Archive for the ‘History’ Category

Better Late Than Never

Saturday, September 24th, 2011

The current issue of The Social History of Alcohol and Drugs has a review of Brewing Battles. The book was published over three and a half years ago but such delays are fairly common in academic reviewing.

If you want to read the full review you must be subscribed to the journal. If you have any interest in the topic I would encourage you to do that.

Martin Stack reviewed both Brewing Battles and Maureen Ogle’s Ambitious Brew. Here is an excerpt:

“Mittelman’s approach is quite different. She provides a more complete chronological overview, beginning decades before Ogle does. While she doesn’t spend as much time as does Ogle in connecting changes in the beer and the brewing industry to broader cultural and social developments, she is excellent on two key topics that Ogle downplays, regulation and worker-brewery relations. Mittelman examines thoroughly the history of the complex regulatory environment connecting beer, breweries, and the state and federal government, highlighting how and why this set of interconnections has changed over time. … Mittelman makes a significant contribution in her detailed discussions of how breweries and the federal government set about to develop a post-repeal regulatory system. …

Another topic Mittelman handles very well concerns worker-brewery relations. This discussion draws from some of her earlier work, and she provides some excellent analysis here. Of particular import is her discussion of brewery workers during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; she notes that brewery workers, as did workers in many industries, focused too much on their internal struggles. For brewing this proved particularly short sighted, as workers and owners did not ‘form a self-conscious alliance … to combat prohibition forces … until 1913.’ (p. 61)

Together, the Mittelman and Ogle books bring much needed attention to an understudied topic. … As a student of this industry, I greatly prefer Mittelman’s book.”

It is never too late for such praise.

 

A Time To Break Silence

Tuesday, August 9th, 2011

I have been doing research on Anne Bennett, wife of John Bennett, president of Union Theological Seminary from 1963-1970. Anne was a committed anti-Vietnam War activist. Her husband was a founding member of Clergy and Laity Concerned. Martin Luther King, Jr. was also a founding member.

In 1967 he gave this speech to a meeting of the group at Riverside Church, New York City. The speech is amazing and makes me realize, once again, what a great man he was and what a loss his assassination was.

King showed tremendous courage in speaking out against the Vietnam War. I wonder where such a leader is today. We deeply need someone who can connect the issues of militarism and imperialism to issues of social justice.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Bad Deal

Monday, August 1st, 2011

I just watched this video from the Obama campaign about the debt ceiling deal and wrote this email in response.

I am sorry but I am not buying it. The Republicans got every thing and the American people got nothing. The President should have insisted on a clean up or down vote on the debt ceiling and if that failed used the 14th Amendment. I am seriously considering withdrawing my support. I worked very hard for his election in 2008 and donated more money than I ever have to anyone. I am very disappointed.

Alcohol Regulation

Tuesday, July 5th, 2011

Another interesting panel at the ADHS conference was “Regulating Alcohol in the 20th Century.” W. Scott Haine spoke on “Vichy’s Greatest Victory: Liquor Licensing and Urban Renewal in Occupied France, 1940-1944 and its enduring legacy.” The Vichy government waged a battle against cafes and aperitifs. The government passed seven different laws concerning liquor during the war. A 1943 zoning law sought to cure under population that the government felt was caused by alcoholism and the social life of the cafe. They wanted to move people from the city to the country. Interestingly when the Vichy government fell, the Resistance governments continued the same restrictive zoning and social policies.

Dan Malleck’s talk was on “Viewing and rev-viewing the public space: Ontario, 1927-1944.” Following the end of Prohibition in Ontario, the Liquor Control Board of Ontario licensed hotels to provide alcohol. Hotels were the only place people could drink. He provided very interesting maps that showed both the establishments that were licensed and those that weren’t as well as the surrounding neighborhoods.

William Rorabaugh spoke on “U.S. Alcohol Control after Prohibition”. The paper was really about the three-tier system of liquor production, distribution, and retail sale. This system grew out of the 21st amendment and is still the basic system of organization for alcoholic beverages. Washington is one of eighteen states that have a State Liquor Control Board.  Recently Costco has sued to be allowed to bypass the three-tier system and sell directly to consumers.

The three-tier system works very well for large alcohol producers and has created a powerful trade association, the National Beer Wholesalers Association.  Some craft brewers feel that the system prevents them from having equal access to shelf space and widespread distribution. At the same time, other craft brewers who have expanded nationally are pulling back. Dogfish Head Brewing, located in Delaware, pulled out of four states because the brewer was concerned with meeting demand while maintaining quality. Several other craft brewers have taken similar action. Voluntarily giving up shelf space and market share is not something that either regional or large brewers would have done during the intensely competitive atmosphere of the late 20th century.

Craft beers, however, are a niche product and withdrawing from some markets could increase demand for the product. Since the brewers have framed their market withdrawals within a context of a determination to maintain quality, these actions could also increase the commitment that craft beer drinkers have to the product.

For more on brewers withdrawing from markets  click here.

Connecticut Trail of Taxes

Friday, July 1st, 2011

The June/July issue of Yankee Brew News had two stories about Connecticut brewing that I think illuminate the shape of the craft brewing industry today.  On May 11, the Connecticut Senate passed a bill establishing the Connecticut Brewery Trail. In June, the House passed it and the trail will go into effect today. Connecticut already has a wine trail. The marketing of breweries as tourist sites is an important part of the development of craft beer.  As a niche market with deeply loyal customers, the chance for these customers to see where their favorite beer is produced as well as acquire paraphernalia from that brewery is very appealing.

Also today, the liquor industry in the state faces an increase in the sale tax as well as a floor tax that will apply to what retail stores already have in inventory. Yankee Brew News claims that these new taxes represent a 20 percent increase. Many other produces are also facing tax increases including tobacco. For more on these taxes click here.

Craft beer is a highly fashionable upscale product that also holds a special place in both the federal and state government’s treasuries. I have been surprised that more states have not already turned to alcohol beverages to shore up their deficit budgets.

Alcohol and the Modern State

Thursday, June 30th, 2011

Last week, I attended the Sixth Biennial Meeting of the Alcohol and Drug History Society. It was in Buffalo. I am a founding member of this organization, which was originally the Alcohol Temperance History group (ATHG). There were many nice people at the conference and many of the papers were excellent.

I chaired a panel on “Alcohol and the Modern State.” Brewing Battles deals with the relationship between the United States government and the brewing industry, that is probably why they choose me.

There were four papers and all were excellent.  Noelle Plack spoke on “Wine, equality and taxation in the French Revolution.” Prior to the Revolution, there was a very high indirect tax on wine. Using the rhetoric of equality common people fought for the abolition of the tax.  The taxes were reinstated between 1798 and 1804 but were much lower.

James Sumner’s paper was “Chemists in the brew house: Excise policy, chemical authority and the value of drink, 1790-1820. “ He looked at debates about how to determine the amount of alcohol in beer and what scientific methods to use. The English taxed beer indirectly and were looking for the most efficient, least corruptible way to maintain the tax and the revenue it generated.

Graceiela Marquez Colin and Gabriela Recio spoke on “Politicians and Brewers in Mexico: Taxing Beer in the 1920s.”  By 1899, five firms controlled 63% of Mexico’s beer production. Prior to the Mexican Revolution beer did not pay the stamp tax that other alcoholic beverages did. The Mexican Revolution halted national distribution of beer.  In 1912, the revolutionaries imposed taxes on beer for the first time and taxes rose five times between1912- 1922.  In response, the brewers formed a trade association that sought tariff protection, lower taxes, and a labor code.

Jon Miller gave a talk on “Petroleum Nasby and the Comedy of Excise Taxes.”  David Locke, a journalist, created Nasby as a fictional, satirical figure.  Nasby drank whiskey straight and was a Democrat. Locke used Nasby to promote support of the Republican Party and its’ polices. One of the policies he promoted the most was the excise tax on liquor. A modern comparison to Nasby would be Stephen Colbert who pretends to be a conservative Republican. Nasby was very popular and a favorite of President Lincoln.

All four papers reveal the centrality of liquor taxation to states and their need for revenue. They also reveal the different responses that varying interest groups have to liquor taxation.  In France, common people sought a reduction in taxes using the rhetoric of the revolution. In America, in the 1790s, western distillers rebelled against the imposition of a tax on whiskey.

Brewers in American, when faced with an excise tax to finance the Civil War, responded in a similar way to the Mexican brewers. They organized a trade association and sought amelioration within the tax system.The tax in the United States provided many patronage positions and this is one aspect of why Locke via Nasby supported the liquor excise. By looking at the relationship between states and liquor taxation, all the papers demonstrate how entangled liquor is in every aspect of modern life.

Containing Beer

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2011

On Saturday, I had dinner at Egg, a great restaurant in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. With the meal, I ordered a Narragansett Bock, 16 oz., and my husband had a Sly Fox Pale Ale. The restaurant didn’t have any beer on tap.  The two beers came in cans which surprised me. I know that some craft brewers have been producing beer in cans and Oskar Blues Brewery only produces beer in cans and has done so since 2002. ( For an article about canned beer and session beers, another trend in craft brewing, click here.)

Narragansett is an old brewery that has been recreated as a craft beer. At one time, Narragansett, based in Rhode Island, was a top selling beer in New England. Falstaff Beer bought the company in 1966. The brewery closed in 1981. In 2005, Rhode Island investors purchased the brand.

Usually when I go out to eat, I drink whatever beer is on tap and the same is true when I go to a bar.  I probably retain the negative association of bad beer with cans. The Narragansett Bock was okay but there really wasn’t anything special about it. My husband said the same thing about the Sly Fox.

To really evaluate if drinking from a can makes a difference in taste, I would have to drink the bock from a bottle or on tap and then compare.

A few weeks before the dinner at Egg, we went to Yankee stadium to see the Yankees play the Red Sox. Our seats were not that great and far away from any food or beer. It was hot so I got a Miller Lite – only 110 calories – in a plastic bottle. Miller Lite is a terrible beer and mostly tastes cold and wet. It would be impossible for the plastic to make it worse.

It is funny that soda comes in all different containers and no one thinks that   from a can instead of a bottle makes it taste worse. The new cans that craft brewers are using are not supposed to affect the taste at all and are lighter and easier to recycle.

I still think that the association of bad, macro beer with cans will limit how many craft brewers embrace brewing in cans.

Beer Cookery

Friday, May 13th, 2011

While doing some research for my new book, I came across a review, in the New York Times of Beer Cookery by Michael Harrison. It was  published in 1954. “From England comes, not so oddly, “Beer Cookery.” There recipes are inclined to be of the squeeze-of-this and a pinch-of-that variety. They sacrifice accuracy to breeziness. And I believe than most people are looking for improved techniques rather than warmed-over witticisms.”

Obviously, the reviewer did not like the book very much. I thought it was interesting that the cookbook is from 1954 since, at least in America, we think of that period as the dark days  before craft beer appeared. Cooking with Bud is not appealing. If anyone has a copy of the book let me know.

Links on the Chain

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011

On Saturday, I went to Hartford to attend a Rally to Save the American Dream in support of the workers in Wisconsin. The best part of the demonstration was singing Solidarity Forever.  The events in Wisconsin seemed to have revived the labor movement, which has been quiescent for the last twenty years or so.

The past few months I have been wondering why there were no demonstrations in America over things like the failure to extend unemployment benefits to the 99ers, the war in Afghanistan, and the extension of the tax cuts for the rich.

Governor Walker’s naked power grab seems to have been the straw that broke the camel’s back and people are finally responding. One of the signs at the demonstration Saturday said Unions Make Us Strong. I really believe that. What you win in struggle is much harder to take away.

In such an overtly capitalistic country as America there must be a counter veiling force. Because we no longer make anything, it is much harder to have a viable labor movement. The low paying service jobs at McDonald and Wal-Mart’s have seemed impervious to organizing. The country needs a strong, vital labor movement that will stand for social justice.

The title of this post is from Phil Ochs  Links on the Chain, which explores the less than perfect record of mainstream unions toward people of color, women and gays. It also lays out the case for unions perfectly.
For more information about the Rally to Save the American Dream go to MoveOn.org

Links on The Chain

 

The Interview

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011

Here  are two links to my interview with Barry Eva: Interview with Barry Eva. If that doesn’t work  try this: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/across-the-pond