It was in 1937 that M.F.K. Fisher first
said that there were two different kinds of food writers, those who
imitated Brillat-Savarin, and those who didn't. It is as true now as
it was then, although nowadays, it could probably be split into those
who imitate Fisher herself and those who don't. She condemns memoirs
in which “from each chapter rises a reek, a heady stench of
truffles, Chateau Yquem, and quails financière”
(naturally), and also the books where young men cycle around Europe
staying at charming inns and denouncing “the barbaric horrors of
the cocktail.”
I write this as I sip the barbaric
horrors of a nice Negroni
at a French bistro in my neighborhood. As much as I hate the term
“mixology,” it's such a standard part of the gastronomic
repertoire now that it's hard for me to imagine an alternative
reality, a time when a well-made cocktail wasn't appreciated.
But when I think about what exactly a
cocktail is, the context makes a bit more sense. Consider that
Negroni I'm drinking, a classic of the génération
perdue
recently revived from obscurity. And, in 1920, it must have seemed so
modern, so detached from any kind of preexisting tradition.
Start
with the gin, a drink that's Dutch in origin, but English in soul,
and which was one of the first truly commercially distributed
alcohols. In England in the early 18th
Century, the hearty, traditional drink of the peasantry was local
beer, but as the population moved to the cities, and a market opened
up for a distilled drink made from lower-quality grain, gin became
the crack cocaine of Enlightenment-era London, as immortalized in the
famous William Hogarth print.
Or
consider the vermouth. While herbed wines were a major part of the
Roman and Medieval drinking traditions as well, vermouth took off as
a likewise highly commercialized product in Continental Europe in the 19th Century, with brands like Martini & Rossi and Noilly-Prat all
angling for the lucrative cafe market. Such an integral part of the
new, highly branded world of alcohol was it that the world's first
neon advertisement was for Cinzano vermouth.
And
last, there's the Campari, which, while it has its roots in
traditional Italian bitters, is a proprietary drink, invented in
1860, a pure capitalist-era product.
Now
take those three things, themselves all delinked from the distinct,
local traditions of ales, wines, and brandies, and blend them.
So
I have to conclude that like the novels of F. Scott Fitzgerald, or
the paintings of Henri Matisse, the Negroni has become a symbol of an
older iteration of the modernist idea. Its pedigree comes with the
passage of time. Just as how Matisse and his cohorts were once
denounced as fauves,
the insult became a badge of honor, before becoming a simple
historical descriptor. The cocktail is no longer a “barbaric
horror,” a bucking of antique tradition, but a part of that antique
tradition itself.
I
might be drinking this thing because of its delicate balance of sweet
and bitter, but, like wearing a vintage shirt, or listening to an old
45 rpm record, there is the joy of placing oneself within the
narrative of history. Part of me drinks it because, after a dull,
monochrome day, when I see the countless stories contained in one
object, it is like holding a prism to it. The whole spectrum becomes
visible.
My love of the Negroni is young, but passionate. I had my first one around two years ago, and then quickly set to making them for myself at home. As an amateur mixologist - which is an even worse word than mixology - I appreciate the simplicity of the Negroni. When so many recipes are "jigger of this" or "dash of that" or a bizarre 2:1:3/4 ratio, there is beauty in mixing three ingredients in equal parts and tasting all of them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete