Scotch & Politics

In Defense of Scotch (a rebuttal)

January 03, 2008 by Andrew · 6 comments

Isn’t W* a Welsh name?

This started out as a comment for Mike’s post. But I had to break it out into its own article. My baby’s been insulted. I can’t stand for that.

If you’re confused, read this bullcrap first. Well, it’s not bullcrap, it’s his honest opinion. But I just think it’s the wrong opinion, and it’s unfortunately shared by several of my cohorts.

Now Miguel, I understand what you’re saying, but I think you’re confusing “better” with: “it’s sweeter and smoother and easier for my girly little ass to drink.”

Damn, sorry. While I am in no way calling bourbon a girly drink (I’m just trying to call Mike girly), it is generally easier to consume, and leaves a lighter, sweeter flavor on the palate.

Scotch, GOOD scotch mind you, is generally celebrated for the nuances and oft-minute contrasts among brands, among vintages, hell, among different bottles of the exact same stuff. It’s an incredibly delicate liquor, despite the reputation for its brash, biting flavor, and generally needs to be thoroughly analyzed to be fully appreciated.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’ve housed my fair share of blended scotches like Dewar’s, Chivas and Johnnie W (see New Year’s Eve ‘08), but I don’t think I could bring myself to gulp down a glass of Lagavulin without taking a few moments to admire it a la bouche. On the other hand, I’ve found that “plowing” through a bottle of Maker’s Mark is just as easy as you say. Only difference is, I’ve also found higher priced, and supposedly better bourbons, to be just as easy to chug.

This could be due to the charcoal aging, the higher concentrations of sugars (or whatever, I’m no distiller)…who knows. But, I just don’t think you can honestly state matter-of-factly that bourbon is better than scotch, without designating a specific range (for instance, mid-priced blends and low-priced single malts or something…you ever try Johnnie blue? Holy mother mackerel that stuff’s good).

All in all, I think that you’re saying that you prefer bourbon as a common, general anytime drink. Sure, that’s fine. But if you want something extraordinary, something that really takes your breath away and demands some attention - rather than simply complimenting whatever situation you’re in - order yourself a single malt.

Ha, sorry for the diatribe. I really just wanted to call Mike girly. But now I want some of that dark golden goodness. Oh, and my birthday’s coming up (hint, hint).

Tags: · · · · · ·

  • 1 Doug // Jan 03, 2008 at 05:56 PM

    Sorry, you’re both wrong. Irish Whiskey is the greatest drink there is. Go get your self some Bushmills 21 (it’s pricey but just trust me). You will not put a tastier thing in your mouth.

  • 2 Mike W // Jan 03, 2008 at 07:12 PM

    I’ve never tried the pricey options of Bushmills, but by your rec I will do so.

    Fine rebuttal Andrew, and I think you nailed my preference on the head. Bourbon has become my drink of choice for general drinkin’, regular consumption. You may be right about the pricier/high-end comparisons of scotch and bourbon. I just don’t have enough experience taste-testing them (for lack of financial backing, not want)

  • 3 fredlewis // Jan 03, 2008 at 07:20 PM

    Please learn the difference between it’s and its. Its is possessive. It’s is a contraction for It is.

  • 4 andrew // Jan 03, 2008 at 09:27 PM

    All fixed. Didn’t capitalize a few I’s too. Maybe I’ll read it over next time.

  • 5 Thomas // Jan 03, 2008 at 11:08 PM

    If you weren’t so damn drunk all the time, you might be able to spell things right.

    I’m with Mike. I like a good glass of scotch, but there is nothing like some Maker’s to take the edge off. But, I’ll have to try Basil and Bushmills.

  • 6 Brendan // Jan 04, 2008 at 09:04 AM

    I agree with this post. I don’t agree with the irish Whiskey guy, that stuff is triple distilled - they burn the character right out.

    BTW Glenmorangie is the best.