if baristi are nothing, then that makes this blog …
December 7, 2007 – 1:07 pmdoesn’t the logic contained in the first post of uberbarista chris owens’ new blog more or less mean that the barista, relatively speaking, is the least vital link in the seed-to-cup coffee process? just asking!
p.s. no wonder those barista trips to coffee countries and local farmer symposiums are suddenly en vogue — the counter staff is cozying up to the real power! as thucydides once said, “if a single man’s convex tamper does not a good spro produce, then find the man who grows the cherry and party with him … “
17 Responses to “if baristi are nothing, then that makes this blog …”
I don’t think that the barista is the least vital, but I do think it is important they see their role in perspective. Great baristas are vital to coffee for a number of reasons, some in the cup and many not. I think it is a shame when you meet baristas who forget that no matter how good the coffee is, people are still buying from people and interaction goes such a long way.
A barista is as vital as a roaster or a mill owner in that they all have the power to preserve or destroy. Granted the baristas time with the coffee is the least of anyone’s - from grinding to the cup is a minute or two, compared to the time of a roaster or someone processing the green, though I guess that is irrelevant.
The baristas I respect are the ones that work to understand their product better, that see their coffee beyond the bag it comes in. All in all I think Thucydides was right.
(I think I’ve rambled here and managed not to say anything of interest. Apologies.)
By James Hoffmann on Dec 7, 2007
no doubt the barista is vital in his “power to preserve or destroy.” but — relative to the others in the chain — is he least vital?
you put the barista on equal footing with the roaster or mill owner. but it seems to me you could conceivably get a good cup of coffee from a mediocre barista (maybe by pure chance, where the tamp and grind and dose just “happen” to be right), whereas a screw-up by the roaster or mill owner would more likely guarantee poor coffee, no? so are they really equally vital?
there is probably no compelling need to definitively rank the weakest contributor to cup quality, and obviously chris was alluding to the other end of the spectrum — what are the most important factors.
the line of inquiry just had me thinking about the relative role of the barista. agreed: the most coffee-centric ones (as opposed to self-centered ones) earn my respect.
By bz on Dec 7, 2007
I think you can get acceptable coffee from a mediocre barista, and you can get acceptable coffee from a mediocre roaster (millions do!), and acceptable milling doesn’t ruin a cup.
Everyone in the chain has the same scope for influencing the quality retained. How good you are is as much your consistency as your highlights.
(Completely OT - what are your thoughts on the Iron and Wine record?)
By James Hoffmann on Dec 7, 2007
OT– Iron and Wine was the single most forgettable performance at the Pitchfork festival this summer. Here was a typical response:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daseindesign/2017961991/
Stick with me through a rather tortured analogy here… As someone relatively new to the coffee industry, I’m struck by the split representation of the barista as either chef or sommelier. The sommelier has the knowledge of the wine and a refined pallet to make recommendations, but it is the skill of the winemaker (and, to some degree, farmer) that is unchallenged as the true artistry in the glass. You don’t spend a grand on a bottle of wine because of the skill of the sommelier, but you do expect them to have respect for the wine and to have stored (and to serve) it properly. The chef might seek out the best ingredients from the most respectable of farmer, but at the end of the day the restaurant’s reputation rests with the chef, not the person who raised the pig or nurtured the tomato. Obviously, the barista wants to be seen as the chef. And as the last decade has shown, the skill of the barista is essential in teasing out the best qualities of coffees used as espresso. But doesn’t the emphasis on COE and auction lot coffees challenge the role of the barista? You don’t see brewed coffee in barista competitions, after all. A coffee like Esmeralda is slouching towards “wineicity” where you expect the barista to get out of the way of the cup: you want the coffee to be fresh, to be ground and brewed properly, but you expect the barista’s role to be transparent and the grower’s role (and, to a lesser degree, the roaster’s role) to be foregrounded.
By true on Dec 7, 2007
true: you’ve hit on one of the key tensions i perceive in cult of the barista. in general (and there are many exceptions), the chef-centric approach simply fails to encompass some of coffee’s biggest wonders — i.e. those stellar brewed origins that don’t require much prep skill … just appreciation. which is one reason coffee is so different from anything — even wine and food.
james: “Everyone in the chain has the same scope for influencing the quality retained.” i’m struggling with this one, actually. i really don’t see how that can possibly be true. i mean, the guy who turns the cherry on harrar patios has some influence on the quality, but surely not as much as the roaster. right?
too bad about the iron & wine review. because i personally think the dude is one of the few singer/songwriters currently transcending the whole scene, and he does it with seemingly hypnotic ease. the new record took awhile to get used to, but like all good things it continues to grow on me in a major way. much more instrumentalization, more funky beats than in the past, but still the genius, mellifluous lyricism you know him for. i always feel like he must be making his music seem way easier than it is. and that it’s a sign of how good he is. but that’s just me.
By bz on Dec 8, 2007
BZ, you need to check out the last Califone album, Roots and Crowns. Probably the sleeper hit of last year for me, or at least the one record that I kept coming back to on a regular basis. It is also one of the few that I’ve heard recently that I feel compelled to listen to from start to finish from the first few bars of the first song.
I’m not sure how it is relevant to the topic at hand, but here’s a story of my recent encounter with a local cake baker. I’m sourcing local vendors for everything from milk and cheese to baked goods. There’s a local cake baker just a half a block from my place. She’s someone I’ve known for years socially, so not a total stranger. Her bread-and-butter, so to speak, is selling exquisite wedding cakes and incredibly rich layer cakes for high-end functions. I gave her my pitch about what I’m doing with Volta, how I’m bringing a focus on coffee that is analogous to her her focus on the art of baking, and that I’d like to set up a wholesale account to offer her cakes by the slice. I talk about how we’re natural allies who are working to bring the same clientele to downtown, how I want to actively promote all of the local vendors that I am relying on, and how my selling her cakes by the slice will help drive her whole cake sales. And I know that she does wholesale baking, and that her whole cake business has been down with the slowdown in the economy, so I’m thinking that she’ll be excited by the idea. But no. Not only not interested, but openly hostile. Seems she’s picked up a used Bunn catering brewer and is selling coffee by the cup to try to pick up a few extra dollars a day. We’re talking about a Bunn carafe that sits directly on a burner, waiting for the dozen or so office workers a day to walk in for a cup and perhaps a cupcake or a slice of cake. No matter what I say, she sees me as direct competition for her coffee business.
I wanted to get all indignant and rail about the skill that I’ll be expecting of my baristas, about our focus on amazing SO coffees, about how there was an art to what I will be doing that is not so different from her art as a baker. Instead, I walked away. The irony is that I sourced another baker across town the next day, but she will never be able to improve the quality of her coffee service unless she abandons her business model. But I realized that arguments within the coffee industry about baristas and the third wave were a lot like the intra-departmental squabbles that I used to get caught up in when i was working on my PhD, where post-structuralists would wage pitched battles against neoclassicists for control of a departmental committee. It seemed vitally important at the time, but once I left the university I understood just how little anyone outside of the department cared.
By true on Dec 8, 2007
Well I think the guy turning the cherries does has the same scope for influencing the quality. If he does his job he becomes invisible in the coffee, though should he do a gradually worse and worse job defects will slowly manifest themselves in the cup turning the lot from specialty to premium to commodity to filth. He can completely ruin tonnes of cherries, if they are improperly turned and start to ferment/rot. Perhaps you could try and argue that it takes less skill to turn cherries than to pull a good shot, but it doesn’t mean that he doesn’t have the same range of quality influence.
By James Hoffmann on Dec 8, 2007
In so many ways, I am realizing that coffee is like film making. The director might get the credit for the film, but at every step of the production there are skilled workers who all contribute to the quality of what’s up on the screen. Without that particular combination of set dresser, sound recorder, and cinematographer (to pick three jobs out of a thousand), Blade Runner could have been any z-grade production on SciFi Channel. A lazy theater manager with a poorly maintained projector can render any film unwatchable.
By true on Dec 8, 2007
woohoo! a new coffee analogy — filmmaking!
but then, why does the director get paid more than everyone else? isn’t it because his skills/potential impact on the film are so much greater than the runners and grips? it’s true — anyone can potentially ruin a film. but how can you NOT make a value judgement recognizing the difference in importance between the director and the grip?
james is arguing that anyone can ruin coffee. that’s true, and in that sense everyone has an equal vitality. but what about the other side of the coin? the thing that each person contributes to the eventual flavor? is the cherry-turner’s positive contribution really as meaningful as the roaster’s positive contribution to finished flavor?
part of it is skill. but part of it is the value one places on each person’s input.
By bz on Dec 8, 2007
and lets not leave out the customer. All is for naught if the customer doesn’t give a rats ass about what lands in the cup.
The ideal of the barista, in my mind, should be closer to the sommelier than the chef. Bar skills are overrated and generally underwhelming (how many baristas have the speed and economy of movement of the typical short order cook? we’ve set the bar pathetically low). What really should matter most in the paradigm we all seem to be lurching toward is the shtick. Can you communicate an experience of the coffee to the customer? Do you really know what is vital about the coffee you are serving? Can you sell it? Are you even operating within an environment where such a conception of coffee can get through to the customer?
There is a great gulf between our philosophical conception of the barista and the conception of the barista held by our customers. And I remain largely unimpressed with the haphazard, un-rigorous approach to communicating coffee. We all know 10 times more about the bean than our customers but its a sloppy and often shallow expertise used more to impress than inform. We need something closer to Peter G level knowledge behind the counter and a conceptual framework of how to share that knowledge with the customer. Without that, everyones contributions along the chain dwindle in meaning.
By t o n x on Dec 8, 2007
Amen. It’s all about the narrative, the story– and telling that story in a way that is compelling to the customer.
By true on Dec 8, 2007
bz– the idea that the director is the author only dates to the late 1950s and wasn’t accepted widely as a concept until the 60s. There had always been a few exceptions, but before then a film’s content and quality was much more likely attributed to the studio or the producer: a republic western, an MGM musical, a Universal horror film, a Darryl Zanuck “message” film. Look at television today; the director is a lesser influence in comparison to the producers, ie, the writers and show runners.
By true on Dec 8, 2007
now THERE’s a discussion. and yet … all our money and attention is being spent on glorifying those very bar skills. it’s a misplaced priority that possibly handicaps the movement, in my opinion. and say that as a fan of barista comps and throwdowns.
i feel half guilty about this discussion, actually, because i’d normally much rather think about what the consumer is thinking/doing. the relative importance of the barista clearly matters little, and makes only for esoteric junkie discussion … guilty as charged.
true: YOU’re the one who came up with filmmaking as an analogy. i was just riffing on it. point taken, though.
By bz on Dec 9, 2007
bz- not trying to argue, but rather answer your question about how not to “make a value judgement recognizing the difference in importance between the director and the grip.” In other words, recognize that the value judgement is an artificial construct and ask a different question instead: what is the best way to honor each person’s contribution to a collective endeavor?
On a personal note, I discovered H-B.com about the same time that I picked up a decent machine for home and also about the same time that I started to think about the idea of opening my own shop. But for some reason, I’ve never really been interested in the discussions at H-B. Don’t get me wrong–there’s much to be gleaned there, from a bunch of very smart people. But for me the perfect shot at home will never be as good as a very good shot in a great cafe. There’s that intangible difference created by the social aspect of the cafe that is, for me, transformative. It can’t overcome crap commodity coffee served by indifferent staff, but when it all comes together– that’s what it’s all about for me. I think that’s a component of what Caragay is going on about over on that other board: that carefully building the customer’s cafe experience is the final step in honoring the amazing coffees that are now available, and that it shouldn’t end with the mechanics of pulling a great shot.
By true on Dec 9, 2007
i think i get the general sentiment — everyone is important. honor the collective work. eschew the exaltation of certain contributors over others. tell the whole, arching narrative. to which i wholeheartedly agree.
where i stumble is where one abdicates making any value judgment at all. i can accept that movie directors are wildly overpaid and unjustly lauded. but they’re still more important to the quality of a film than the third grip, right? not making a value judgement is meaningless relativism, it’s anarchy, and the same logic would prevent you from saying which coffee is “good” and which coffee is “bad” — because, you know, a lot of people worked very hard on this coffee to create a spectrum of flavors that are equally valuable, and that’s inspiring!
i’m all about the narrative. but you’ve gotta be able to deliver the goods, and to do that you have to be able to say what good is.
a fascinating analogy with H-B.com, btw. i also tend to hang out elsewhere (though i know there’s plenty of wisdom to be had there when i need it) because of the concentration of gearhead minutiae present. i also hear what jay’s saying about the entire consumer experience. where i disagree, again, is where one abdicates an empirical value judgement altogether.
because a shot at home CAN be every bit as good as an excellent shot in a cafe. you may like the complete cafe experience better, but you have to be able to draw that line and say, “this shot is great. in fact, it’s every bit as good as one i could find commercially.” otherwise, we’ll all wander around in search of some elusive, relative “vibe.”
am i misunderstanding you? i hope not.
it just so happens that i get a pretty great vibe going in my house most weeks, making spro and debating philosophy with a group of hopeless aesthetes and newbies alike. it’s a great thing — made better by a recognition of value where it exists.
By bz on Dec 10, 2007
I don’t think anyone has ever accused me of abdicating empirical judgement value altogether– in spite of having forced a generation of college students to slog through volumes of Derrida. And, for the record, I’ve never been a chef or barisa. But I have worked around the edges of the film and television industries for twenty five years. Working to open Volta, I feel more like a producer/director than anything else I’ve done. (of course, my heroes are Godard and Vertov, so this is going to be a bumpy ride… I’m already brainstorming the possibility of a coffee agit-train.)
By true on Dec 10, 2007
cool. then i won’t accuse you of such a thing either.
just seemed like the argument was a bit of a slippery slope.
volta. i like it.
By bz on Dec 10, 2007