bayWeiss
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/3/07
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 0
The way I look at it is as follows.
1. I do not want to reinvent the wheel.
2. Like any science or art, you read up on the past, see what the experts say or did, follow them, maybe try to emulate them, and then make your product or craft your own after you have become pretty good at what you are doing. For example, Michalangelo and DaVinci were apprenticed/trained in their craft for a good while, by some masters/mentors, but then kinda branched out on their own (or put their particular styles/twists/creativity into it) to become better or more recognizable than their masters. This does not mean that their masters were wrong in what they taught them, it just means that the true geniuses used the foundation they learned to make brilliant pieces.
Now, could the true geniuses have made their masterpieces without the classical training? I am not sure... I tend to think not, but there are always exceptions.
3. History books, recipe books, guide books all exist for a reason. They exist to present a collection of work done by someone to present to you for the purpose of your consumption, and on the idea that they are mostly accurate. This allows society to bootstrap itself and advance. Without history/guides/etc, people would never learn and society would not progress.
Since my homebrewing career is fairly short lived compared to almost all of the experts out there, I look at what they say as pretty much correct, until my experience proves them wrong. The advice and recipes that I have followed so far from Denny Conn, John Palmer, and Jamil Zainasheff et al. have allowed me to brew faster, with more confidence, and better, than what I think I would have been able to do without them.
On the post above about Jamil... I personally do not take what he says as gospel, but, since he has won SO MANY awards, I have to take what he says very seriously. I find also (from listening to almost every single Jamil Show), that he seems to be pretty humble, and does not come across to me as someone who says that what he says are hard facts. I think quite the opposite, when Jon P. says something stupid (it happens a lot), most of the time Jamil will disagree, ad say "WELL......."......... which I take as meaning that he is disagreeing, and that what he comes across as saying is his opinion, and not a hard fact.
:beer:
1. I do not want to reinvent the wheel.
2. Like any science or art, you read up on the past, see what the experts say or did, follow them, maybe try to emulate them, and then make your product or craft your own after you have become pretty good at what you are doing. For example, Michalangelo and DaVinci were apprenticed/trained in their craft for a good while, by some masters/mentors, but then kinda branched out on their own (or put their particular styles/twists/creativity into it) to become better or more recognizable than their masters. This does not mean that their masters were wrong in what they taught them, it just means that the true geniuses used the foundation they learned to make brilliant pieces.
Now, could the true geniuses have made their masterpieces without the classical training? I am not sure... I tend to think not, but there are always exceptions.
3. History books, recipe books, guide books all exist for a reason. They exist to present a collection of work done by someone to present to you for the purpose of your consumption, and on the idea that they are mostly accurate. This allows society to bootstrap itself and advance. Without history/guides/etc, people would never learn and society would not progress.
Since my homebrewing career is fairly short lived compared to almost all of the experts out there, I look at what they say as pretty much correct, until my experience proves them wrong. The advice and recipes that I have followed so far from Denny Conn, John Palmer, and Jamil Zainasheff et al. have allowed me to brew faster, with more confidence, and better, than what I think I would have been able to do without them.
On the post above about Jamil... I personally do not take what he says as gospel, but, since he has won SO MANY awards, I have to take what he says very seriously. I find also (from listening to almost every single Jamil Show), that he seems to be pretty humble, and does not come across to me as someone who says that what he says are hard facts. I think quite the opposite, when Jon P. says something stupid (it happens a lot), most of the time Jamil will disagree, ad say "WELL......."......... which I take as meaning that he is disagreeing, and that what he comes across as saying is his opinion, and not a hard fact.
:beer:
