fdigital said:
JACK DANIELS!
Just kidding.
I'm not. Jack Daniels is exceptional. Often mistaken for Bourbon, it is a Tennessee 'sour mash' whiskey, which differs primarily from Bourbon by being filtered through maple charcoal - not to mention that Bourbon must be made in Bourbon county, Kentucky to be so-called, regardless of how it is made.
I find this interesting, because it ties in to some of my experiences with photography.
One always thinks that the most expensive things are therefore the best. One strives to gain an appreciation of the finest things, and relies upon the advice given by others.
My friends of cultivated taste encouraged me to take the time to learn to appreciate fine single-malt Scotch whisky, and to train my palette along the way. I bought the books and the magazines to teach myself about the differences in the single malts from the highlands versus the single malts from the lowlands, the islays, the campbelltowns. I bought and tasted dozens of bottles of the most highly-renowned single-malts I could find. I cleansed my palette, I optimized my tasting environment, I sought isolation to think about what I was tasting. You'd have thought I was trying to learn Latin.
I tried. I tried as I have seldom tried to learn to like things that I otherwise found distasteful upon first encounter. After years spent in company and alone with a bottle and contemplation, I have come to one conclusion.
Single-malt Scotch whiskies taste like crap. Despite their many differences, they uniformly taste like fire mixed with lighter fluid and they cause my gorge to rise in self-defense. I don't have a strong 'gag' reflex, but Scotch brings it out in me.
Blended Scotch is only slightly better, the best of them being somewhat like having my tongue staple-gunned to the south end of a north-bound cat.
Canadian whiskey, the less said about that, the better. They should stick to brewing beer, which they do phenomenally well.
I like Bourbon. And I love Jack Daniels.
Plebian taste? Perhaps. But it was arrived at by careful consideration over the years, and I intentionally did NOT want to come to this conclusion, as I was lost in the quagmire of 'being one' with the 'smart people' the 'cool people,' the people of taste and culture. I knew Jack Daniels was 'low brow' and 'frowned upon' by people of taste and culture.
Ironically, I have found the same to be true of my photography, regarding the tools I use. The only thing I have that says "Leica" on it is an old Hektor 135 in LTM. I prefer Cosina Voigtlander and old Canon LTM lenses. I use multiple fixed-lens rangefinders of no particular pedigree, because I have found through experimentation that they work well. I have yet to find a removable lens capable of out-resolving a Yashica Lynx 1.4 when used with a lens hood.
I listen to other's opinions, and then I try to find out if it works for me. I tried very hard to learn to like single-malt Scotch and failed. I now realize that the stuff just isn't for me.
About the only thing in my life that I enjoy that is 'upscale' is my coffee, about which I am admittedly a snob.
Other than that, give me a Bessa R with a Canon 50mm f/1.4, a bratwurst on the cheap charcoal grill, and a Jack-n-Coke on a hot summer day, and I'm straight.
Ya'll can take your glen-tulla-wulla-morangie-dipsydoodle and drink it in good health. Me and Jack are fine right here on the porch.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm heading north today, to take some photos of an Indian Pow Wow. I'm shooting .... digital. Sorry.
