I know that making a flawless low grav lager takes just as much, if not more, skill than the average ale. That doesn't lead me to conclude that you must master the former to be respected or good at the latter.
See, there's where we'll disagree. In my worldview, mastery of the craft happens after you master all the "boring", "average" stuff. You can't properly do the Path of the Drunken Monkey until you've practiced kata enough to prove you've mastered the basics.
If I make the world's most technically flawless camphor oil lager, that doesn't grant the camphor oil category a high rating minimum if the style itself is judged to be worse than something else.
What is the point of judging a category or style against another? There is none. If you give Blatz Premium a D- because you really like El Humongo IIPA, your opinion is meaningless. Because ratings like that only matter when the rating is given as a comparison against a stlye/breed/whatever standard. Judging a beagle against a wolfhound is fracking stupid. You need to judge beagles against beagles and wolfhounds against wolfhounds.
That's the same reason Bordeaux wines are safely assumed to be superior than New Mexico red wines, Cuban cigars over Dominican, etc.
Assumptions are almost always wrong. The probability exists there of "aficionados" driving those opinions instead of any really quantifiable superiority existing. I've smoked Cubans. I've had crappy Cuban cigars, just as many as I've had excellent Dominicans. In fact, I find I prefer Dominicans. I've had $100-per-bottle French wines that were far inferior to $15 domestic wines. It's in the tastes of the beholder.
And you cannot deny that a climate exists where people automatically
think a thing is better because it's from a certain place, or from the workshop of a certain craftsman. "Ooo, it's Chateau Lafitte, it's got to be good." "Ooo, it's a Cuban Cohiba." "Ooo, Vinnie Cilurzo brewed it." Neither statement really means anything. If you
like Chateau Lafitte, Cuban Cohibas or Vinnie's massive beers, that's one thing. But to use that as some sort of objective criteria against which you can judge, in reverse order, Premium Lager, Galoises or Welch's - see the beagle/wolfhound comparo above - is devoid of meaning.
To say a Bordeaux red is automatically better than a New Mexico red just as automatically overrates the Bordeaux.
I can't knock the guy who makes the world's best burger if he can't make a souffle or a perfect boring chicken broth to save himself - I must take him at face value with what he chooses to make. If burgers are assumed to better than plain chicken broth, that's outside of whether he's good at what he does or not.
In your burger analogy, many of the "better" things are simply more complicated and therefore more interesting to the non-craftsman. Not really "better", just more interesting. Moreover, more complicated items give more opportunities to hide very basic flaws in the work, flaws from lack of skill. Thus can the burgermeister* gain an undeserved reputation as a master. You wrote that it's possible to be good at a complicated thing and not be good at the more basic thing. In my considered opinion,
if you can't do the basic thing well you're not doing the complicated thing well either. That's a basic tenet of mastery.
We don't - or
shouldn't - have 'master porter brewers' or 'master lager brewers' or 'master IPA brewers'. We have - or
should have -
master brewers.
In addition, I think a brewer can be considered great if they choose to brew only selected styles that they're good at. I don't think anyone's obligated to expand their repertoire to be considered good - look at DFH, Guinness, or AB. Anyone would say they have great brewers behind them, and they're all great at what they each set out to do (be pioneers, style leaders, or technical experts).
I don't disagree. One doesn't expect a master woodworker to force himself to make Chippendale chairs when what we really wants to do is make tables. However, at the same time one expects a master woodworker
could make a Chippendale chair if he wanted to, that he'd have the skill and knowledge to do so.
In the same way, brewmasters like Vinnie Cilurzo have proven their skills. Others have not.
This is a great discussion!
Cheers!
Bob
* Thank you for the opportunity to use a word in everyday conversation I've wanted to use for decades.
