Comments on: That Which We Call A Rose: The Black IPA Name Debate

By: Angelo

Angelo — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:09:07 +0000

I say call a beer what you wish. It’s all quite subjective. And while I understand…um sorta…those like Stone who deny Cascadia as the main force behind the style and the region where their hops come from, I can imagine the confusion that India Pale Ale must have caused when the style name first emerged. Still, education should supersede dumbing down things for easy immediacy. Just my two cents. Great article, Ash. I like how you take various sides of the argument into account.

By: Dark wench | 1tiklakazan

Dark wench | 1tiklakazan — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 10:57:54 +0000

[...] That Which We Call A Rose: The Black IPA … – Drink With The WenchOct 23, 2011 … Black India Pale Ale. India Black Ale. American-style India Black Ale. American- style Black Ale. Cascadian Dark Ale. All names for what is, at its … [...]

By: Patrick Boegel

Patrick Boegel — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:24:05 +0000

NADA is good, basically anything that puts this in a defined class is good. I have disagreed with Greg Koch before, but I could not disagree with him more vehemently and think the argument he attempts to build for labeling these Black IPAs is fraught with error and opinion.

By: Handlebar Sandwich » Blog Archive » The Black IPA Manifesto

Handlebar Sandwich » Blog Archive » The Black IPA Manifesto — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 05:11:05 +0000

[...] That Which We Call A Rose: The Black IPA Name Debate [...]

By: Chris Lewis

Chris Lewis — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 23:25:05 +0000

I think of “IPA” as a generic term. Kinda like Kleenex. People know when asking for one they get a tissue, not the brand of tissue they are inquiring about. I think most people know the storied history behind the term India Pale Ale but the term “IPA” has become a standard beer labeling for a hoppy style beer. If you were to call it Black India Pale Ale I think this would be wrong. But a Black IPA in my opinion would work. Taking in the modern acceptance of the “IPA” as a hoppy beer.

Anyways….

By: WallyG3

WallyG3 — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:01:21 +0000

I’m all for American Dark Ale. We already have American Amber Ale, why should this be any different?

By: Anders Nilbrink

Anders Nilbrink — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 20:52:35 +0000

Interesting article and well written. I think in the end the consumers and the breweries will determines the name. I think it will be something recognizable that describes the flavor of the beer the best way. The brewers will chose a name for their beer that will sell the best. Some will initially choose the “wrong” name. The consumers will go for simplicity and recognition. People know (or think they know) that a dark beer can have a roasted flavor and an IPA/AIPA is hoppy, thus I think in the end it will be Black IPA. Simple, recognizable and sellable.
I don’t think the consumer will be confused about contradictions in the name- black vs. pale (or America/North America vs. India in the other name suggestions).There are plenty of contradictions in names and expressions in our language and people don’t think much about it.

Here is my name suggestion.
PA=malty with hop flavors, IPA=hoppy, American IPA=very hoppy. It seems like American and India is the hop-level indicator in the name. Porter=roasty.
So, hoppy and roasted beer=India Porter and a very hoppy, roasted beer= American Porter. Simple, recognizable and sellable? (With my logic it should probably be American India Porter (AIP) but that just sounds stupid).

By: Wenchie

Wenchie — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 18:47:23 +0000

Steve: Agreed with hoppy porter concept as well. That’s another reason this style is becoming so ambiguous. What is it? Is is a Black Ale? A porter? It is English? Is it American? Maybe we need 2 categories? Ugh… And WHAT is up with the aged ale? LOL.

By: beercommdood

beercommdood — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:59:29 +0000

Great write-up, Ashley. As we discussed on Twitter previously, naming this brew is certainly not without contention, but in the end, it simply needs a place. “Black IPA” may not be correct due to the contradictions in the name itself, but is certainly a marketable moniker. Certainly any brewer would be free to use such a phrase on their bottles, cans, etc. Cascadian Dark also would work for an official style, but would require education among the masses. Of course, kolsch, helles, lambic and other styles that would cause the typical beer consumer to look perplexed have now become widely understood thanks to a blend of successful marketing, popular brand adoption, and the production of damn tasty beer.

In the end, it doesn’t matter to me what they ultimately decide to officially name this style on the books. We need this put to rest for judging ad proper categorization for brewing. My black cascadian hoppy IPA whatever you want to call it was judged in with porters and (oddly) stouts last fall. I think the shock factor alone gave my beer an edge over the others as the profile is so vastly different from a porter or stout. While I’d like to think my beer held its own and earned its awards on its own merits, I can’t help but think the striking difference in the style from the other entries gave it an edge with the judges. Granted it was submitted under “Specialty (23)”, and it was the competition staff/judges who chose to lump it in with porters and stouts for tasting.

It is funny how big a a deal this name debate has become. Did Pilsner or Kolsch go through similar debate back in the day, or was there an understanding of the beer’s uniqueness with regard to point of origin that allowed for smooth adoption? It’d be interesting to find out. But more than that, these regionally-named beers have since been modified and brewed using non-regional ingredients and still hold true to their name. It seems it’s become more about the overall profile and not about origin of ingredients. Pilsners are defined in part by use of noble hops, not regionally-specific yields of such hops. And they have subcategories of Bohemian and American variations where some modifications of the style have taken place, albeit fairly consistently (American may stray from noble hops, Bohemian dial specifically into Saaz). Perhaps such a sub-categorization could be used for this new black hoppy beast to note specific variations on the style, whatever it may be called?

By: Steve Parkes

Steve Parkes — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:08:24 +0000

Considering that the first modern commercial example was an extremely hoppy porter brewed by Greg Noonan in Vermont I think Vermont Porter is an equally valid name. Also consider that just as much British brewed porter was shipped to India at the same time as IPA the idea that this style is simply a hoppy porter is also true.