner service, prep for life! A Blog
participating
member
Posts: 649
Joined: 16-June 04
From: Arlington,
VA
Member No.:
19,263
Katherine
Apr 20 2005, 07:50 PM
Post #16
I'd be happy if they'd just put my sweet martini (Three parts gin, one
part red vermouth, and a cherry, please) in a cocktail glass, without
asking if I want it on the rocks.
participating
member
Posts: 1,515
Joined: 4-August
01
From: Maine
Member No.: 16
winesonoma
Apr 20 2005, 08:51 PM
Post #17
QUOTE(birder53 @ Apr 20 2005, 09:13 AM)
QUOTE(winesonoma @ Apr 19 2005, 04:08 PM)
Some people think it's the name of a glass not a drink. Fuck them.
Gin dammit, it's Gin I say.
participating
member
Please, tell us what you really mean!
Posts: 1,582
Joined: 7-January
04
From: Sonoma, Ca
Member No.:
"GIN"
14,400
-------------------Bruce Frigard
Quality control Taster, Château D'Eau Winery
"Free time is the engine of ingenuity, creativity and innovation"
111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321
Chef Shogun
Apr 20 2005, 09:04 PM
Post #18
I'm no good at cards. Let's play checkers.
-------------------Matt Robinson
Prep for dinner service, prep for life! A Blog
participating
member
Posts: 649
Joined: 16-June 04
From: Arlington,
VA
Member No.:
19,263
winesonoma
Apr 20 2005, 10:03 PM
Post #19
QUOTE(Chef Shogun @ Apr 20 2005, 08:04 PM)
I'm no good at cards. Let's play checkers.
Drink first, Play games later.
participating
member
Posts: 1,582
Joined: 7-January
04
From: Sonoma, Ca
Member No.:
14,400
Liz Johnson
participating
member
Posts: 365
Joined: 10-May 02
Member No.:
2,325
-------------------Bruce Frigard
Quality control Taster, Château D'Eau Winery
"Free time is the engine of ingenuity, creativity and innovation"
111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321
Apr 22 2005, 06:32 AM
Post #20
I used to "politely correct" people — as drinkboy puts it — that the
proper name is "cocktail" when I was writing a weekly cocktail
column. And when people made the effort to invent names for their
creations instead of adding 'tini' to the end of a flavor — I always
lavished praise.
But after while, I decided drinking sweet drinks out of cocktail
glasses and calling them something-tinis is really no different of an
introdcution to the world of cocktails than white zinfandel is to the
world of wine. It's an starting-point, and it gets people curious.
We should encourage curiousity, not squash it with snootiness.
This post has been edited by Liz Johnson: Apr 22 2005, 06:33 AM
-------------------Elizabeth Johnson
Professional:
Food Editor, The Journal News and LoHud.com
Westchester, Rockland and Putnam: The Lower Hudson Valley.
Personal:
Sour Cherry Farm.
Lan4Dawg
Apr 22 2005, 06:47 AM
Post #21
participating
member
Posts: 316
Joined: 13-July 03
Member No.:
9,724
QUOTE(Liz Johnson @ Apr 22 2005, 06:32 AM)
I used to "politely correct" people — as drinkboy puts it — that the
proper name is "cocktail" when I was writing a weekly cocktail
column. And when people made the effort to invent names for their
creations instead of adding 'tini' to the end of a flavor — I always
lavished praise.
But after while, I decided drinking sweet drinks out of cocktail
glasses and calling them something-tinis is really no different of an
introdcution to the world of cocktails than white zinfandel is to the
world of wine. It's an starting-point, and it gets people curious.
We should encourage curiousity, not squash it with snootiness.
good point but we can still talk bad about 'em behind their backs. ":^)
-------------------in loving memory of Mr. Squirt (1998-2004)-the best cat ever.
Splificator
Apr 22 2005, 11:25 AM
Post #22
QUOTE(Liz Johnson @ Apr 22 2005, 06:32 AM)
...drinking sweet drinks out of cocktail glasses and calling them
something-tinis is really no different of an introdcution to the world
of cocktails than white zinfandel is to the world of wine.
More like Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill, no?
participating
--DW
member
Posts: 187
Joined: 4-February
-------------------04
From: Brooklyn David Wondrich
Member No.:
15,117
Liz Johnson
"Little drops of whisky,
Poured on broken ice;
Little grains of sugar,
Of lemon peel a slice;
Just a dash of Angostura bitters, pray!
That's what we call a cocktail
In the USA"
(Traditional.)
Apr 22 2005, 11:41 AM
Post #23
QUOTE(Splificator @ Apr 22 2005, 01:25 PM)
QUOTE(Liz Johnson @ Apr 22 2005, 06:32 AM)
...drinking sweet drinks out of cocktail glasses and calling them
something-tinis is really no different of an introdcution to the world
of cocktails than white zinfandel is to the world of wine.
participating
member
Posts: 365
Joined: 10-May 02 More like Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill, no?
Member No.:
2,325
--DW
Acutally for me it was peach wine coolers!
-------------------Elizabeth Johnson
Professional:
Food Editor, The Journal News and LoHud.com
Westchester, Rockland and Putnam: The Lower Hudson Valley.
Personal:
Sour Cherry Farm.
Rob Simmon
Apr 22 2005, 05:34 PM
Post #24
QUOTE(kvltrede @ Apr 19 2005, 03:08 PM)
From Ted Pincus' column in today's Chicago Sun-Times: "But please,
don't ever, ever try to take a fluid composition that is not four
heavenly ounces of genuine Beefeater, Boodles, Bombay or
Tanqueray and seven measured drops of imported dry vermouth, all
stirred gently with 10 ice cubes in a freezing cold stainless steel
shaker, and have the temerity to call it a martini..."
participating
member
Posts: 129
Joined: 27December 04
Member No.:
25,246
KOK
society donor
Posts: 227
Joined: 8-March
05
From: Washington
D.C. area
Member No.:
28,473
Seven measured drops of imported dry vermouth? I fear this guy has
never had a proper martini:
2 parts gin (Hendrick's, perhaps)
1 - 2 parts dry vermouth (I prefer made in the U.S.A. Vya)
a dash of orange bitters
lemon twist
shaken, not stirred
Apr 30 2005, 10:15 AM
Post #25
I'm a bit of a dinosaur and am in the camp of those that know a
martini is gin and vermouth. James Bond not withstanding, a vodka
martini is vodka and maybe vermouth in a martini glas, but calling it
a martini does not make it one.
Apple-tini, chocolate-tini, poison-tini. I think it was Mr Lincoln who
asked his cabinet how many legs a sheep would have if you called the
tail a leg. They all said five, but he said four as simply calling the tail
a leg didn't make it a leg.
"Everyone should believe in something. I believe I'll have another
drink". W.C. Fields
My 2 cents,
Kevin
-------------------DarkSide Member #005-03-07-06
MaxH
Apr 30 2005, 01:18 PM
Post #26
QUOTE(Rob Simmon @ Apr 22 2005, 04:34 PM)
I fear this guy has never had a proper martini:
participating
member
Posts: 365
Joined: 6December 04
From: Bay Area,
California
Member No.:
24,655
2 parts gin (Hendrick's, perhaps)
1 - 2 parts dry vermouth (I prefer made in the U.S.A. Vya)
a dash of orange bitters
lemon twist
shaken, not stirred</blockquote>
THERE we go. Thank you, thank you.
That is a classic martini at least by the history I've read. Not too dry,
hints of citrus flavor -- even a drop of Grand Marnier or other orange
presence will do in a pinch, scientific tests have shown -- and of
course lemon peel. (Pickled vegetables of whatever kind appeared
way later -- 1925? -- surely the true start of the variations and
corruptions now branded "Fauxtini.")
I hope that y'all who opine on the history have read, or at least will
read, Conrad's Book, published 1995 at or before the beginning of the
martini revival. Which is not that old -- the drink was well out of
style for a while, underscored in a 1990 novel, which I mentioned in
the amazon.com comments under the link.
Paraphrasing Hugh Johnson and Bob Thompson in the closing line of
The California Wine Book (New York: William Morrow, 1976; ISBN
0688030874)"
"I do not believe I ever have heard anyone speak of a vodka martini."
Prosit -- Max
slkinsey
May 1 2005, 08:52 AM
Post #27
QUOTE(MaxH @ Apr 30 2005, 04:18 PM)
QUOTE(Rob Simmon @ Apr 22 2005, 04:34 PM)
I fear this guy has never had a proper martini:
2 parts gin (Hendrick's, perhaps)
1 - 2 parts dry vermouth (I prefer made in the U.S.A. Vya)
a dash of orange bitters
lemon twist
shaken, not stirred
manager
Posts: 6,451
Joined: 13-May 03 THERE we go. Thank you, thank you.
From: New York,
That is a classic martini at least by the history I've read. . .
New York
Member No.:
Well, to pick a nit, I love the formula (2:1 or 1:1 with a dash of
8,505
orange bitters), but I always stir my martini as I don't like it to be
cloudy. Besides, I am given to understand that, if you use cracked ice,
the drink actually comes out colder if you stir rather than shake.
-------------------Samuel Lloyd Kinsey, aka "slkinsey"
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, New York and Fine Spirits and Cocktails Forums
slkinsey@eGullet.org
andiesenji
May 1 2005, 09:44 AM
Post #28
QUOTE(winesonoma @ Apr 19 2005, 02:48 PM)
QUOTE(mjr_inthegardens @ Apr 19 2005, 01:39 PM)
If I drink a sidecar out of a martini glass does that make it a
sidecartini?
society donor
Posts: 4,205
Joined: 20-April
04
From: Southern
California
Member No.:
17,399
That makes it a Sidecar. Properly drunk out of a sidecar attached to a
high powered motorcycle.
Actually, to be historically correct, the sidecar should be attached to a
1912 Triumph.
-------------------"It is said that one cannot judge a book by its cover. However, one
CAN judge an old cookbook by the number of stains, fingerprints,
dog-eared pages and hastily scribbled notes and clipped recipes it
contains."
"I'm not overweight, I'm undertall!"
MaxH
May 1 2005, 11:13 AM
Post #29
QUOTE(slkinsey @ May 1 2005, 07:52 AM)
QUOTE(MaxH @ Apr 30 2005, 04:18 PM)
...That is a classic martini at least by the history I've read. . .
participating member
Posts: 365
Joined: 6-December 04
From: Bay Area,
California
Member No.: 24,655
Well, to pick a nit, I love the formula (2:1 or 1:1 with a dash of
orange bitters), but I always stir my martini as I don't like it to
be cloudy. Besides, I am given to understand that, if you use
cracked ice, the drink actually comes out colder if you stir
rather than shake.
There's room for all kinds of variations, of course.
Cheers -- Max
-(Check out today's Sunday New York Times, Section T (style
magazine), Page 87 -- Surfing Foodies.)
Rob Simmon
May 3 2005, 06:21 PM
Post #30
QUOTE(slkinsey @ May 1 2005, 10:52 AM)
Well, to pick a nit, I love the formula (2:1 or 1:1 with a dash of
orange bitters), but I always stir my martini as I don't like it to
be cloudy. Besides, I am given to understand that, if you use
cracked ice, the drink actually comes out colder if you stir
rather than shake.
participating member
Posts: 129
Joined: 27-December 04
Member No.: 25,246
It's my understanding that the aeration of shaking a martini
enhances the botanicals in the gin (and likely the vermouth,
too.) Although I must admit I've never done a side-by-side
comparison. Therefore, I will conduct the experiment this
weekend, and report back. If anyone else tries, please share your
experiences!
This post has been edited by Rob Simmon: May 3 2005, 06:26
PM
http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=65978
2 Pages 1 2 >
Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+
A Martini by any other name..., what should we call those drinks?
tanabutler
legacy participant
Posts: 2,798
Joined: 17-June 03
Member No.:
9,198
Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic
Mar 29 2004, 08:20 PM
Post #1
[Editor's note: Since the Key Lime Martini thread was splitting into
two topics, I took the liberty of splitting it officially. The question of
what exactly constitutes a "martini" and what to call all those other
drinks begins with this comment by tana. -- JAZ]
Just because it's served in a martini glass doesn't mean it's a martini.
It's a marketing ploy to sell a Key Lime cocktail that people otherwise
might not order.
A martini is gin (and purists, of course, exclaim "Never vodka!"),
unsullied with anything except the barest vermouth. Diaphanous
vermouth.
All references to vermouth, of course, are spoken in droll terms, such
as "wave the vermouth bottle over the glass" or "stand across the
room with the vermouth bottle and whisper its name to the martini."
Martinis seem to have their own eclectic language, conceived by the
cult following they, above all cocktails, seem to enjoy. The only
conceivable additions are one of the following: a lemon twist, olives,
or cocktail onions. Anything else is considered an abomination.
I'm not even a martini lover, but even I know not to mess with the
formula for the classic cocktail of all time.
Please read this brief treatise on The Secrets of a Very Dry Martini.
Mr. Lucky is also kind enough to offer up this Advanced Martini
Making lesson. (Rather than out him, let me implore the author, an
eGulleteer friend of ours, to step from behind the curtain.) I've known
about Mr. Lucky since about 1995, and am proud to be one of the
early subscribers to his paper magazine. Don't forget to check out his
other cocktails.
Yes, martini glasses are groovy, and make things look cool, but KoolAid in a flute will never be champagne.
Pardon my bluntness: I've clearly been brainwashed by people who
know their martinis.
This post has been edited by JAZ: Apr 5 2004, 10:35 AM
beans
Mar 29 2004, 08:24 PM
Post #2
QUOTE (tanabutler @ Mar 29 2004, 10:20 PM)
Pardon my bluntness: I've clearly been brainwashed by people
who know their martinis.
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
8,543
drcocktail
Sure, now go change every bar, restaurant, club menu and the
manufacturers and retailers of cocktail glasses that call them martini
glasses.
tana, you haven't unearthed what hasn't been bickered about here on
the Gull before.
Mar 29 2004, 09:01 PM
Post #3
Ubetcha. No one feels more like Tana at the core of the issue than I.
For me, even vodka is reserved for Moscow Mules and Bloody
Marys.
Nonetheless, there is no escaping the evolution of the... English
language. It is clear that just as the term " cocktail " usurped and
overwhelmed other categories - soon to be SUBcategories, so has the
wildly popular word Martini. Yes, it once referred exclusively to a
gin, vermouth and bitters (yes, bitters) concoction, and in its latter
participating
years gin OR vodka hinted with vermouth, it has come to supercede
member
the term " cocktail ". Walk into any responsible bar and ask for a
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March Martini - and you'll still be asked, "gin or vodka". Probably won't be
enough vermouth put in, but it IS the basic drink you envision. Add
04
any descriptor to the beginning of the term, and the gates swing wide
Member No.:
open. That is because in popular parlance the word "martini" has
16,395
become synonymous with the term " cocktail ".
Don't fret! " Cocktail " consumed juleps, crustas, fizzes, fixes, shrubs,
slings, swizzles, sangarees, corpse revivers, and MANY others. This
is just the evolution of the language. Cocktails became the overall
category embracing all of the above, many of which actually
preceded it. So it remains today.
If you aren't just posturing -- if you really appreciate Martinis -- after
all, they were just one of MANY cocktails of the golden age of
cocktails, and certainly other cocktails of equal value from that same
period are still enjoyed, pristine, while others of value have been
unduly forgotten, if you know all this and still appreciate and
embrace the balance it presumes, then we agree and have recipes to
share. These formulae will never go away, no matter what the new
crop of drinkers call them. We can just hope they WILL call them!
When you speak of "traditional Martinis", you open yourself up to
queries about their brothers and sisters. It's hard to be HALF of a
traditionalist.
Whatever the terminology, and as Beans said, the umbrage is nothing
new, you can still have your drink - just don't assume the slippery
slope is, itself, anything BUT traditional!
(edited, as always, for typos.)
--Doc.
This post has been edited by drcocktail: Mar 29 2004, 09:22 PM
tanabutler
Mar 29 2004, 09:53 PM
Post #4
Thanks, Beans and Drcocktail.
The umbrage really isn't mine. Consider me a proofreader who spots
an error that might prove embarrassing were it to be published. I
didn't write the rules, I didn't write the copy. I'm just looking around,
legacy participant nervously, at the posse that might be showin' up any time, ready to
Posts: 2,798
lynch the idea of an (ahem) Key Lime Martini. Or any other of the
Joined: 17-June 03 libelous libations, the cockeyed cocktails, the bastardized brews
Member No.:
churned out in marketing lingo (and that's all it is
) today.
9,198
Over at my other hangout, Readerville, there is a thread called "Word
Abuse! Word Abuse!" and another one all about food. (Readerville is
specifically book-centric.) I can't count the number of times that I've
seen people go off about martinis. It just has come to be sacrilegious
to me that a martini could include things like apple or vanilla or
blackberry. They should call them "pot pourri cocktails." A martini
with fruit would go, in my opinion as a non-martini drinker, right
straight into the "Word Abuse" thread.
I think specificity in language is a very nice thing, especially when it
counterbalances corporate speak. Corporations employ marketing
people. Marketing people employ hype. Hype employs falsehoods. I
think it's very good when language gets real.
Or maybe I need a deprogrammer. I hope not.
This post has been edited by tanabutler: Mar 29 2004, 09:59 PM
beans
Mar 29 2004, 10:15 PM
Post #5
QUOTE (tanabutler @ Mar 29 2004, 11:53 PM)
The umbrage really isn't mine. Consider me a proofreader who
spots an error that might prove embarrassing were it to be
published.
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
8,543
I wrote that eye popping amount on the evolving cocktails listing
oodles of these new breeds of martinis, and I'm hardly embarrassed. I
doubt that many of the other "real" publishers of hard copy books on
the same/similar subject with their pink martinis, filled with fruit
purees are either.
Meh. Language, schmanguage. We all have our pet peeves and mine
are almost always the glaring split infinitive -- which, too, has
become common place and somewhat accepted as proper by many
writers today.
typos here tooooo!
wine not helping either....
This post has been edited by beans: Mar 29 2004, 10:28 PM
JAZ
Mar 29 2004, 10:23 PM
Post #6
QUOTE (tanabutler @ Mar 29 2004, 08:53 PM)
I think specificity in language is a very nice thing, especially
when it counterbalances corporate speak. Corporations employ
marketing people. Marketing people employ hype. Hype employs
falsehoods. I think it's very good when language gets real.
Or maybe I need a deprogrammer. I hope not.
manager
Posts: 2,045
Joined: 13January 03
From: San
Francisco
Member No.:
7,258
I think, Tana, that it's undeniable that the trend toward naming every
new drink a fill-in-the-blank martini is spurred by marketing.
"Martini" conveys elegance, sophistication and, well, coolness in a
way that "cocktail" does not. I don't think it's an accident of language
that everything is now a "martini" rather than, say, a daquiri or a
margarita, even though, in construction, the new drinks are often
closer to them than they are to the classic martini.
Yes, I wish that new drinks were not all called "martinis." No, I don't
think it's going to stop. I really like the creativity in bartending these
days (even if I personally don't like many of the drinks) and if
usurping the name "martini" has helped that trend, then I (very
reluctantly) have to say that it's not all bad.
This is a very new attitude on my part. A very big part of me still
wants a martini to be gin, vermouth and bitters. Period. As a lover of
the language, I really, really wish that new drinks had the great names
of older drinks -- how can a "fill-in-the-blank martini" compete with a
Corpse Reviver, a Satan's Whiskers, a Monkey's Gland, a Blood and
Sand? When I create new drinks, half the fun is coming up with a cool
name.
But, marketing rears its head in the cocktail world, just as it does
everywhere else. Is a Key Lime Martini, language-wise, any worse
than a Mexican Caesar Salad? I've come to the conclusion that this is
one battle I'm not going to win. It doesn't mean that I'm going be
calling my new drinks "martinis," but it does mean that I'm over my
outrage. But, believe me, I do understand your point. You're not alone.
PS Reading Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct totally
changed my attitude about "word abuse."
-------------------Janet A. Zimmerman, aka "JAZ"
Dean, eGullet Culinary Institute
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, Fine Spirits and Cocktails
jzimmerman@eGullet.org
drcocktail
Mar 29 2004, 10:36 PM
Post #7
Ummm... ok, all of this seems to avoid and ignore the concept of the
evoloution of the language, doesn't it? Thermos. Scotch tape. Triple
Sec. Websters now recognises vodka martinis, so what's your point?
Bring on the "posse". Whatever they presume to know about
etymology or cocktails, it is evident that, they are behind the times if
you are characterizing their position correctly. And of course all
linguists know dictionaries, by their nature, lag behind the evolving
language that drives them. Again, 'cocktail' consumed previous
categories that were once its equals (and in the case of Slings, it's
participating
father). Now, as the "martini" in the popular Martini Cocktail
member
consumes previous categories that once contained it...well, what IS
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March your point? The typically revisionist stance is that the "Martini" is
simply gin and vermouth. This is laughable. The martini in its history
04
has embraced sweet vermouth, dry vermouth, old tom gin, genever
Member No.:
gin, dry gin, vodka, olives, lemons, aromatic bitters, orange bitters...
16,395
but now it's this thing that can't be changed, from its current
incarnation, the last 40 years of its 140 year history?! Oh please,
bring on the "posse."
OR begin to understand what's really happening and put your energy
into more relevant (cocktail) issues. Orange bitters. Fresh juices and
ingredients, evolution.
(Sorry to be so stern, but I've been at this -- in depth -- longer than
you {or the posse} were alive) --Doc.
rancho_gordo
Mar 30 2004, 08:19 AM
Post #8
QUOTE (JAZ @ Mar 29 2004, 09:23 PM)
But, marketing rears its head in the cocktail world, just as it does
everywhere else. Is a Key Lime Martini, language-wise, any
worse than a Mexican Caesar Salad?
Isn't the Caeser Salad from Mexico?
participating
-------------------member
Visit beautiful Rancho Gordo: ¡Cuanto le Gusta!
Posts: 656
Joined: 13-January
04
From: Napa,
California
Member No.:
14,551
drcocktail
Mar 30 2004, 08:27 AM
Post #9
Created IN Mexico, but not Mexican. Actually it was invented by an
Italian in Tijuana for the Hollywood resort crowd down there in 1924,
or so it is said.
--Doc.
participating
member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March
04
Member No.:
16,395
tanabutler
Mar 30 2004, 08:38 AM
Post #10
QUOTE (rancho_gordo @ Mar 30 2004, 08:19 AM)
Isn't the Caeser Salad from Mexico?
iSi, si, si!
legacy participant
Posts: 2,798
Joined: 17-June 03
Member No.:
9,198
Well, sort of and mostly. The Caesar salad was the creation of an
Italian immigrant to Tijuana, Caesar Cardini, back in 1924. Julia
Child is said to have eaten one of his salads at the source. Cardini and
his brother later founded the Cardini line of salad dressings.
God love Google.
beans
Mar 30 2004, 09:14 AM
Post #11
doc, tanabutler, rancho, et al.
Martini wars again revived? Surely one of the following will suit as
ample battle grounds to hammer it all out!
legacy participant Direct link to the eG Martini Discussion Index:
Posts: 2,836
http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showto...=0&#entry538804
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
Or here is a cut and paste:
8,543
QUOTE
An eG Index of Martini Links
Martinis
Gin Taste Tests, Which one for your martini?
The Perfect Martini
Drinking Gin
Martini Controversy
And you shake your tail how?
Best Gin for Martinis?
Martini and Vodka Tasting Discussion
Super Premium Vodkas
Vodka (as far as tasting it)
How to Taste Vodka?
Vodka, Is there really a difference?
Vermouth
Vermouth, Whilst out & about
Glassware
Why Martini Glasses?
eGCI
JAZ's Classic Cocktails
Classic Cocktails Q&A
Evolving Cocktails, Part I
(covering the Martini Renaissance, Seeking Out Flavor, Cocktail
Trends, Garnish, Bar Equipment and a Measurement Reference)
Evolving Cocktails, Part II
(covering Glassware, Recipes & Techniques and some great
Resources)
Evolving Cocktails Q&A
Extra Special
eGullet Q&A with Dale DeGroff
(inspiration for the opening quote and class, Evolving Cocktails)
Cheers!
edit: Links!
This post has been edited by beans: Mar 30 2004, 09:15 AM
drcocktail
Mar 30 2004, 09:38 AM
Post #12
Nope, I'm done, or as we used to like to say in the early days, [/rant].
--Doc.
Edit: Oh, one other thing, as far as I can tell, Morton's Key Lime
Martini is a LOT like Katie's recipe, but it adds half & half (the dairy
kind). --D.
This post has been edited by drcocktail: Mar 30 2004, 09:45 AM
participating
member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March
04
Member No.:
16,395
beans
Mar 30 2004, 09:43 AM
Post #13
QUOTE (drcocktail @ Mar 30 2004, 11:38 AM)
Nope, I'm done, or as we used to like to say in the early days,
[/rant].
--Doc.
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03 Aw crap. Just when it was getting to be fun!
Member No.:
8,543
rancho_gordo
Mar 30 2004, 09:43 AM
Post #14
QUOTE (beans @ Mar 30 2004, 08:14 AM)
doc, tanabutler, rancho, et al.
Martini wars again revived? Surely one of the following will
suit as ample battle grounds to hammer it all out!
I'm a lover not a fighter!
participating
The comment was made:
member
Posts: 656
Joined: 13-January QUOTE
04
Is a Key Lime Martini, language-wise, any worse than a
From: Napa,
Mexican Caesar Salad?
California
Member No.:
14,551
I was just pointing out that the Caeser was first made in Mexico.
So was the Martini invented in Key West?
I think I'm on topic and not particpating in a Martini war.
-------------------Visit beautiful Rancho Gordo: ¡Cuanto le Gusta!
beans
Mar 30 2004, 09:48 AM
Post #15
Weren't Key Limes from the West Indies?
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
8,543
raych77
participating
member
Posts: 24
Joined: 6November 03
Member No.:
13,083
beans
Mar 30 2004, 09:56 AM
Post #16
So sorry to have started a war! In my defense - I did admit my
ignorance in my first post. Wait - is that a defense? Hee hee!
Anyways... lets all calm down, drink two, three, maybe even four of
the key lime BEVERAGES and relax! Who cares what ya call 'em? I
plan to say screw the martini glass, too small, and throw mine in a
nice high ball and go to town!
Meet you all at the bar!
Raych
Mar 30 2004, 10:00 AM
Post #17
QUOTE (raych77 @ Mar 30 2004, 11:56 AM)
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
8,543
So sorry to have started a war! In my defense - I did admit my
ignorance in my first post. Wait - is that a defense? Hee hee!
Anyways... lets all calm down, drink two, three, maybe even four
of the key lime BEVERAGES and relax! Who cares what ya call
'em? I plan to say screw the martini glass, too small, and throw
mine in a nice high ball and go to town!
Meet you all at the bar!
Raych
No worries Raych.
Bickering about what constitutes a martini has, and always will be,
hashed and rehashed among cocktail enthusiasts -- and on no fault of
your own!
Same squabble, in a new thread.
typos!
This post has been edited by beans: Mar 30 2004, 10:02 AM
tanabutler
Mar 30 2004, 10:39 AM
Post #18
Hey, you kids! Get offa my lawn! Darn hooligans. (Drcocktail, I can't
believe you've been doing this longer than I've been alive. I am
solidly on the shady side of 40.)
legacy participant
Posts: 2,798
Joined: 17-June 03
Member No.:
9,198
drcocktail
Mar 30 2004, 10:52 AM
Post #19
I know. I've since perused your website with interest. It was a
particularly boneheaded thing for me to say. It's the curmugeonly
way. I wear a button that says "Ask me about this button" and when
they do, I club 'em and drag 'em off to the cave. Is that so WRONG?
Nice design work, by the way. That's my regular paycheck too.
--Doc.
participating
member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March
04
Member No.:
16,395
drcocktail
Mar 30 2004, 10:59 AM
Post #20
QUOTE (beans @ Mar 30 2004, 09:50 AM)
QUOTE (drcocktail @ Mar 30 2004, 11:38 AM)
Edit: Oh, one other thing, as far as I can tell, Morton's Key
Lime Martini is a LOT like Katie's recipe, but it adds half &
half (the dairy kind). --D.
participating
member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March
04
Member No.:
16,395
Unfortunately, Charbay isn't available everywhere.
Right, and that would be a difference. I don't think Morton's uses it some other citrus spirit - they aren't saying. They DID specify Licor
43, though.
Personally I use Scope, T.J. Swann Easy Nights, and Kaopectate. It
tastes like hell, but the color's right!
--Doc.
balmagowry
Apr 1 2004, 02:41 PM
Post #21
QUOTE (tanabutler @ Mar 29 2004, 11:53 PM)
Thanks, Beans and Drcocktail.
legacy participant
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 13February 04
Member No.:
15,555
The umbrage really isn't mine. Consider me a proofreader who
spots an error that might prove embarrassing were it to be
published. I didn't write the rules, I didn't write the copy. I'm just
looking around, nervously, at the posse that might be showin' up
any time, ready to lynch the idea of an (ahem) Key Lime
Martini. Or any other of the libelous libations, the cockeyed
cocktails, the bastardized brews churned out in marketing lingo
(and that's all it is
) today.
Over at my other hangout, Readerville, there is a thread called
"Word Abuse! Word Abuse!" and another one all about food.
(Readerville is specifically book-centric.) I can't count the
number of times that I've seen people go off about martinis. It
just has come to be sacrilegious to me that a martini could
include things like apple or vanilla or blackberry. They should
call them "pot pourri cocktails." A martini with fruit would go,
in my opinion as a non-martini drinker, right straight into the
"Word Abuse" thread.
I think specificity in language is a very nice thing, especially
when it counterbalances corporate speak. Corporations employ
marketing people. Marketing people employ hype. Hype
employs falsehoods. I think it's very good when language gets
real.
Or maybe I need a deprogrammer. I hope not.
If you do, so do I - and I am a martini drinker. At least... I thought I
was... but I have to confess that I do sometimes drink the vodka
(per)version and had quite forgotten it wasn't orthodox.
At any
rate, though I too am fanatical in proofreading mode, I have tried to
learn to pick my battles; which is why I kept mum on this point. As
someone said up-thread (and perhaps down-thread as well - when will
I learn to hold off until I've seen the whole thread?
), it's gone and
gotten itself too prevalent to be fought down; I figure if I keep my
own utterance pure, and clear of my own pet peeves (and I got plenty
of 'em), then at least I'm doing some of my bit.
Of course, there are a few howlers that will spur me to riposte. BTW,
the split infinitive ain't among 'em; there is nothing intrinsically
wrong with a split infinitive. That is one of those arbitrary artificial
rules that were imposed in the 19th century by old what's-'is-name
(damn, what IS his name? my mind is slipping) because he felt there
weren't enough grammar rules to fill up a curriculum. Of course, now
we all avoid them - even I do - because we're not used to considering
them OK, and they sound weird to us. But wrong... they ain't. And
while I'm at it (oooh, look, Ms. Pick-Your-Battles is ranting after
all!), here's the one I resent most: Just where does old what's-'is-name
get off outlawing ending sentences with prepositions? That one really
frosts me. Go read Samuel Richardson and Jane Austen amd Henry
Fielding: their work is full of dangling prepositions, and they are one
of its greatest charms. Well, the hell with it. If it's good enough for
Richardson, it's good enough for me. I'll go ahead and dangle my
prepositions whenever I damn well please.
Whew. We now return you to... where were we? Oh - yes - if it really
doesn't bother you to do so, go ahead and call it a Martini. I couldn't
do it, meself, but that's me.
Um. Now, about my own sin... what SHOULD I call it if I make it with vodka...?
EDIT to add: There. I knew it. Coulda saved myself the trouble: JAZ
has already said most of it - more succinctly, too. (But I stand by the
grammatic rant.
)
This post has been edited by balmagowry: Apr 1 2004, 02:44 PM
-------------------balmagowry
AKA Lisa Grossman
"I'm inclined to dispute Adam's statement...."
- L.G., at the suggestion of A.B.
Splificator
participating
member
Posts: 187
Joined: 4-February
04
From: Brooklyn
Member No.:
15,117
Apr 1 2004, 04:04 PM
Post #22
If you'll pardon a passing stranger for butting in, a Martini made with
vodka is, or at least was for a time, known as a "Kangaroo." Not that
any bartender on earth will recognize such an order.
The Esquire Drinks Database
-------------------David Wondrich
"Little drops of whisky,
Poured on broken ice;
Little grains of sugar,
Of lemon peel a slice;
Just a dash of Angostura bitters, pray!
That's what we call a cocktail
In the USA"
(Traditional.)
drcocktail
Apr 1 2004, 04:08 PM
Post #23
Some Euro bartenders do. With Plymouth gin, it was also known as a
Marguerite at the beginning of the 20th century.
--Doc.
participating
member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March
04
Member No.:
16,395
balmagowry
Apr 1 2004, 05:36 PM
Post #24
QUOTE (Splificator @ Apr 1 2004, 06:04 PM)
If you'll pardon a passing stranger for butting in, a Martini made
with vodka is, or at least was for a time, known as a "Kangaroo."
Not that any bartender on earth will recognize such an order.
That's got to be something of a nomenclatural tin can on the tail of its
self-respect... but thanks. Maybe I'll just switch back to gin.
legacy participant
Kangaroo - I wonder why.
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 13February 04
-------------------Member No.:
balmagowry
15,555
AKA Lisa Grossman
"I'm inclined to dispute Adam's statement...."
- L.G., at the suggestion of A.B.
JAZ
Apr 2 2004, 07:22 PM
Post #25
QUOTE (Splificator @ Apr 1 2004, 03:04 PM)
If you'll pardon a passing stranger for butting in, a Martini made
with vodka is, or at least was for a time, known as a "Kangaroo."
Not that any bartender on earth will recognize such an order.
manager
Posts: 2,045
Joined: 13January 03
From: San
Francisco
Member No.:
7,258
beans
We love it when passing strangers butt in, but beware! you might like
it so much you never leave.
Welcome!
-------------------Janet A. Zimmerman, aka "JAZ"
Dean, eGullet Culinary Institute
Manager, eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters
Host, Fine Spirits and Cocktails
jzimmerman@eGullet.org
Apr 2 2004, 08:36 PM
Post #26
QUOTE (JAZ @ Apr 2 2004, 09:22 PM)
QUOTE (Splificator @ Apr 1 2004, 03:04 PM)
legacy participant
Posts: 2,836
Joined: 16-May 03
Member No.:
8,543
If you'll pardon a passing stranger for butting in, a Martini
made with vodka is, or at least was for a time, known as a
"Kangaroo." Not that any bartender on earth will recognize
such an order.
We love it when passing strangers butt in, but beware! you might
like it so much you never leave.
Welcome!
And God bless those that make their first eG post in the Cocktails
forum!
Gary Regan
Apr 3 2004, 09:38 AM
Post #27
Sorry I haven't been around--far too busy trying to come up with a
new Martini for e-gullet . . . What's that? You wanted a cocktail?
What's the difference?
Yes, I'm with Doc on this one. The English language just keeps on
evolving. Otherwise there'd be no room for words such as cocktailian,
now, would there?
participating
member
Posts: 119
Joined: 12-March
04
From: New York
Member No.:
16,135
-------------------"I want to do something with more security, more respectability, and
less narcissism, so I think bartending is a good place to start." Jeannie
Berlin playing Crystal, a hooker, in “Into the Spirit.”
Splificator
participating member
Posts: 187
Joined: 4-February 04
From: Brooklyn
Member No.: 15,117
Apr 5 2004, 06:58 AM
Post #28
Thanks folks for the warm welcome--much appreciated!
I'm with Doc and Gary on this one: as much as it galls me to see
a dessert-in-a-glass walking around calling itself a Martini,
that's the way language goes. In the early 1600s, "Punch" meant
arrack, lime or lemon juice, sugar, water and spices. Period. In
the early 1800s, "Cocktail" meant liquor, sugar, water and
bitters. Period. I've got no problem calling something with
brandy, rum, maraschino, lemon juice, orange juice, sugar,
water and champagne a Punch, and something with brandy,
lemon juice and Cointreau a Cocktail, so I figure my right to
complain about the misapplication of "Martini" is pretty much
forfeit--taking the long view, anyway. (Secretly: a Martini is gin
and vermouth, period. Everybody knows that deep down.)
And while I too have heard (on Drinkboy, I believe) that some
bartenders "in Europe" will respond appropriately to the order
of a "Kangaroo," it's one of those things that must be confirmed
by ocular evidence--in other words, "show me."
--Dave "Splificator" Wondrich
-------------------David Wondrich
"Little drops of whisky,
Poured on broken ice;
Little grains of sugar,
Of lemon peel a slice;
Just a dash of Angostura bitters, pray!
That's what we call a cocktail
In the USA"
(Traditional.)
drcocktail
Apr 5 2004, 08:01 AM
Post #29
Well howdy, Splif! Your name sounds vaguely familiar. And I
KNOW you meant to whisper "gin, vermouth, & bitters!" No
worries, hang out with us geniuses and we'll get you on track.
--Doc.
participating member
Posts: 135
Joined: 22-March 04
Member No.: 16,395
balmagowry
Apr 5 2004, 08:37 AM
Post #30
QUOTE (drcocktail @ Apr 5 2004, 11:01 AM)
Well howdy, Splif! Your name sounds vaguely familiar.
I still wanna know if he's a saffron-colored son of a doormat.
EDIT: OMG, this is my 500th post!
legacy participant
This post has been edited by balmagowry: Apr 5 2004, 08:41
Posts: 1,482
AM
Joined: 13-February 04
Member No.: 15,555
-------------------balmagowry
AKA Lisa Grossman
"I'm inclined to dispute Adam's statement...."
(http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=40264&st=0)
Party of Two
by Christopher Orr
Only at TNR Online | Post date 08.09.05
Printer friendly
E-mail this article
The important thing is the rhythm," the man at the bar is explaining, cocktail shaker in
hand. "You always have rhythm in your shaking. Now, a Manhattan you shake to fox-trot
time. A Bronx, to two-step time. But a dry martini you always shake to waltz time." He's
joined a few moments later by his wife and his wire-haired terrier. The former inquires
how much he's had to drink and is told he's on his sixth martini. As she downs her first,
she flags down a waiter: "Will you bring me five more martinis and line them up right
here?"
Thus was the wide world introduced to Nick and Nora Charles in 1934's The Thin Man,
starring William Powell and Myrna Loy. Witty, sophisticated, and pleasantly pickled, the
pair would sleuth their way through a total of six films, the last five of which have just
been released on DVD for the first time. (A short-lived 1950s TV spinoff starring Peter
Lawford is better left forgotten.) As Nick and Nora, Powell and Loy subverted the classic
detective film with comic aplomb and presented an impressively modern vision of
marriage as an association of equals. They were also cinema's most glamorous
dipsomaniacs, a reminder of a bygone era when Hollywood could still imagine that
charm, taste, and good humor might go hand-in-hand with the copious consumption of
distilled spirits.
The Thin Man was adapted from the Dashiell Hammett mystery of the same name (Nora
is to some degree modeled after Hammett's longtime love Lillian Hellman), but director
W.S. Van Dyke and married co-writers Albert Hackett and Frances Goodrich leavened
the novel's hard-boiled tone and grim wit. The result is less a detective story with
occasional flashes of humor than a light comedy set against a backdrop of murder. Nick
Charles is a former police detective of considerable fame who has retired in order to
"manage" (i.e., spend) the wealth of his heiress wife Nora. He has little desire to return to
crime-solving, but after an acquaintance is murdered he finds himself back in the thick of
things, much to Nora's delight. The scenario repeats throughout the sequels: Again and
again, lethal misfortune befalls someone in the Charleses' circle, and missus prods mister
to get to the bottom of it--with her help, of course, and that of their terrier, Asta. In the
course of their investigations, they match wits, and frequently highballs, with the full
spectrum of 1930s cinematic types, from high (Nora's stuffy society relatives) to low
(gamblers, jazz musicians, and a parade of amiable crooks with names like "Fingers" and
"Creeps," few of whom begrudge Nick the fact that he has at one time or another sent
them up the river).
The mysteries themselves tend to be
somewhat disappointing--needlessly
convoluted, with solutions that often
hinge on a last minute revelation or
"clue" of dubious import (for example,
whether or not someone announced
themselves before opening a door).
Rather, the chief pleasure of the films is
in spending time with Nick and Nora as
they tease, cajole, and romance their
way toward the conclusion. Powell and
Loy, who made a total of 16 movies
together, have an inimitable chemistry,
easygoing and companionable yet
perpetually alert to any opportunity for
a loving tweak. Unlike Hepburn and
Tracy, whose onscreen partnerships are
never more than a step away from open sexual warfare, Powell and Loy get along quite
well, thank you very much, their disagreements rarely occasioning more than a wrinkled
nose or wry putdown. ("How'd you like Grant's Tomb?" Nick asks, having sent Nora
there in a cab to keep her out of harm's way. "It's lovely," she replies. "I'm having a copy
made for you.") Indeed, the Thin Man movies have an almost revolutionary cinematic
view of marriage as neither a goal nor an obstacle, but rather a state of being--and a
happy, openly romantic one at that.
But these days what is perhaps most striking about Nick and Nora is not their easy blend
of comedy and drama or their balanced sexual dynamic, but rather their carefree
booziness. In modern American movies, the consumption of alcohol is limited largely to
fraternity pledges, lost souls, and the occasional Billy Bob Thornton character. The idea
that discerning, well-adjusted adults would on occasion choose to have a few drinks in
the company of like-minded friends is almost heretical unless it is accompanied by
suitably catastrophic consequences--a fist-fight, adulterous affair, or car accident.
Some would argue, no doubt, that any onscreen hint that drinking can be fun must be
avoided for the sake of the children--though how this problem is solved by limiting
portrayals of the activity to plastered high-schoolers and collegians is not quite clear.
Sadly, I suspect Hollywood's dim view of sociable drinking has just as much to do with
its dim view of sociability. The activity that accompanies alcohol consumption most
frequently, after all, is not wife-swapping or vehicular homicide but rather conversation,
and conversation of a particular kind: banter, chitchat, idle musing, or witty repartee.
With relatively few exceptions, American movies today have little use for talk that has no
purpose beyond itself, that doesn't move the plot forward or reveal some hidden character
trait but rather consists merely of two or more people taking pleasure in one another's
company and inviting us to do the same, as the Charleses do with such genial ease. G. K.
Chesterton once wrote that "Americans do not need drink to inspire them to do anything,
though they do sometimes, I think, need a little for the deeper and more delicate purpose
of teaching them how to do nothing." Were he alive today, I suspect he would find this
observation more true than ever.
In their comical bibitory excess, Nick and Nora Charles are not realistic drinkers, of
course, any more than they are realistic detectives--though if that's the standard to which
we intend to hold Hollywood we might just as well shut the place down. They don't slur
or stumble or speak too loudly. They are every bit as charming after a few drinks as they
were before, perhaps a touch more so. As a result, spending 90 minutes or so with them is
less like being around drunks than it is like being a little tipsy oneself. Bottoms up.