Tags:





Advertise here: Contact FM.


Starbucking around the world
March 22, 2007 10:05 AM   RSS feed for this thread Subscribe

Starbucking, the true story of one man's highly caffeinated journey.Starbucking is a documentary film that follows Winter, a man who has dedicated his life to visiting every Starbucks in the world. He's been to 6,000 Starbucks (and counting) since 1997, and is trying to break his record of visiting 28 Starbucks in a day. So, "sit back, have a cup of joe, and watch as one man defies society's norms in a never ending search for the lady in green."
posted by londontube (239 comments total)

His dying words will be "oh, how I've wasted my life."
posted by boo_radley at 10:14 AM on March 22, 2007


No Impact Man > Crazy Starbucks Guy
posted by poweredbybeard at 10:16 AM on March 22, 2007


Neither of them has anything on Contagious Disease Dude or the International Bingo Streaker.
posted by spiderwire at 10:18 AM on March 22, 2007 [3 favorites has favorites]


His dying words will be "oh, how I've wasted my life."
posted by boo_radley

Says someone sitting in front of their computer in the middle of the day grabbing life by the balls.

I don't care about visiting every starbucks, I'd just like one within walking distance.
posted by justgary at 10:20 AM on March 22, 2007 [3 favorites has favorites]


What's the point? From the website: "Why would someone choose such a seemingly pointless and impossible mission in life? What was going on in this guy's head? Those are the questions STARBUCKING seeks to answer."

I guess I'd kind of like a clue now, before I consider paying 8 bucks to see this.
posted by amro at 10:23 AM on March 22, 2007


FilmFilter: Hey guys, I really want to make a movie, but I don't have any ideas. I really liked Super Size Me, maybe I could make something like it?I have a lot of free time, and I'm learning iWeb. [more inside]
posted by roll truck roll at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2007


Approximately, yes, justgary. I'm not skeetshooting while skydiving, I guess, by my goals are better than "visit more than 28 identically branded coffeehouses in one day". My goal -- for this day, at least -- is to ensure that 1,200+ students get the health insurance that they're entitled to. I'll let you know how it goes. Or, maybe you could follow me with a camera.
posted by boo_radley at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2007 [8 favorites has favorites]


This is easier than hunting for snails with a sledgehammer.
posted by CynicalKnight at 10:33 AM on March 22, 2007


Mmmm ... coffee.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:37 AM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Ridiculous. But certainly no worse (actually better) than getting up each morning and going to a stupid job.
posted by Skygazer at 10:38 AM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


I guess he gets to see the world, and how a crappy corporation with a great advertising committee is spreading it's capitalistic meme.

obligatory: Starbucks has awful coffee.
posted by porpoise at 10:41 AM on March 22, 2007


... a never ending search for the lady in green.

He might find her at the bottom of a pipe of salvia, or a sugared flute of absinthe. I don't think she'll ever be caught among the dregs of a Starbucks coffee, though.
posted by Drexen at 10:42 AM on March 22, 2007


I think this tells me everything I need to know about this schmoe.

What a fucking child.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 10:45 AM on March 22, 2007


If he can do it wearing a tuxedo, then I think he's got something here.
posted by psmealey at 10:48 AM on March 22, 2007


Wait a minute... is he actually humping that Starbucks?
posted by miss lynnster at 10:49 AM on March 22, 2007


wow, just wow.
someone who has the exact opposite reaction to starbucks as me, nice. I'd prefer a caffeine-withdrawl headache than drink their mudcack.

on some level, I'm jealous, I suppose.
I'd like to travel the country with the goal of playing every still-working version of Attack from Mars, one of the most brilliant games designed ever.
posted by Busithoth at 10:55 AM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


is he actually humping that Starbucks?

Both literally and metaphorically, miss lynn.
posted by JaredSeth at 10:56 AM on March 22, 2007


Guess everyone needs a goal in life...
posted by brautigan at 10:58 AM on March 22, 2007


It's like fucking Stockholm syndrome.
posted by klangklangston at 11:02 AM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


Say, I could go for some delicious Starbucks Coffee right now! Mmmm.... Starbucks Coffee.
posted by redhanrahan at 11:04 AM on March 22, 2007


Perhaps the answer is in the link I can't be bothered to follow, but what I'm less curious about why he's doing it and more curious about how he's paying for it. Is he an heir to some huge fortune, racking up credit card debts left and right, or is Starbucks paying for it as some kind of viral, guerilla marketing campaign?
posted by PigAlien at 11:05 AM on March 22, 2007


I'd like to travel the country with the goal of playing every still-working version of Attack from Mars, one of the most brilliant games designed ever.

I'd go to that movie.
posted by roll truck roll at 11:05 AM on March 22, 2007


If he wants to visit all of the Starbucks in the world, it's going be a tall (err, venti) order.
"[Chairman Howard] Schultz also insisted Wednesday that Starbucks will not back down from its growth plan, which calls for eventually having 40,000 stores worldwide, up from around 14,000 today."*
I think it's all a ploy so that he can meet Paul McCartney. ;)
posted by ericb at 11:05 AM on March 22, 2007


How is he subsidizing this?
posted by pinky at 11:06 AM on March 22, 2007


What a fucking child.

That was a little unwarranted.
posted by Kwantsar at 11:09 AM on March 22, 2007


Not this guy's first appearance here, although it having been turned into a documentary does make it marginally more stupid and irritating.
posted by nanojath at 11:10 AM on March 22, 2007


Maybe he can get a gum company to sponsor him?
posted by miss lynnster at 11:11 AM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


He's going to have to ramp it up a notch.
They're building, what, eighty-two per day?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 11:12 AM on March 22, 2007


And then he gets written up by Colonel Tigh for being such a smartass.....
posted by Afroblanco at 11:12 AM on March 22, 2007


"We've secretly replaced Winter's obsessive-compulsive disorder with new Starbucks coffee. Let's see if he notices!"
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 11:14 AM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


Gee, who usually funds Starbucks advertisements? Phillip Morris? The Government?
posted by redhanrahan at 11:14 AM on March 22, 2007


When he announces that he lost 20 pounds and gained the equivalent back in muscle mass on his Starbucks® Diet he can become the next Jarrod (the Subway® guy).
posted by ericb at 11:18 AM on March 22, 2007


ericb: yeah, but it's all going to be fast-twitch and vascular smooth muscle.
posted by boo_radley at 11:23 AM on March 22, 2007


As an interesting side note, there was a piece on NPR regarding comments by Starbucks that they feared they were losing their corporate soul. So they had a priest (Episcopal, iirc) and some Seattle soul singer go and try a variety of coffee houses, including the original Starbucks and the most recent one opened in the Seattle area, along with an indie place.
They concluded that the newest one was the nicest, especially after the original Starbucks told them they couldn't record in it. Arguments for "soulfulness" were that it was the same everywhere, which reminded them of home, and that it was soothing and played music like Norah Jones. The whole thing was as perverse a statement on yuppie interpretation of "soul" as possible, and had to have been produced by either the deeply ironic or the deeply clueless.
posted by klangklangston at 11:23 AM on March 22, 2007


Kwanstar: That was a little unwarranted.

Was it? Perhaps. Perhaps I just don't see the art in this exercise. Perhaps I don't see how documenting every Starbucks in the nation contributes to society.

Is this art? It's a question that far predates Duchamp but still worth asking. Because if it's not art, what purpose does it serve? Who, other than Starbucks, benefits from this escapade? So, it must be art. It is my opinion that as art, it sucks (in theory, and in theory it shall forever remain since I have no intention of seeing this documentary).

Was it unfair of me to link to pictures of him acting silly and to label him childish? Perhaps. But perhaps I also see a childishness in someone who drinks from society's cup and never refills it.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 11:25 AM on March 22, 2007


someone who drinks from society's cup and never refills it

That was sooo not intentional.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 11:29 AM on March 22, 2007


In an episode of the original Battlestar Galactica, Starbuck's ship crash-landed on a prison colony and he was tossed in jail. The prisoners were named after the crimes they had commited: "Robber", "Forger", "Pirate" and stuff like that. The lady in the cell next door asked Starbuck's name, and when told, she looked confused and said in a delightful Irish-ish accent:

"And what, pray tell, is Star-buckin'?"
posted by PercussivePaul at 11:30 AM on March 22, 2007


I like how you hate his antics, Terminal Verbosity.
posted by jon_kill at 11:31 AM on March 22, 2007


what a Venti idiot.
posted by keepoutofreach at 11:36 AM on March 22, 2007


But certainly no worse (actually better) than getting up each morning and going to a stupid job.

Um, why?

If I had enough money that I didn't have to work, I can think of a thousand things that'd be better for the planet and more interesting than visiting Starbucks.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 11:38 AM on March 22, 2007


No Impact Man > Crazy Starbucks Guy

Bears repeating. I'm all for acknowledging how pointless life is by deriving pure enjoyment out of manifesting my will in ways that leave other people scratching their heads, but to enthusiastically sacrifice your identity to a ubiquitous corporate sponsor reeks of soul-death to me.
posted by hermitosis at 11:38 AM on March 22, 2007


To the people bashing the pics: I think he's probably having more fun than you are.
posted by Malor at 11:47 AM on March 22, 2007


obligatory: Starbucks has awful coffee.

Obligatory: Don't be an asshat. Your taste does not equal objective truth.

To the people bashing the pics: I think he's probably having more fun than you are.

Seconded.
posted by languagehat at 11:54 AM on March 22, 2007


good for him. being addicted to caffeine must suck.
posted by quarter waters and a bag of chips at 11:59 AM on March 22, 2007


Obligatory: Don't be an asshat. Your taste does not equal objective truth.

Well, that's your opinion.
posted by doctor_negative at 12:04 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


I agree with that dude who wondered how this here dude manages to pay for this elaborate stunt, by which I mean that I agree in the sense that I share his wonderment.
posted by Mister_A at 12:04 PM on March 22, 2007


We need another recession. Or another Vietnam.

And, yes, Starbucks coffee does suck. But hats off to them for the double con they pull off. They like to pretend they're selling great coffee and their customers like to pretend they're drinking it.
posted by rhymer at 12:06 PM on March 22, 2007


You could do a lot worse than Starbucks coffee, even in a privately owned fair-trade weasel-poop coffee house in the less tony, more authentic parts of Williamsburg* (Brooklyn). Honestly. Though Starbucks does often burn their coffee, in my experience.

*Said parts may not actually exist
posted by Mister_A at 12:13 PM on March 22, 2007


Well, that's your opinion.

Absolutely, and I would never pretend otherwise. I would also never go into threads about fish restaurants to say "Fish sucks!!" because I happen not to like fish. But for some reason various childish asshats feel obliged to drop into every coffee thread to bleat "Starbucks coffee sucks!!" Yeah, you're the one who sees that the emperor has no clothes, and those of us who claim to like it are just pretending. Sure thing, pal.
posted by languagehat at 12:13 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


I agree with that dude who wondered how this here dude manages to pay for this elaborate stunt, by which I mean that I agree in the sense that I share his wonderment.

You have inspired me to change my profile page, as I am sensitive to being called a "dude."
posted by pinky at 12:15 PM on March 22, 2007


Hm. The "Starbucks Coffee Sucks" thing always feels like sour grapes to me.

It's burnt compared to some places, but consistently so in that I always get the same B-minus espresso as opposed to a mountain of D's and F's with an occasional B+ at the supposedly-superior indie shops who all buy the same Blue Mountain or Torrefazione rebrands and try to convince me it's gourmet.

Your least favorite coffee doesn't suck.
posted by abulafa at 12:15 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Yes, let's just hear from people who like Starbucks from now on, okay?
posted by redhanrahan at 12:16 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


I am reminded of th efamous painting of Jesus, bearing the heavy cross on his way to his crucifiction. Sweat and tears stream down his face. He is slightly bent from the weight of the cross as he makes his way through the stations of the cross. Under the painting, the caption taken from the Cunard Staemship motto: getting there is half the fun.
posted by Postroad at 12:19 PM on March 22, 2007


And, yes, Starbucks coffee does suck.

Look, man, I can't stand Starbucks coffee either, however, I'm old enough to remember what coffee meant in this country BEFORE Starbucks and at the very least I am thankful to them for making A LOT of people demand a level of quality in coffee that previously one had to travel to Europe for. Back in the early 80s your choices were fucking Sanka or Folgers.
posted by spicynuts at 12:20 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


If this doesn't involve Katee Sackhoff then I'm not interested.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 12:20 PM on March 22, 2007


Not everyone can make it at Starbucks
http://www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=291849
posted by Postroad at 12:21 PM on March 22, 2007


Sorry pinky, this was the referent dude.
posted by Mister_A at 12:28 PM on March 22, 2007


d'oh!
posted by pinky at 12:33 PM on March 22, 2007


If I had enough money that I didn't have to work, I can think of a thousand things that'd be better for the planet and more interesting than visiting Starbucks.

Yes. I agree. My comment assumed that this stunt is or will eventually be underwritten by Starbucks, when the company decides to make this bozo a viral spokesman/mascot and he becomes known on the internets as That crazy WEB 2.0 Starbucks Guy®.

As a job, it doesn't honestly seem so bad. Better than some I would say. He gets to travel see the world and meet people. I'm sure it will be an amzing and unforgettable experience.

Let's say though, that he has no desire to be The StarBucks Guy®, but this whole idea is a MacGuffin, so that he has an excuse to travel around. Visiting Starbucks isn't such a bad organizing principle for doing that. It's stupid, but whatever.

Okay now let's say the guy has money and really does in fact have such a huge boner for all things Starbucks that he MUST, I mean absolutely MUST VISIT EVERY MOTHERF*CKIN STARBUCKS IN EXISTENCE.

Well, than: He's a just a complete dumbass.
posted by Skygazer at 12:35 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Look, man, I can't stand Starbucks coffee either, however, I'm old enough to remember what coffee meant in this country BEFORE Starbucks

A-fucking men. When Starbucks started to gain a foothold in NYC, it represented a SIGNIFICANT improvement over the rancid deli coffee (a/k/a "poor man's cocaine") that had tainted both our stomachs and our DNA for so many decades.

Starbucks is definitely a shitty brew in cities that have good coffee (like Seattle: Espresso Vivace I miss you!), but for the rest of the country it is definitely a step up.
posted by psmealey at 12:38 PM on March 22, 2007


My God, I can't fathom why anyone would do this. Now if he was visiting every Tim Hortons, sure I could understand that, they have pretty good coffee, but every Starbucks, jeesh.
posted by bobo123 at 12:40 PM on March 22, 2007


I'm not a huge Starbucks fan, but it actually seems kind of cute to me. I remember when I was around 11, we went traveled through the midwest by car visiting relatives, I made it my project of the summer to try as many different brands of orange soda as possible (I topped out around 12 as I recall) This seems like a more elaborate version of that is all, and an excuse to travel around and take pictures. Harmless, ultimately.

What a fucking child.

Back in school you were the kid who used to give everybody a hard time for acting 'immature,' right? Loosen up already.
posted by jonmc at 12:42 PM on March 22, 2007


I think I'm going to start following him, and maybe the end of the documentary will end up like that part of Forrest Gump, with all these twitching, irritable people trailing behind him.
I don't think it takes away from your 15 minutes when you piggyback onto someone elses.
posted by hellbient at 12:43 PM on March 22, 2007


I hope this nitwit takes a shower before going in, or he's in for a bit of a surprise...

And as far as coffee, my dear grandmother (may she rest in peace) and my lovely girlfriend both swear by Dunkin Donuts coffee, so go figga - me, I'm a tea drinker, can't stand coffee. I can tell you that the Starbucks-backed Tazo teas are one notch above Liptons, which is the dirt of teas.
posted by dbiedny at 12:43 PM on March 22, 2007


Starbucking
Across the universe
On the Starship Enterprise
Under Captain Kirk
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:45 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


Mister_A: *Said parts may not actually exist

They exist. There are in fact none tony places. For fucksake the whole place is non-tony actually, it's just that Bloomberg, the banks and the Real Estate agents have done such a number on so many lemmings.

But enough of that...sorry (I'm not bitter or anything). Where was I? Oh yeah... I can get a mighty good cup of Joe at the corner deli for .60 fuckin' cents, jack. Hell, even the Korean guy on the other corner makes a good cup for like a dollar. The best cup in the neighborhod comes from a cafe and is only $1.25.
posted by Skygazer at 12:45 PM on March 22, 2007


What's with all the complaints about the quality of the Starbucks coffee? You're kidding yourselves. I've drunk a lot of coffee and it *all tastes about the same*, modulo amount of milk, sugar and other things you put in it. I guess it's just product fetishism, similar to wine bores getting themselves in a lather about some absurdly overpriced bottle of plonk that apparently has notes of lavender and rosewood.
posted by snoktruix at 12:45 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Im bout to git all supercilious witcha snoktruix.
posted by Mister_A at 12:49 PM on March 22, 2007


skygazer, which cafe you talking about?
I gave up on Oslo and since Atlas changed beans, have taken to ordering them online and sporting a thermos. It'd be nice to think I could just go get a cup, rather than make a whole pot.
posted by Busithoth at 12:51 PM on March 22, 2007


similar to wine bores getting themselves in a lather about some absurdly overpriced bottle of plonk that apparently has notes of lavender and rosewood.

That's because they need to somehow justify getting loaded to themselves as some kind of gourmet thing.
posted by jonmc at 12:52 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


Irregularity: not a problem for this man.
posted by jeffkay at 12:52 PM on March 22, 2007


It's a crying shame...all those cups of coffee and he'll still never have the joy of drinking a good one from Tim Horton's
posted by Shfishp at 12:58 PM on March 22, 2007


Thank you to those who have pointed out that the coffee I like in fact sucks. I can’t tell you how grateful I am to discover how my own tastes have so egregiously misguided me. This has been an eye-opening week for me. In AskMe, I found out that a movie I loved (Pan’s Lab.) actually sucks. In MeFi, I discovered that some of my favorite public radio people (such as Ira Glass) in reality suck. At least it isn’t a problem that I like Windows... is it?
posted by found missing at 12:59 PM on March 22, 2007 [6 favorites has favorites]


You're kidding yourselves.

I'm sorry but no, you are kidding yourself. Number one, you dump crap in it like milk so you aren't really drinking 'coffee'. Number two, most places don't really care how much coffee to water they are working with and you get coffee flavored water. Number three, most places let it sit on a heater for hours thereby burning it. There is definitely a wine bore element at the top end, but there is a vast difference between swill from a diner that doesn't care and coffee from anyone (diner, bodega, cafe, steet cart, yo momma) that DOES care.
posted by spicynuts at 1:01 PM on March 22, 2007


The only standout feature of Starbucks coffee that I could discern, other than that it was really expensive and in a really big mug, was that it tasted like they dumped a sack of sugar in it.
posted by snoktruix at 1:01 PM on March 22, 2007


This has been an eye-opening week for me.

Next week you will find out that you yourself do indeed suck.
posted by spicynuts at 1:02 PM on March 22, 2007


You like Windows? You fucking bastard.
posted by snoktruix at 1:02 PM on March 22, 2007


Busithoth: You and me both!

(Although for my money, Twilight Zone is a bit better. But hey, this is pinball, the worst you can do is not bad.)

And to the other guy who chimed it: Attack From Mars is not based off of (although arguably it could be based off the hype from) Mars Attacks.
posted by JHarris at 1:03 PM on March 22, 2007


Well you talk like the coffee you get at these favored places is somehow better than the stuff you get by buying any brand of ground coffee and mixing it with boiling water. It just isn't. And some people like to take it with milk, because the bitter flavour is a bit nasty. I guess gagging on neat whisky is better too because you're really tasting it.
posted by snoktruix at 1:07 PM on March 22, 2007


After all the talk of Tim Horton's, I finally got to Canada to try some.

Meh. Not much different than Dunkin' Donuts, or any other local donut shop's coffee.
posted by eyeballkid at 1:08 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


*gazes at snoktruix superciliously*

My dear boy, do you have any idea of how coffee is brewed? You do not "mix ground coffee with boiling water"—unless you are a cowboy or some similar barbarian sort. I also take exception to your insinuation that a two-dollar can of Eight O'Clock coffee can be equivalent in any way other than mass to shade-grown Costa Rican beans. Harrumph.
posted by Mister_A at 1:18 PM on March 22, 2007


Well you talk like the coffee you get at these favored places is somehow better than the stuff you get by buying any brand of ground coffee and mixing it with boiling water. It just isn't.

Why, cuz you say it isn't? It's better TO ME, which is all that matters. Next are you going to tell me that Miller Lite is no worse than Guinness?
posted by spicynuts at 1:20 PM on March 22, 2007


OK, sorry, you mix ground coffee with boiling water and then wait.
posted by snoktruix at 1:20 PM on March 22, 2007


Next are you going to tell me that Miller Lite is no worse than Guinness?

No, Guiness tastes better, but they'll both get you drunk.
posted by jonmc at 1:21 PM on March 22, 2007


You appear to have some form of dysgeusia.
posted by Mister_A at 1:23 PM on March 22, 2007


It's burnt compared to some places, but consistently so in that I always get the same B-minus espresso as opposed to a mountain of D's and F's with an occasional B+ at the supposedly-superior indie shops who all buy the same Blue Mountain or Torrefazione rebrands and try to convince me it's gourmet.

In other words, "Hey yeah. It sucks. But its suckage is consistent! And other things aren't." Which is the same kind of logic as, "Sure, poop isn't a tasty thing to eat. But at least it's consistent. I can't always count on other things I eat to be good so at least I know I'll get the same thing when I eat poop."

Personally, I just make my own latte in the morning & enjoy every sip that I know doesn't suck. Why bother drinking bad stuff at all? Especially when I know in advance that I'll find it kinda bad. I'd rather just go without drinking coffee than drinking coffee I don't like. Or eating poop.
posted by miss lynnster at 1:28 PM on March 22, 2007


I think we got a tagline here...

Metafilter: people sitting in front of their computer in the middle of the day grabbing life/themselves by the balls
posted by Termite at 1:29 PM on March 22, 2007


To the people bashing the pics: I think he's probably having more fun than you are.

If you define "fun" as unquestioning allegiance to a monopolistic chain coming perilously close to undermining the achievements of the Sherman Antitrust Act that has single-handedly brainwashed a substantial chunk of the population into accepting inferior, mass-produced and mostly non-Fair Trade coffee chanting "tall, grande, venti" like a deranged catechism, and concomitant outlandish behavior resembling a Scientologist or a Jonestown zealot (as opposed to a more or less sane and fun-loving member of Western society), then I suppose you're right.
posted by ed at 1:29 PM on March 22, 2007


I've said this a million times, but I guess I'll repeat it once more. :)

Starbucks was invented in an era of very bad coffee. American coffee sucked at the time. They were the first company to both get a solid brew going and to go chainstore. They have been wildly successful for a reason: they have a good product that they can ship in incredible volume, and maintain extremely consistent results doing so. And they treat their workers well.

Folks like to snark at them because they know where to find better coffee. For instance, locally, I think Jittery Joe's is at least as good if not better. Peet's is definitely better. But saying Starbucks is 'crummy' is not understanding the simple truth:

Starbucks, by its sheer overwhelming presence, defines 'average' coffee. And they raised the bar significantly in getting to that point. Average coffee was terrible 15 or 20 years ago.

And keep in mind that this is 'mode' average, not median. Even now, the vast majority of coffee sold in this country simply isn't very good. Starbucks, in other words, is both the definition of 'average' and 'above average' at the exact same time. :)
posted by Malor at 1:31 PM on March 22, 2007


I like beer a lot, but I recognize that you can't really rank beer's by quality either. It's too subjective, and depends on your mood. Many people hate Guinness, it's quite bitter. Sometimes a cold Fosters is just the right thing (maybe not a Miller). Those Lite beers are like the watered coffee, it's not even real beer. Anything that is, is just beer.
posted by snoktruix at 1:32 PM on March 22, 2007


Busitoth: Which cafe you talking about?

Satchmo's on Graham. Fantastic stuff. It might be too far east for you if you've been going to Oslo, but it's worth the trip.

Anyhow, get some good coffee beans (Fresh ground if possible), a gallon jug of spring water, experiment with measuring scoops and you should be in business. The corner Deli and me make the second best cups of coffee in my neighborhood. (I still have not been able to outdo Satchmo's though).

I don't even think of Starbucks as coffee. It's more like a coffee-flavored shake, but what ever floats your boat (or hat).
posted by Skygazer at 1:35 PM on March 22, 2007


the only guinness I've found bitter is the stout in the small glass bottles. the draft cans do a wonderful job of getting that tasty, smooth meal-replacement liquid into your gullet. I've heard people (fools!) complain that it's too 'heavy', but never too bitter.

don't lets ramble into such nonsense as that.
posted by Busithoth at 1:37 PM on March 22, 2007


My latte can beat up your latte.
posted by miss lynnster at 1:37 PM on March 22, 2007


I <3 statistics, Malor. Saying "mode" gets me all lathered.
posted by Mister_A at 1:38 PM on March 22, 2007


In other words, "Hey yeah. It sucks. But its suckage is consistent! And other things aren't." Which is the same kind of logic as, "Sure, poop isn't a tasty thing to eat. But at least it's consistent. I can't always count on other things I eat to be good so at least I know I'll get the same thing when I eat poop."
I've got to get me some of this B+ poop you speak of.

Also, I wouldn't say "burnt" is "bad" - it's a flavor I prefer to "bitter" which is what lots of espresso blends seem to value for no reason I can fathom.
posted by abulafa at 1:38 PM on March 22, 2007


No, Guiness tastes better, but they'll both get you drunk.

If you're a seven-year-old anorexic girl with no legs, perhaps.

I can't drink enough Guinness to get drunk -- it's so heavy that I get full, as if I'd eaten too much bread, before it can get me drunk.

As for Miller Lite, I was under the impression that a beverage had to have an APV higher than that of skim milk to provide even a hint of a buzz.
posted by solid-one-love at 1:38 PM on March 22, 2007


on preview, Graham's too far at the moment, but I'll shill my Mellitta grind and brew, only because it makes the most kick-ass cup of joe I've had outside Italy.

(but if I find myself passing Satchmo's, I'll check it out)
posted by Busithoth at 1:40 PM on March 22, 2007


I should also note that the "coffee" in question here is almost always an Americano - no "coffee flavored shake," no "sack of sugar." Those are desserts and pleasant as such, but not what I mean when I say "coffee."

Americano, black. On hot days, iced. The brews vary so widely in flavor that I prefer a nice toasty espresso unless I have time to sample everything available and pick one (which is sadly, never.)
posted by abulafa at 1:42 PM on March 22, 2007


So this means he will never set foot in Italy, where you can actually buy a good cup of coffee.
posted by wfc123 at 1:45 PM on March 22, 2007


If you're a seven-year-old anorexic girl with no legs, perhaps.

Well, nobody said it'd be easy, sir. My point was that while some beers taste better than others, all of them can be used to get loaded.
posted by jonmc at 1:48 PM on March 22, 2007


Ah, I should have been clearer. Dutch coffee, plain, brewed coffee is the best I've ever tasted. (And there I will add their Kaffemilch, but only because they seem to like each other so much.)

Further, if I were in Italy drinking coffee you can bet your socks I'd be taking my time to sample.

(Fun note: most of my foreign expat friends will only drink Americanos when in the US. Go figure.)
posted by abulafa at 1:49 PM on March 22, 2007


abulafa, you'd be horrified to find how rushed some of the best coffee places are in Italy. A teeny counter, customers barking orders, it's damned close to a comical experience, but it can be great it doesn't matter a bit (this was my repeated experience in Rome, anyway).

also, I'm referring to expresso consumption.
posted by Busithoth at 1:55 PM on March 22, 2007


Well, nobody said it'd be easy, sir. My point was that while some beers taste better than others, all of them can be used to get loaded.

Yeah. But so can Nyquil.
posted by miss lynnster at 1:56 PM on March 22, 2007


See also Project Denny's. The Project Denny's guy is actually in this movie, albeit briefly, and I think he predates the Starbucking guy by a fair chunk of time.

I'm not the main Denny's guy, but I have been a past participant in Project Denny's, and there's something to be said for having a damn nigh impossible, lazily pursued goal.
posted by the dief at 1:58 PM on March 22, 2007


Yeah. But so can Nyquil.

Not these days it can't, the new recipe is weak. I've switched to Theraflu... high on some right now, actually.
posted by eyeballkid at 2:01 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


You ever notice how, whenever some interesting scientific study gets linked to that does not involve the cure of AIDS, everyone is like, "Oh, great job guys. People are still dying of AIDS!" As though all scientific thought is mental masturbation if it doesn't lead to the Cure. And as though a theoretical physicist could do something about it anyway.

Well, the other night I was joking about this with my girlfriend. We decided that we should start extending that criticism not just to other scientists, but to everyone. And then we started yelling at some street performers for not curing AIDS.

And then I read this thread.

Some of you hate this guy for doing absolutely nothing. "someone who drinks from society's cup and never refills it"?? Sheesh.

I don't need to have some internal narrative about how useful my presence on earth is. I do my 9 to 5, read lots of metafilter, go home and read some poetry and drink some bad coffee, and try to help out other people whenever I can.

For the inevitable moment when someone makes a post about how useless I am, I apologize in advance. I guess I should have given 1,200 college students health insurance, or cured AIDS or something.
posted by roll truck roll at 2:03 PM on March 22, 2007 [7 favorites has favorites]


Hi snoktruix. You're a screaming, blithering idiot. No, you really are. The way you flaunt and flag your ignorance so proudly is appalling. Either that or you're dropping a tiresome troll to which I have risen. (You also misuse apostrophes with alarming regularity, too, but that's not the purpose of this thrashing.)

So, be honored. Or very, very afraid, because you're about to get schooled. Sit down, son.

Yes, to you coffee tastes like ass because you drink bad coffee. You admit that your coffee is bitter, and that you drench it in milk and sugar.

Contrary to popular opinion, real coffee isn't bitter. Fresh, properly roasted and brewed coffee is sweet, with chocolatey flavors and a rich, complicated flavor that has proven impossible to duplicate in a lab.

Note that Starbucks coffee isn't sweet, but a good, real Italian espresso is, as are unburnt medium roasts like an Ethiopian or Sumatra. Note that French Roast - the burnt-black-beaned Starbucks standby - is extremely bitter, and as noted many times in this thread, Starbuck's is uniformly terrible.

Anything that comes in a can or pre-ground is bitter. This isn't a matter of opinion, this is a matter of scientific fact. Ground coffee oxidises very quickly. You can actually test the pH of ground coffee and unground coffee and prove this to yourself.

Coffee is the single most complex flavor man usually encounters. Real chocolate - not Hershey's - is a distant second. To this day Coffee eludes the flavor and scent scientists.

Why? Because Coffee is not any single chemical - it's a very complex brew - pun intended - of flavanoids, antioxidants, organic esters, oils and much more.

The very humidity and temperature of the room that coffee is ground and brewed in alters the flavor balances. The dissolved solids in the water, the very taste of the pipes in the place making the coffee adds or detracts from the flavor.

It's a very complicated chemical process that goes above and beyond "boiling water and ground coffee.", the least of which that you don't actually use "boilling" water, and that the size and shape of the grind drastically changes the flavor. Turkish grind gets you way more chocolate and bitter, as does espresso, but a much coarser drip grind gets you a sharper, lighter coffee with not nearly so many "base" notes of chocolate and earth.

I've had coffee so sweet I actually was concerned someone slipped some sugar in it. Or half a bar of chocolate.

Just because you personally apparently have no sophisticated or working taste buds at all doesn't mean that the rest of us are so handicapped by your lack of taste.

Just because you're apparently an idiot who couldn't cook their way out of a greasy parchment sack doesn't mean the rest of us are so sorely wanting for skill.

It's not my fault you drink shitty coffee, and it's not my fault you don't know a sparrow's shit about how it's properly made, how to appreciate it and how to drink it.

It's not our fault if you choose to be an unculutured moron. Enjoy your tasteless life. I wouldn't trade places with you for all the coffee in Java.
posted by loquacious at 2:03 PM on March 22, 2007 [8 favorites has favorites]


All I can add is that I nearly burst into tears (okay, okay, exaggeration, but not by much) to see that corporate logo beckoning to me in the internet-and-coffee-wasteland of downtown Blackpool. I think it was the only place in the entire city where one could get online (okay, slight exaggeration, but again not by much). Coffee and wifi: we settled in, grateful for what we once took for granted as being hallmarks of Civlization, spoiled urban dwellers that we were. I don't mean to snark: I hadn't realized how narrow my comfort zone had become.

(Despite all this, I actually loved Blackpool, in a kind of pomo-Benjamin-Arcades-simulacra-surreal sort of way, even though the girl in the store sighed when I told her where I was from and said with conviction that she wished she was from anywhere else other than Blackpool.)
posted by jokeefe at 2:03 PM on March 22, 2007


It's also most often a caffeine delivery system, dude. and best cut with a little Jamesons.
posted by jonmc at 2:04 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


On preview: wtf loquacious, perhaps you need another (or less) coffee?
posted by jokeefe at 2:04 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Do we really need a documentary highlighting our obsession with gluttonous consumerism and corporate cock-suckery?
posted by schleppo at 2:13 PM on March 22, 2007


Also:

To the people bashing the pics: I think he's probably having more fun than you are.

In my case you'd be wrong - note how little time I've spent on MeFi recently. Going to every Starbucks sounds excruciatingly dull.

But then I just relocated to one of the most amazing cities in the world, I'm a happily jobless artist in a bleeding-edge art co-op and I've been so excruciatingly happy with my luck as of lately that I just want to go gibbering madly into the fog, laughing all the way.

Now if you'll pardon me I must excuse myself, go make some damn fucking good espresso, and consider what fine adventures that lay before me on this sunny day in this city of totally wonderful weirdos.
posted by loquacious at 2:15 PM on March 22, 2007


similar to wine bores getting themselves in a lather about some absurdly overpriced bottle of plonk that apparently has notes of lavender and rosewood.

That's because they need to somehow justify getting loaded to themselves as some kind of gourmet thing.

Amen. Drug snobs are the worst, be they of the wine-glass swirling, espresso-bean worshipping, hops-name dropping, ornate-bong owning or obscure-cigarette puffing types. No matter how you dress it up, you don't own your addictions, your addictions own you. on preview: Jesus, Loquacious. Has it occured to you that maybe you don't actually like coffee?
posted by Bookhouse at 2:17 PM on March 22, 2007


jokeefe: You mess with the magic happy bean, you mess with me. That's just how I roll.
posted by loquacious at 2:17 PM on March 22, 2007


Terminal Verbosity: I think this tells me everything I need to know about this schmoe.

Fo reals. I could totally dunk on his ass.

(C'mon... nothin wrong with being silly!)
posted by LordSludge at 2:21 PM on March 22, 2007


Bookhouse: don't get me wrong, I abuse substances with the best of 'em. I just get a little tired of all the bullshit people put themselves through to justify it all.
posted by jonmc at 2:22 PM on March 22, 2007


This thread really would have been better if you stuck to talking about the guy in the film in the link, and maybe the nature of obsession and lust for fame. Back and forth with the "Starbucks sucks!" is kind of missing the point here.
posted by Burhanistan at 2:27 PM on March 22, 2007


Arabian and Persian style coffee is better anyways.
posted by Burhanistan at 2:29 PM on March 22, 2007


Oops, I meant Turkish, not Persian.
posted by Burhanistan at 2:29 PM on March 22, 2007


hi loquacious. If you're so clever, what are doing in an "art co-op".
posted by snoktruix at 2:36 PM on March 22, 2007


So this means he will never set foot in Italy
"And in Italy, the epicenter of European coffee culture, the notion that the locals will abandon their own 200,000 coffee bars en masse for Starbucks strikes many as ludicrous. For one, Italian coffee bars prosper by serving food as well as coffee, an area where Starbucks still struggles. Also, Italian coffee is cheaper than U.S. java and, say Italian purists, much better. Americans pay about $1.50 for an espresso. In northern Italy, the price is 67 cents; in the south, just 55 cents. [Chairman Howard] Schultz insists that Starbucks will eventually come to Italy. It'll have a lot to prove when it does. Carlo Petrini, founder of the antiglobalization movement Slow Food, sniffs that Starbucks' 'substances served in styrofoam' won't cut it. The cups are paper, of course. But the skepticism is real." *

posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on March 22, 2007


Being famous is the most important thing in the world. Even if this doesn't work out for him, he should continue doing gimmicky shit until people notice. Otherwise he'd just be ordinary. Who wants that?
posted by rhymer at 2:38 PM on March 22, 2007


"Next are you going to tell me that Miller Lite is no worse than Guinness?

No, Guiness tastes better, but they'll both get you drunk."

No, having drank Miller Lite recently, I can say that eight of 'em didn't get me buzzed. Perhaps I wasn't drinking them fast enough, but even still, I had to switch to cheap scotch instead. Which did, by God, get me drunk like a proper liquor should.

Miller Lite doesn't get me drunk, Miller Lite gets me bored.

(And Guiness ain't much better, but it's a good analogue to the Starbucks complaints— when there weren't any other stouts, Guiness was OK. Now that there are? Fuck 'em. Gimme an Edmund Fitz from Great Lakes Brewery every goddamned time— It's a porter that drinks like a stout, and has been my favorite beer for a couple years now.)

"Many people hate Guinness, it's quite bitter."

Even my mother likes Guiness. It's not bitter at all, unless all you drink is Mountain Dew.

"Amen. Drug snobs are the worst, be they of the wine-glass swirling, espresso-bean worshipping, hops-name dropping, ornate-bong owning or obscure-cigarette puffing types. No matter how you dress it up, you don't own your addictions, your addictions own you. on preview: Jesus, Loquacious. Has it occured to you that maybe you don't actually like coffee?"

Oh, fuck that too. The perverse anyman-ism (or jonmcism) that holds all appreciation of good drugs is hogwash window dressing to inebriation is bullshit too. I love me some cheap beer, some cheap wine and some cheap liquor, but I recognize quality when I taste it. And yeah, there are complex flavors in a good scotch, and yeah, I enjoy sitting there, letting 'em swirl on my tongue.
That I can discern relative aesthetic and sensual value is the reason that I don't just fuck sheep whenever I'm horny, and I can understand the situational choice between having a watery domestic (just mowed the lawn, lemme have that MGD) and tasting a great beer (with good food, or even a beer tasting). Just like how I don't want a wonderbread and velveta sandwich every day (in fact, almost never), or how I can love punk rock and prog.
Or, to bring it back home, I tend not to like most coffee, but I'm a sucker for the vending machine cups with the cards on 'em while I'm on a road trip (the mocha is even better).
And I used to date a Spanish girl who would get the most obscene frothy, syruped sprinkle-laden contraptions available at Starbucks. Her reasoning? "All coffee in America is shit, so I might as well enjoy myself."
posted by klangklangston at 2:48 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


God, how I hate these "it's objective! / it's all subjective!" It's interesting and revealing that people switch sides in this debate depending upon the subject. It's also interesting that the subjective argument can be used to either sneeringly deride supposed snobbery or to sneeringly deride supposed bad-taste that cloaks itself in claims of objectivity. In other words, people take extreme and intolerant positions in this kind of debate out of personal convenience and self-validation.

But most of these sorts of things can be correctly claimed to have available to them some sort of imprecise metric of quality that is built around a varying degree of consensual opinion on the matter while, simultaneously individual opinion can vary substantially from this loose consensus and such individuals can make valid arguments for why they disagree with the consensus. And this is a complicated way of saying something that we all already know.

A person can easily say that a badly burned entree is "bad" even if they don't like it when it's not burned. Foods that are badly burned are usually thought by most people to be "bad", with a few exceptions, and so people don't have a difficulty making an objective claim about quality even when they are quite aware that there is a great difference of opinion about quality independent of whether it was burned. In almost all cases, judgments about quality can be said to be both objective and subjective. (I'm not claiming objectivity in the sense of some metaphysical absolutism that defines it. My definition is, I think, the more widely acceptable that, at least, there's a notion of quality that is consensual, the result of a sort of group gestalt of subjectivity.)

Is a cup of coffee with so little coffee in it that it tastes like water "bad"? Yes, it is. That's objective. Is a cup of coffee which is extremely bitter and acidic "bad"? Yes, it is. There are characteristics of coffee that almost everyone agrees upon are necessary or despoiling and those things clustered together form a metric by which coffees in general can be judged in some objective way. But as you move away from those clusters of things most everyone agrees upon, or when you start looking at them within the area of agreement in fine detail, then you move away from the ability to make objective claims and into subjectivity.

So, yes, there is an objective basis upon which coffees can be said to be better or worse than each other and, yes, there's nevertheless a great deal of subjectivity and the capriciousness of "taste". And, yes, a lot of people internalize the consensus opinion about preferences as a means of group affiliation without ever really examining those preferences or, indeed, forming them according to their own personal preferences and then equate that group affiliation with what is right and good. But, frankly, we all do that to some degree or another. Going around denouncing people because they like something that perhaps says more about their group affiliation than their personal taste and integrity is like shooting fish in a barrel. It's like throwing stones while living in a glass house. It's obnoxious because it reveals a streak of intolerance coupled with a willful lack of self-examination.

It's okay for people to have "bad taste" in some things. It's more than okay, it's unavoidable. If you think it's valid and fair to condemn someone for a particular example of this, you ought to first try to justify your implicit idea that their preference has a moral component to it. Is there a moral component to being a Starbucks customer? People argue that there is. I'll accept that with the proviso that this is a consumer society and I am skeptical that those who are critical about Starbucks or, say, Wal-Mart are as critical of each and every one of their own consuming choices as they are of these high-profile examples with which they can villify others.

Finally, the way that people are making judgments about Starbucks coffee is implicitly relativistic when they use the word "good". It seems to me that it's indisputable that, relative to the pre-Starbucks world of widely available US coffee, Starbucks is "good". It also seems to me that it's indisputable that, relative to what a coffee connoisseur who buys freshly roasted gourmet coffee beans and grinds them himself/herself thinks is "good", Starbucks coffee is "not good".
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:50 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


Malor: To the people bashing the pics: I think he's probably having more fun than you are.

languagehat: Obligatory: Don't be an asshat. Your taste does not equal objective truth.

Thank you. My God, the haters in here. What is the problem with a person wanting to do something that seems strange or pointless to you? Every endeavor can be an opportunity. In any given Starbucks this person could meet the love of his life, meet someone who offers him the job of his life, find a new religion, abandon religion. OR, he could just enjoy himself. Sheesh.
posted by iguanapolitico at 2:51 PM on March 22, 2007


*buys loquacious an espresso* Stumptown does a fine job.
posted by everichon at 2:55 PM on March 22, 2007


The perverse anyman-ism (or jonmcism) that holds all appreciation of good drugs is hogwash window dressing to inebriation is bullshit too. I love me some cheap beer, some cheap wine and some cheap liquor, but I recognize quality when I taste it. And yeah, there are complex flavors in a good scotch, and yeah, I enjoy sitting there, letting 'em swirl on my tongue.
That I can discern relative aesthetic and sensual value is the reason that I don't just fuck sheep whenever I'm horny, and I can understand the situational choice between having a watery domestic (just mowed the lawn, lemme have that MGD) and tasting a great beer (with good food, or even a beer tasting). Just like how I don't want a wonderbread and velveta sandwich every day (in fact, almost never), or how I can love punk rock and prog.

This is why I loves me some loquacious.

Going around denouncing people because they like something that perhaps says more about their group affiliation than their personal taste and integrity is like shooting fish in a barrel.

You seem to be assuming (with a weaselly "perhaps" for cover) that those of us who like Starbucks are "affiliating" with the brand. This is incorrect. I hated Starbucks because they were a brand until I actually tasted the coffee. I liked the coffee. It's damn good coffee (to my taste, and that of many other people). I strongly suspect that those who claim it's bad coffee are actually just taking out a childish resentment against "brands" and/or "capitalism."
posted by languagehat at 3:01 PM on March 22, 2007


Any low budget traveller in Europe, or anyplace for that matter, who likes to walk as a mode of tranportation and discovery, will inevitably visit most local Starbucks as the only venues offering a clean bathroom freely. No small matter.
posted by semmi at 3:07 PM on March 22, 2007


Gimme an Edmund Fitz from Great Lakes Brewery every goddamned time— It's a porter that drinks like a stout, and has been my favorite beer for a couple years now.

i just tried this a couple of weeks ago and i have to agree ... it's very good

i get MY coffee from a vending machine ... it sucks, but it has caffiene in it
posted by pyramid termite at 3:08 PM on March 22, 2007


If all coffee is the same, why not just drink water with a spoonfull of caffeine?
If all the beer or liquor is the same, why not just drink ethanol?

Maybe, just maybe, it's not just about getting stimulated or depressed, have you thought of it?
That whole "I don't need none of that fancy shit, give to me plain and straight" sort of attitude is so very american, in my opinion. Why is that? Why wouldn't you want fanciness?
posted by c13 at 3:08 PM on March 22, 2007


Guinness is a bit bitter, IMO. Bitter in the way that English beers are bitter. Other Irish stouts like Murphy's and Beamish are not bitter at all. Maybe bitter isn't the right word. It's certainly pretty hard to drink.
posted by snoktruix at 3:10 PM on March 22, 2007


McDonalds have clean bathrooms too. And something they also call coffee.
posted by miss lynnster at 3:14 PM on March 22, 2007


My $.02: This Starbucks dude, if he is enjoying himself, more power to him. Not my cup of tea. Starbucks? Not my favorite, by a long shot, but good enough, and ubiquitous. And it's true: a lot of indie shops vary wildly in the quality of coffee they make.
posted by everichon at 3:14 PM on March 22, 2007


~Star.. buckin... across the universe...

on the starship enterprise, under Latte Kirk...~

Ok, it sounded better in my head.
posted by drstein at 3:16 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Finally, anyone who argues with a straight face that there is no difference between 2-buck-chuck and a bottle of, say, really good Sagrantino di Montefalco, or between swill-brown-water coffee and actual good coffee, is full of the shit. Eat poop, you cat.
posted by everichon at 3:19 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


This is why I loves me some loquacious.

I didn't write that, but I so could have - and for a moment I thought I did write that but somehow forgot. That was really disturbing. It was like someone else was speaking in my head in my own voice - but not my own words. Jesus. *shakes head, marbles rattling* Now I really need a fresh cup.

Snoktruix: Sorry for the pounding. You're not an idiot. You're just an idiot about coffee, which is totally fine. You don't have to like coffee. Part of my angst directed towards you has a source, though, in that it's your opinions about coffee (or whatever) that makes those of us that care about coffee suffer by way of the lowest common denominator. That kind of stuff is a hair trigger for me.

What am I doing in an art co-op? Writing a book and making music. Enjoying the good life. Etc.
posted by loquacious at 3:22 PM on March 22, 2007


"You seem to be assuming (with a weaselly "perhaps" for cover) that those of us who like Starbucks are 'affiliating' with the brand."

Odd that you got that impression from what I wrote. My point was that perhaps people are doing this (because we all do it to some degree) and, if so, then attacking them is stupid and self-indulgent and, if not, then it's completely unfair. I'm certainly not assuming that the Starbucks defenders are more brand-affiliated than they are simply aware of their own preferences in coffee. I'd particularly not expect that from you and therefore it didn't occur to me to think that of you. But it's probably true of a few people defending Starbucks. The "perhaps" wasn't a weasel word, it was essential to my compound argument.

I just can't tolerate intolerance. This tribal mocking of other people—and by no means am I claiming it's any worse here than anywhere else—bugs the shit out of me because it's mean-spirited and inevitably hypocritical because there is always a place to stand whereby the group can, in turn, be mocked for bad taste, or moral failures, or inconsistency, or whatever. So MeFites seem to have sufficiently refined taste in coffee to generally dislike Starbucks and prefer more exotic fare. Fine. Are there things in which MeFites have arguably bad taste? I can think of lots of standards by which we do and other people laugh at us.

And then in opposition to this is the equally annoying "jonmc-ism" which reflexively is the contrarian to the group and, in this instance, argue that it's pretty much all the same and if there's differences, it's not important enough to argue about it while, in other threads the same person argues strenuously for the great importance of his supposedly objective viewpoint of rock music. The bottom line is that people are intolerant of other people who differ in how much they care about a particular thing. If they care a lot, then they are offended by the people who don't. If they don't care at all, they're offended by the people who do. It's fucking annoying.

"McDonalds have clean bathrooms too."

Yeah, and I sure love their french fries and occasionally a Big Mac hits the spot.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:22 PM on March 22, 2007


I just find that a reasonably good cup of coffee is pretty similar to all other good cups of coffee, despite what the coffee snobs say. Same for me with wine, with beer, with pasta, with steak. Maybe I'm just incapable of appreciating food and drink on a gourmet level. This seems to be degenerating into a religious war between food snobs and food pragmatists...
posted by snoktruix at 3:22 PM on March 22, 2007


This is why I loves me some loquacious.

Again, just to be clear, for the record: I didn't write that. Klangklangston did.

Just play the record, ok?
posted by loquacious at 3:26 PM on March 22, 2007


You can claim you didn't write it all you want, "loquacious."
posted by found missing at 3:28 PM on March 22, 2007


I didn't write that, but I so could have

D'oh! But I'm glad you feel the same way I did about it. That is why I loves me some loquacious, even though it happened to be by klangy (whom I also love, in that special never-met-the-guy MeFi way).

EB: Sorry, I misread you. And I'm with you all the way on
I just can't tolerate intolerance.
posted by languagehat at 3:28 PM on March 22, 2007


Tastes Great! Less Filling! TASTES GREAT! LESS FILLING! You suck! No, you suck! Fuck you! No, Fuck You!
posted by ericb at 3:28 PM on March 22, 2007 [4 favorites has favorites]


you are ALL drinking too much coffee
posted by pyramid termite at 3:32 PM on March 22, 2007


::switching to green tea.::

ohhhmmmm.
posted by miss lynnster at 3:36 PM on March 22, 2007


I just find that a reasonably good cup of coffee is pretty similar to all other good cups of coffee, despite what the coffee snobs say.

That's not the point, snoktruix. It's not just about "reasonably good", whatever that means. Two different "reasonably good" wines do NOT taste the same. Each one is slightly different, this is why you prefer one over the other for a specific occasion. Same with everything else. And it does not stop at food and drink. A Timex and a Rolex both keep time "reasonably well". And Toyota will get you from point A to point B just as well as a Bentley. But you do see the difference between them, do you not?
People are not snobs because they have sophisticated tastes. Furthermore, "sophisticated" does NOT mean that one likes only the best and most expensive, but that one is familiar with a wide range of whatever that might be (flavors, tastes, technical characteristics, etc)
posted by c13 at 3:39 PM on March 22, 2007


"I just find that a reasonably good cup of coffee is pretty similar to all other good cups of coffee, despite what the coffee snobs say. Same for me with wine, with beer, with pasta, with steak. Maybe I'm just incapable of appreciating food and drink on a gourmet level."

Maybe you are. That's okay, even if some people here are saying it isn't. But you also were making the claim that there was no objective basis by which people appreciate food and drink on a gourmet level. You're making the same sort of subjective-as-objective value judgment as they are.

I think this kind of argument bothers me because I'm very aware that knowledgeable and refined awareness of quality is possible with almost every choice one makes where such a concept is applicable. In consumption, in art, in intellectualism, in most everything. And it simply isn't possible for a single person to be knowledgeable and aware enough to have such discernment in every circumstance. It's not possible—and putting a lot of effort into it is a less productive use of one's time and energy than most other things. The impulse to snobbery, however, pretty much demands that this is the prime place into which one should put one's energy. And, frankly, the impulse to snobbery is not a quality-of-life instinct, it's a social instinct. It's desirous of quality not for quality's sake, but for social affiliation's sake. Or, alternatively, it can be an expression of a Randian alienated superiority complex. Either way, it's plain ugly.

Therefore, the overemphasis of "good taste" that is recognizable as snobbery is not what it claims to be. A tolerant variety of good taste is to identify within oneself what one cares enough about to require "good taste" and to allow other people to have differing priorities.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:39 PM on March 22, 2007


After all the talk of Tim Horton's, I finally got to Canada to try some.

Meh. Not much different than Dunkin' Donuts, or any other local donut shop's coffee.

I agree. I don't think it's terrible, but it is bitter. In many ways, Tim Horton's is Canada's Starbucks, except the former, for whatever reason, isn't so maligned, probably because it's not American.
posted by smorange at 3:44 PM on March 22, 2007


Tim Horton's has much better cookies and pastries.
posted by c13 at 3:46 PM on March 22, 2007


And here I thought you were just bein' colloquial, with loquacious as the adjective and a folksy assault on proper syntax.

But I'll say that despite my fist-swingin' for a lack of high/low culture dichotomy, bein' passionate about the middle road and nuance is a hard thing to keep up and nearly all of aesthetic theory stands against having strong pro-nuance and contextually-based opinions.

(Side note— I got into it with the goddamned LaRouchites in the college lobby about their sneering over Aristotle, prefering Plato's "truth" to Aristotle's mean. But I love livin' the good life, and that means enjoying what booze I drink, high or low.)
posted by klangklangston at 3:48 PM on March 22, 2007


Ok, but where's the dude who goes to every Arby's in the world?
posted by furiousthought at 3:50 PM on March 22, 2007


The perverse anyman-ism (or jonmcism) that holds all appreciation of good drugs is hogwash window dressing to inebriation is bullshit too.

I'll ignore the bait, but honestly what's so perverse about it? Taste is a great bonus, but ultimately it's all about the effect.
posted by jonmc at 3:52 PM on March 22, 2007


I have a shirt from the northernmost Denny's in the world. Fairbanks. Alaska.
posted by phaedon at 3:56 PM on March 22, 2007


I just find that a reasonably good cup of coffee is pretty similar to all other good cups of coffee, despite what the coffee snobs say.

See, I take umbrage with the "snob" label. You won't find me dropping $500 for a 1/4th pound of civet-cat-pooped coffee beans. That is a snob. And I've had that coffee, and it's overrated.

Someone who prefers to buy their own affordable (hopefully Fair Trade) locally fresh-roasted beans in small, sufficient quantities and then grind them as needed for coffee or espresso isn't a "snob". It just means they like coffee and they understand coffee.

I could write for pages and pages about the flavors I find in good coffee and never really finish the job. The sweetness on the tip of the tongue, the bitter-savory-umami flavors at the back, the strange, ethereal transient salt-like tastes of the esters that sometimes linger like clarified butter, or appear briefly and vanish like a light touch of caramel.

Some coffees taste green and peppery like lemongrass. Some are the darkest chocolate, which linger and coat the tongue and throat like a mug of hot cocoa.

The perfect froth or crema of straight espresso is the holy grail. Sometimes dark, sometimes marbled and mottled through, sometimes airy and fluffy - millions of microscopic foamy bubbles all shot through with a strange, magical chemistry unlike any other on this planet - an experience both in complicated flavors as well as complicated brain-chemistry-modifications. The traditional cocoa-pepper chocolate drink of the Americas being the only other competition in this nearly mystical chemical realm that I can think of.

(Tea purists will hang me for this, but I don't find tea to be quite so complex, mysterious or unpredictable. It's much more - forgive me - transparent and understandable. It's a very close third in my book, however.)

So. Not only do tastes and preferences differ, but the acuity of the senses of an individual differ.

This isn't snobbery, this is science. There are people who make their livings simply because they have a more active sense of taste or smell, working in the food or fragrance industry. They can be objectively tested and proven to be able to detect vastly smaller quantities of a given chemical than the average individual.

There's a fellow out there who can identify the source of cocoa in chocolate by taste alone, as featured in our recent Noka Chocolate thread. Which is a perfect example of true snobbery - repackaged, readily available dark chocolate put in shiny boxes and marked up 500%.
posted by loquacious at 3:58 PM on March 22, 2007


Taste is a great bonus, but ultimately it's all about the effect. Really? That seems sad to me. I enjoy wine (for example) often, but rarely for "the effect."
posted by found missing at 3:59 PM on March 22, 2007


Taste is a great bonus, but ultimately it's all about the effect.

Well, ULTIMATELY it is. If you're homeless, sure, the mouthwash will get you drunk. But if can afford it, why not get something else? The perversity, I guess, is deliberately narrowing your experiences just of the sake of it.
posted by c13 at 4:01 PM on March 22, 2007


The perversity, I guess, is deliberately narrowing your experiences just of the sake of it.

I'm not. But sometimes the extras just arent worth the added fuss and expense. The choice isn't always between La Fin Du Monde and Scope on the rocks. Sometimes a Budweiser or a Bacardi & Pineapple will do just fine. Not every buzz has to be an epicurian adventure.
posted by jonmc at 4:05 PM on March 22, 2007


Update: The students are covered for the upcoming semester. Hooray.
posted by boo_radley at 4:09 PM on March 22, 2007 [3 favorites has favorites]


(also, Im in no position to comment on wine, since even the smell of it literally makes me ill. I generally prefer beer, and when I'm more flush, I'll order something higher-end but for everyday couch drinking, Budweiser (not MGD, I have somestandards) is just fine.

Really? That seems sad to me. I enjoy wine (for example) often, but rarely for "the effect."

Ask yourself this: if you didn't get a buzz from it, would you bother?
posted by jonmc at 4:09 PM on March 22, 2007


If you're homeless, sure, the mouthwash will get you drunk.

You don't need to be homeless to get drunk on household products: Kitty Dukakis getting drunk on rubbing alcohol.
posted by ericb at 4:10 PM on March 22, 2007


Ask yourself this: if you didn't get a buzz from it, would you bother?

I usually (not always) have only one beer, or one glass of wine. I suppose I feel a little relaxed, but it isn't nearly enough for me to feel any kind of buzz. I really like the taste of the stuff. Especially the good stuff, which is what I tend to stick to. So, yeah, I'd bother.
posted by found missing at 4:13 PM on March 22, 2007


Not every buzz has to be an epicurian adventure.

Of course not. But I don't think anyone here is saying that. If all you have around is Starbucks, sure, it will do. But if there is a small independent shop across the street that makes much better coffee, why not try it? More to the point, if the coffee is not so much as "better" as different?
posted by c13 at 4:14 PM on March 22, 2007


Fair enough. I'd never stand in the way of another man's pleasure. But my observations of people have made me think otherwise, generally speaking.
posted by jonmc at 4:16 PM on March 22, 2007


Sorry I came late to this thread I was skydive skeet shooting and hunting for snails with a sledgehammer this morning. I thought while I’m sitting in front of my computer scratching my balls I’d take a break from working on the cure for aids to see what’cha was talking about.

“It's a very complicated chemical process that goes above and beyond "boiling water and ground coffee."”

Who the hell thought of that? Consider - you have a bean, found only in select places. It’s a pain in the ass to pull out. When you get it out it’s inedible.
“Hey, let’s boil it” says some guy. That doesn’t work. “Ok, so lets grind it up first.” That doesn’t work. “Ok, so let’s just drink the juice not the bean residue.” That marginally passes. “Hey, let’s roast it over the fire, then boil it, then...” etc. etc. etc.
Never underestimate folks with a lotta time on their hands.
posted by Smedleyman at 4:17 PM on March 22, 2007


As far as beers, if there was only Budweiser, (or MGD, for that matter, or Corona) in the fridge, I'd rather not drink at all.
posted by c13 at 4:19 PM on March 22, 2007


c13: I'm as sick of seeing a Starbucks every 12 feet as anyone, but that's mainly because of objections to corporate domination. But if I need a cup of coffee and it's what's near it's fine. Same with deli coffee. I just get a little tired of all the blather people unleash about what's to me just a caffeine delivery system. But of course, as a man who can write multipage discourses on the differences between Manowar and Twisted Sister, I realize I'm guilty of the same thing when it comes to my own pleasures.
posted by jonmc at 4:21 PM on March 22, 2007


For instance, locally, I think Jittery Joe's is at least as good if not better.

Oh, how I miss that place.
I used to hate normal coffee. Bloody hated it, unless I added milk and chocolate for homemade lattes. Then, I really needed a pick-me-up before class and got some Jittery Joe's at the student center. I was instantly hooked on black coffee for life and drink it straight daily now.
Though I can drink pretty much any coffee black now, Jittery Joe's still stands as the best damn cup ever. However, I've also worked at Starbucks. Unequivocally speaking, I agree with those saying their coffee SUCKS. It's just...nasty. It comes in pre-ground packages. Just bitter as hell. I also normally like decaf coffee- but there's nothing worse in the world than Starbuck's decaf. Black piss, I call it.
That said, their expresso is actually ground on site and their lattes are good and frappacinos rocks my face.
posted by jmd82 at 4:35 PM on March 22, 2007


Ok loquacious hon, before you levitate yourself out of your chair could you please lay some coffee swami action on me? Or should I say drop some coffee engineering down on my head, as you've already offered enough general chestnuts to start an arboretum. I have a Bodum French press and a Braun grinder and I don't boil my water and I buy organic whole beans and I can safely say that never have I tasted a coffee as bewitched as whatever the hell it is you've been drinking. So what is it? Do I need some multi-hundred dollar machine to take care of business? That is not going to happen. Do I need to be buying this one certain magical bean, perhaps from a small boy who exchanged it for a cow? Ok, but we drink a lot of coffee in this house so I can't go into hock here, though if there is some splendorous bag of pricey guaranteed wonder I will gamely buy it for a one-off lark. Coffee to water ratio: thoughts? Do I have to build a climate-controlled chamber, and if so, to what dimensions? Do I need to do a quick chakra check before commencing? Sing a Sumatran ditty? Please tell me in precise detail what I need to do to create some of the chocolate-infused wonder that's been fueling your passionate jeremiads and I will give it my utmost. Until then, you are just teasing.
posted by melissa may at 4:36 PM on March 22, 2007 [4 favorites has favorites]


I just get a little tired of all the blather people unleash about what's to me just a caffeine delivery system.

Yeah, and whenever friends come into town and ask where to get an honest-to-goodness New York egg cream I tell them that the Red Lobster in Times Square makes one as good as any. After all, it's just a sugar delivery system.
posted by turaho at 4:41 PM on March 22, 2007


Unequivocally speaking, I agree with those saying their coffee SUCKS. It's just...nasty. It comes in pre-ground packages. Just bitter as hell.

You're an idiot. (How's that for bitter as hell?)
posted by found missing at 4:41 PM on March 22, 2007


"...and nearly all of aesthetic theory stands against having strong pro-nuance and contextually-based opinions."

I'm pretty sure this isn't true, though I'm no aestheticist (by which I mean "an expert in the philosophy of aesthetics" as opposed to being an "aesthete".) My experience is that there's a great diversity spanning absolutism to relativism, depending upon schools of thought and historical era. A completely relativistic aesthetics may seem like an oxymoron, but it's not.

"Ask yourself this: if you didn't get a buzz from it, would you bother?"

In my case, yes. I rarely drink enough to get buzzed, even though I rarely drink (meaning my tolerance has gone way done). These days, I'll have a single glass of wine or beer and I'll usually not feel any effect from it whatsoever. But I still drink it. Why? For the taste. That's also why when I do drink a single wine or beer, I don't drink bad stuff.

I've seen you make this "it's only about the buzz" claim before. You're a really nice guy, I like you a lot especially since I've had the opportunity to know you personally, but this type of thing you do is very annoying. You excessively project onto other people your own personal experience. Where you don't see differences, you assume that when other people do, they're pretending (and usually your claim is that they are doing so for social reasons). Now, there's a certain amount of truth to this. But—and I'm going to go out on a limb and be a bit rude here and be patronizing—being preoccupied with this and being critical of others for it is frankly adolescent. It's adolescent because most people first realize this, and are resentful about it, when they are adolescents. It's adolescent because most people, after adolescence, adopt a more nuanced and accepting view of human nature with regard to this sort of thing. Because it turns out that people's motivations are complex, not simple. And it also turns out that assuming other people's motivations on the basis of one's own is a very tricky business, prone to errors. Yes, it's the most immediate and, often, best tool available. But when you use this tool, you learn to use it carefully and to reality check. You especially learn to be careful when making value judgments. I'm not sure you've learned this.

It's especially insulting to assume that most other people are sheep while simultaneously claiming a self-awareness that those "sheep" supposedly lack. To some degree, all people are "sheep". But if you look closely, if you make the effort to find out, you'll often find that they have their own valid and personal reasons for making the choices that they make. I see a failure to do this very often on MeFi (as well as everywhere else). As long as we're talking about non-mefites, particularly hicks in fly-over country, then simply assuming sheep-like behavior with moronic intelligence is the norm. But the fur flies when mefites play that game with each other.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:45 PM on March 22, 2007


Look, man, I can't stand Starbucks coffee either, however, I'm old enough to remember what coffee meant in this country BEFORE Starbucks and at the very least I am thankful to them for making A LOT of people demand a level of quality in coffee that previously one had to travel to Europe for. Back in the early 80s your choices were fucking Sanka or Folgers.

N-thing this. Starbucks coffee isn't what you'd call inspired. The pastries are crap. And the music is corny. But the coffee is generally OK. It's consistently palatable. Starbucks did create the market for something close to real coffee in the USA. And they inspired a lot of people to move beyond their offerings and make better coffee.
posted by jason's_planet at 4:51 PM on March 22, 2007


Etheral Bligh: point taken, but remember this whole discussuion began because some of us decided that some guys harmless quest to go travel around drinking coffee was snarkworthy. I figure that if it's his way to have some fun, no harm done. (and I've explicitly admitted that I can be as big a pain in the butt about what seem to be meaningless nuances to an outsider, when it comes to my own pleasures)
posted by jonmc at 4:54 PM on March 22, 2007


and I've explicitly admitted that I can be as big a pain in the butt about what seem to be meaningless nuances to an outsider, when it comes to my own pleasures

While I appreciate your willingness to concede this, it seems odd to me that you don't at some point say to yourself "Gee, since I see nuances others don't in the things that are important to me, maybe others see nuances I don't in the things that are important to them, so maybe I should stop doing that thing where I automatically comment 'Who cares, it's all just X anyway' and assume that when people talk about different kinds of wine or coffee or whatever, they actually know what they're talking about unless they really sound like snobs who are faking it." I mean, you do realize you're basically accusing everyone else here, including people you claim to like, of being snobs and faking it when you do that, right?
posted by languagehat at 5:08 PM on March 22, 2007


Dumbest. Thread. Ever.

Seriously guys, over 170 comments. We can do better than this. I believe in you.
posted by public at 5:11 PM on March 22, 2007


Consider - you have a bean, found only in select places. It’s a pain in the ass to pull out. When you get it out it’s inedible.

things i learned from my proctologist, pt 1
posted by pyramid termite at 5:11 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


I like the Coffee Connection coffee more than Starbucks, and I justify my (stubborn, if not bombastic) reluctance to patronize Starbucks as testament to the good, local coffee houses that were gobbled by this corporate amoeba. isn't this begging for someone to do the same to the Wal-mart chain?

and this whole (slight) derailment away from this attention-starved soul (again, I'm just jealous of his confidence at some level. I'm sure that IF I did anything so vainglorious as this, I'd never sport the scratch to pay for the bandwidth he's paying for) is in reaction to someone's loud pronouncement of love for a corporation.
posted by Busithoth at 5:43 PM on March 22, 2007


mellisa may: YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!! mehehe.


In all seriousness:

More coffee, less water. Medium-light beans, a good blend actually between rather dark and medium-light roast. My favorites these days tend to look like 1-2 dark beans for every 8-10 medium beans to 1-2 lighter beans, IE, mostly a medium roast with just a sprinkling of darker and lighter. For really good coffee, find a local roaster that still slow roasts. It's usually less expensive than store bought bulk.

The best drip-brew I've ever consistantly had is doing it by hand in either a mesh or perforated basket (more fine grinds in the coffee - more chocolaty mouth feel) or with an unbleached filter in a basket. 10-12 heaping tablespoons of medium-fine grind (finer than drip, decidedly coarser than a true espresso-powder.)

Bring good cold water nearly to a boil. Stop before bubbles form and rise. Hand pour the water into the basket, saturating the coffee from the center outwards, forming a pool that soaks to the edges. Allow it to soak through and become dry looking, repeat. Soak down the edges a bit, too. Keep the water just hot enough to not boil in between the pour-soak cycles. This will make about 16-32 oz of coffee, depending on how strong you like it.

The key seems to be the soak and drip-dry cycle, as it seems to extract more oil from the beans, especially if you forgo the paper filter and just use the mesh basket.

I think part of it is just how much one likes coffee. I can (sometimes) taste and enjoy much of the same notes even in terrible gas station coffee, but the bitter, unpleasant tastes usually overwhelm them, which is why I generally will simply forgo bad coffee until I can get something good.


Which brings up another interesting tangent.

I drink coffee for caffiene, yes. I also drink it for taste, true. I also drink it for the antidepressant and antioxidant properties - and to me it's medicine of a sort.

These antidepressant and antioxidant qualities don't seem to exist in coffee that isn't fresh and done properly. Bad tasting coffee to me is indicative that it doesn't have what I'm actually looking for.

You can look at it this way: The taste of good coffee is a symptom of it being prepared in a certain way that releases these antidepressant and antioxidant chemicals - it tastes "good" because these chemicals are present in large quantities, enforcing a positive feedback loop that's both pleasure and health driven.

Starbuck's was invented in Seattle, and coffee is very popular in northern latitudes for a reason. Those who have visited or lived there know why - it helps reduce the effects of SAD and environmental depression due to lack of sunlight from rain or season.
posted by loquacious at 5:46 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


My, loquacious certainly lives up to his name when coffee's the topic. Not that I'm complaining or would have the right to complain if I were, which I'm not and I wouldn't.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:52 PM on March 22, 2007


Hey so why do they call him loquacious?

*rimshot*

Good luck on the book!
posted by Mister_A at 6:00 PM on March 22, 2007


For me, it's quite simple. I notify my pilot that I'll be needing the jet. We fly to Taveuni, calling ahead to make sure that my native guides have prepared the equipment. On arrival, we climb to the top of the central ridgeline, picking beans on the way, beans only at the perfect stage of development, which we carefully pack in baskets lined with the freshly-cut hair of virgins.

The beans are roasted over sacred fires which have been continuously burning for more than 8 centuries, fires traditionally fed and ceremonially tended by the oldest women of the village, who prepare the wood by soaking it in shark's blood.

The roasted beans are sealed in titanium canisters, taken aboard the jet, and we return home, atwitter with anticipation.

Back in my kitchen, we grind the beans in a single-use solid-gold grinder, in an argon-gas isolation chamber, to preserve the essential oils and essences.

Only the finest mountain spring water flown in from the Dolomites is used to brew the actual coffee, at a temperature of not more than 99.7 degrees Celsius and not less than 99.2 degree Celsius. The brewing room is kept at an ambient temperature of 22 degrees, and an air pressure of precisely 1025.25 millibars.

The coffee is then ingested rectally, with a solid silver enema lovingly warmed to 0.5 degrees above body temperature.

Some say that I'm a little excessive in my devotion to coffee perfection, but gosh, I sure do love it.

Just taking the piss. I have my rituals, too.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:00 PM on March 22, 2007 [4 favorites has favorites]


"I'm pretty sure this isn't true, though I'm no aestheticist (by which I mean "an expert in the philosophy of aesthetics" as opposed to being an "aesthete".) My experience is that there's a great diversity spanning absolutism to relativism, depending upon schools of thought and historical era. A completely relativistic aesthetics may seem like an oxymoron, but it's not."

I'm not much of an aestheticist either, though I've read my fair share of art theory and taken a couple of classes on the philosophy of aesthetics. But from Plato through folks like Joshua Reynolds, the theory was generally that art was valuable or not (or art or not) based on its conforming to some "objective" basis. That changed relatively recently, and even then it's often more easy to assert authority on the grounds of universal axioms than fitting evaluation to circumstance.
posted by klangklangston at 6:20 PM on March 22, 2007


Seriously guys, over 170 comments. We can do better than this. I believe in you.

i did my best to derail this thread at inception, to no avail...

in other threads the same person argues strenuously for the great importance of his supposedly objective viewpoint of rock music

these two positions are highly consistent. people who wank about coffee are lame. people who wank about how their favorite band was cool 'til they sold out to the man are also lame.

people who argue against starbucks versus my favoritest gourmet coffee are analogous to people who argue against bright eyes versus the decembrists. the answer is that you are both lame. as an objective matter.
posted by spiderwire at 6:27 PM on March 22, 2007


"Starbuckin'"

Chorus
Starbuckin', oh the consumers choice
On the fool's ship Convenience, under milk and sugar
Starbuckin', oh the consumers voice
Burning the coffee until it tastes the worst.

Barista Purple-Hair, report!

Barista Purple-Hair:
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now
Starbucks now
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now,

Analysis, Mr. Laptop!

Mr Laptop:
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it,
not as we know it,
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it, Captain

Purple-Hair:
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now
Starbucks now
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now,

Chorus:
Starbuckin', oh the consumers choice
On the fool's ship Convenience, under milk and sugar
Starbuckin', oh the consumers voice
Burning the coffee until it tastes the worst.

Profit report, Marketer Android 27?

Marketer:
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim
Flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim.
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim, Flat.

Mr Laptop:
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it,
not as we know it,
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it, Captain

Barista Purple-Hair:
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now
Starbucks now
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now,

Starbucks Manager, James P. Shirk.

Shirk:
Ha-ha! We open in droves and we're hell to kill,
hell to kill,
hell to kill.
We open in droves, and we're hell to kill,
hell to kill, men.

Marketer:
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim
Flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim.
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim, Flat.

Mr Laptop:
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it,
not as we know it,
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it, Captain

Barista Purple-Hair:
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now
Starbucks now
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now,

Chorus
Starbuckin', oh the consumers choice
On the fool's ship Convenience, under milk and sugar
Starbuckin', oh the consumers voice
Burning the coffee until it tastes the worst.

Espresso machine, Barista pierced-face!

Barista Pierced-Face:
Ye canna brew good coffee with shit
coffee with shit
coffee with shit
Ye canna brew good coffee with shit
coffee with shit for beans.

Shirk:
Ha-ha! We open in droves and we're hell to kill,
hell to kill,
hell to kill.
We open in droves, and we're hell to kill,
hell to kill, men.

Marketer:
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim
Flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim.
It's worse then that, we're flat, Jim.
Flat, Jim, Flat.

Mr Laptop:
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it,
not as we know it,
It's coffee, Jim, But not as we know it,
not as we know it, Captain

Barista Purple-Hair:
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now
Starbucks now
There's a Starbucks in a Starbucks now
Starbucks now,

Barista Pierced-Face:
Ye canna brew this shit, Jim!
Marketer:
It's worse than that, it's economics, Jim!
Shirk:
Store 23 to HQ! Open nine new stores!
Barista Pierced-Face:
Ach! If I give 'er any more she'll suck, Captain!

*fwooomp*

Na..na..na..na..na..na..na..na..na

Chorus
Starbuckin', oh the consumers choice
On the fool's ship Convenience, under milk and sugar
Starbuckin', oh the consumers voice
Burning the coffee until it tastes the worst!

Starbuckin', oh the consumers choice
On the fool's ship Convenience, under milk and sugar
Starbuckin', oh the consumers voice
Burning the coffee until it tastes the worst!

I'm so very sorry.
posted by loquacious at 6:38 PM on March 22, 2007


Maybe I'm dim, but if the point is to savor the unique snowflakeness of these joints, couldn't this guy save himself a whole lot of hassle by just visiting any one Starbuck's 14,000 times instead?
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:39 PM on March 22, 2007


loquacious: I'm so very sorry.

dude, what?
posted by spiderwire at 6:43 PM on March 22, 2007


loquacious, honey... honestly. Maybe you need to cut down on the caffeine a little.
posted by miss lynnster at 6:44 PM on March 22, 2007


;)
posted by miss lynnster at 6:44 PM on March 22, 2007


I CAN STOP ANY TIME I WANT TO
posted by loquacious at 6:51 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


*tries not to stare at the man with too much caffeine*
posted by found missing at 6:52 PM on March 22, 2007


Oh, for heaven's sake! Almost 200 comments on this? Get a grip, people! Short version:

- YKINMKBIOK, or Your Kink Is Not My Kink But It's Okay
- Coffee is not just coffee. Water, beans, roast, brewing method, and other factors can all affect the taste. Just because you don't like Starbucks doesn't mean it sucks.
- Winter is an itinerant IT guy doing contract work, making it easy to travel around the country. Yeah, he has an eccentric hobby. So? Why the hell do you care?

What's the theme here? Different from you != wrong.
posted by booksherpa at 7:01 PM on March 22, 2007


Coffee tastes nice, it has a robust flavor that mere Postum or Roastaroma can't touch. It wakes me up in the morning. But what I really love about coffee, whether it be from Starbucks or Cafe Flore or Court Square Diner or Amoco #772 Pecks Slip, what keeps me throwing back my wake-me-up Joseph, is coffee's amazing diuretic effect.

Sure, some coffee tastes better than others. But my asshole can't tell the difference between three-day 7-11 burner swill and that Hawaiian or Colombian what-have-you that my snobby cousin just whipped up in that coffee press gizmo I gave her for Christmas '03. About fifteen or twenty minutes after I finish my coffee, I feel a rumble in my jungle that tells me there's gonna be a thrilla in my 'nilla, so I snag a section of the newspaper, or a Science News, or an old Moon Knight comic, head to the can, and go to town.

I needn't describe viscosity or lumpiness, though the variety of textures going out is at least as intriguing as the variety of flavors going in. Sometimes I wonder why a hot cup of coffee doesn't always translate into a hot shit, or why iced or tepid coffee doesn't cool down my morning slide. Or I think about how appropriate the name "espresso" is, to my way of thinking. Or, why does a cardamom pod improve the aroma of the Turkish coffee you drink, but do nothing to help the smell at the other end?

I'll leave those thoughts for the philosophers. I stand with you, my fellow coffee drinkers, as I pull up my pants, tuck in my shirt, zip my fly, and buckle my belt in solidarity with you. Flavor, aroma, caffeine, marvellously loose stools: is there a finer hot drink in creation? I think not.
posted by breezeway at 7:02 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Okay, another connoisseur heard from. Butt, I think you meant a laxative (not diuretic) effect.
posted by found missing at 7:10 PM on March 22, 2007


Can we bring birth control, circumcision, and xtianity--spicing it with a few jokes about marriage and frequency of sexual congress--into this? Then we can really get this sucker under way.

Me, I love the smell of good coffee but really don't like the stuff at all, in any form.
posted by maxwelton at 7:19 PM on March 22, 2007


Then we can really get this sucker under way.

We could talk about the many times I slept with your wife and didn't use protection, using my throbbing uncircumcised member.

And it was in Congress.
posted by spiderwire at 7:23 PM on March 22, 2007


Starbucks declawed my cat.
posted by found missing at 7:26 PM on March 22, 2007


Waste of time, next.
posted by Vindaloo at 7:28 PM on March 22, 2007


You're absolutely right, found missing. Perhaps I meant "diarrhoetic," if that's even a word.

Man, I need to ease up on the kava.
posted by breezeway at 7:29 PM on March 22, 2007


When did this thread turn into a clusterfuck "I can be funny too lol"?
posted by tehloki at 7:37 PM on March 22, 2007


clusterfuck of. clusterfuck OF!
posted by tehloki at 7:38 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


POSTUM? Do people still drink that? I mean, besides Mr. Coffee Nerves?
posted by miss lynnster at 7:40 PM on March 22, 2007


When did this thread turn into a clusterfuck "I can be funny too lol"?

the first three comments?

really, this objection could be levied at almost any thread after the first fifty comments or so. probably earlier.
posted by spiderwire at 7:41 PM on March 22, 2007


There once was a long thread about Starbucks,
In which commenters commented that it sucks,
But, it helps breezeway crap,
And, it made loquacious snap,
Still, tehloki calls the thread a clusterfuck.
posted by found missing at 8:32 PM on March 22, 2007


Well, since you all are still here, what good place and name of coffee can you recommend that I can buy online. Where I'm at right now, there is no good coffee...
posted by c13 at 8:42 PM on March 22, 2007


When did this thread turn into a clusterfuck "I can be funny too lol"?

I can be funny. Other people can be funny, too.

You, sadly, cannot. This is why you never get invited to parties, and will die alone and be eaten by your cat.


That was not meant to be funny.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:21 PM on March 22, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


I actually like Postum, miss lynnster. It tastes better than Sanka (there's less pretense of it being coffee) and you can still get it most anywhere. I haven't seen Roastaroma in ages, though. It's like Canei or Riunite wine; back in the day, we thought it'd be around forever. Little did we know....

Try Cafe Britt, c13. They're Costa Rican, my sister-in-law swears by them, and I think they ship all over the world. I think it's www.cafebritt.com, if that doesn't help try Googling the name.

And tehloki, are you really saying a 200+ post hypercaffeinated de gustibus dispute like this one wasn't ripe for a spot of honest but wacky thread-shitting? Or were you looking forward to a continuation of the churlishly ho-hum effete vs. plebeian bean battle upthread? Fine.

+: The coffee you love tastes like shit because I stirred it with my dick, and God knows where my dick has been.

-: Oh yeah, well there's a Starbucks on every corner now, where are the vacant lots of my childhood?

+: I hate your species!

-: Well, I hate your planet!

What a waste of time. So what? Big deal. Are you actually still reading?
posted by breezeway at 9:31 PM on March 22, 2007


Wow, you little whores.
posted by Firas at 9:54 PM on March 22, 2007


Referring not to the starbucks lovers but the haters-of-starbucks-lovers-and-we're-damn-proud-of-it contingent. I guess you have to get in your daily quota of elitist snobbery somehow, right?
posted by Firas at 9:56 PM on March 22, 2007


On further reading, I guess I'm late to the party, as is my habit. Nevermind...

*Leaves room, hits lights on the way out*
posted by Firas at 9:59 PM on March 22, 2007


It seems that minds of many people are in fact more their enemy than their ally.
posted by Burhanistan at 10:00 PM on March 22, 2007


That was not meant to be funny.

Well, OK, maybe it was, but unsuccessfully.

Nevermind...

Now that was funny.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:02 PM on March 22, 2007


"McDonalds have clean bathrooms too."

That may be the case, but they are not as profusely available all over any town as Starbucks, nor do they generally have the same ambiance and clientele.
posted by semmi at 10:05 PM on March 22, 2007


I can only assume that the total lack of favorites on my painstakingly-halfassed mashup of "Star Trekkin'" means that this untoward, lascivious behavior is being summarily frowned upon by the community at large.

If so, I can only support this sentiment.

/drunk
posted by loquacious at 10:22 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


I have a Bodum French press and a Braun grinder and I don't boil my water and I buy organic whole beans and I can safely say that never have I tasted a coffee as bewitched as whatever the hell it is you've been drinking. So what is it?
posted by melissa may

Organic beans don't necessarily have great flavor. Get Peet's Mocha Sanani, use two heaping tablespoons of freshly ground coffee for each six ounces of water, pour enough water to cover the grounds (This enables the coffee to “bloom”) and stir, after it bubbles (a few seconds), add remaining water to the top. Slowly press the screen into the coffee up to just below the surface. After three minutes, press the screen and the coffee grounds all the way to the bottom. Serve immediately.
posted by semmi at 10:38 PM on March 22, 2007 [2 favorites has favorites]


/drunk

favorited.
posted by spiderwire at 10:40 PM on March 22, 2007


Good night.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 11:31 PM on March 22, 2007


didn't somebody blog something similar a while ago?
posted by bam at 12:23 AM on March 23, 2007


Judging by people's defensiveness, I guess mefi just needs a thread that doesn't take itself seriously once in awhile, for humour's sake.

I'll go back to randomly favoriting comments now.
posted by tehloki at 1:28 AM on March 23, 2007


tea > coffee
posted by pracowity at 3:18 AM on March 23, 2007


beer > tea > coffee
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:07 AM on March 23, 2007


whisky > beer > tea > coffee
posted by pracowity at 4:51 AM on March 23, 2007


28 Starbucks in a day?! He must have spent all day twitching and all night on the can.

The level of personal offense that Starbucks provokes in some people never fails to boggle my mind. In a world full of much larger corporate evils, this doesn't even rank. Don't like their coffee? Don't drink it. All I know is that, thanks to Starbucks creating a market for better-than-McDonald's coffee, dull midsize towns all over America (such as my hometown) now have enough demand for independent coffee shops (or more than were there before), which I can then patronize if their coffee is better than Starbucks'.
posted by Drop Daedalus at 5:07 AM on March 23, 2007


Has anyone visited all the Scotch whisky distilleries? It might be an interesting way to tour Scotland. And unlike the Starbucks coffee everywhere, each whisky, theoretically anyway, should be different.
posted by pracowity at 5:59 AM on March 23, 2007


Ooooh, pracowity, thanks for the distilleries link. Visiting them all? Now that would be a worthwhile pursuit, IMHO.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:24 AM on March 23, 2007


Unequivocally speaking, I agree with those saying their coffee SUCKS. It's just...nasty. It comes in pre-ground packages. Just bitter as hell.

You're an idiot. (How's that for bitter as hell?)

Idiot how so? I think it's nasty and it does come pre-ground in little plastic packages. What part makes me an idiot?
posted by jmd82 at 6:29 AM on March 23, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


Well, I'll tell you one thing, Starbucks in Japan is much, much better than any of the Starbucks I've ever been to in the States. I think it has a lot to do with the discipline of the workers: they keep the machines really clean, they don't make the coffee too hot, they pay careful attention to the necessary details that result in a tastier cup of coffee. And that's just something you can't generally get US minimum-wage workers to do.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:33 AM on March 23, 2007


Holy crap, all this Sturm und Drang about Starbucks? And to think I was once considering starting a Starbucks meetup group. Looks like I made the right decision...

loquacious, I'm with you about the apostrophe abuse, but about "real Italian espresso", I don't recall the espresso I had in Italy being sweet. It wasn't what I would call bitter but it was naturally sweet either. Are you speaking of the Americanized version of espresso? oh, and you write some eloquent flames but perhaps you might consider cutting back on the caffeine a bit?
posted by fuse theorem at 6:36 AM on March 23, 2007


flapjax at midnite: US Starbuck workers typically don't have control over the temperature of the coffee. As far as drip coffee, it's a purely automated process in your local Starbucks. Though I don't like their coffee, the extreme ends of bitterness is usually due to not brewing fresh pots every x minutes. Like I said, we typically don't even grind the coffee in house. With espresso, the extent of our quality control consisted of changing pull times and keeping machines clean.
posted by jmd82 at 7:53 AM on March 23, 2007


I know the Project Denny's guy. He's kind of an ass as well.
posted by kalessin at 8:04 AM on March 23, 2007


I love you, Loquacious.

Also, something about coffee.
posted by infinitywaltz at 8:13 AM on March 23, 2007


Mmmmm. I love the smell of sarcasm flying over people's heads in the morning.

Oh yeah, and coffee.
posted by miss lynnster at 8:19 AM on March 23, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


I had my first Tim Horton's experience last month. The coffee's good, but it was the Tim Bits that had me returning every day.
posted by Sassenach at 8:24 AM on March 23, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]


"Has anyone visited all the Scotch whisky distilleries?"

Now there's an idea.

I like the espresso. Couple of good private clubs out here that have the real stuff. I haven't been to a regular coffee place in a while. Although I'll have starbucks just for the caffene. I think there's a sharp difference in drinking in leisure and drinking because 'dammit I got a lot to do today.'
I know some guys - one's a personal trainer - who lift the weight/hit the gym and then have coffee to go to work. That's always killed me. Seems to drive all the water right out of my muscles and makes me sore. Although they're much younger - so they also drink a great deal of alcohol and club all night, which would screw me up too....so...

Still, sometimes you want to taste it, sometimes you want to inject it. And, as with any drug, there's use and there's abuse.
28 starbucks a day...
posted by Smedleyman at 11:03 AM on March 23, 2007


Lemmy >∞ > whiskey > beer > tea > coffee
posted by Smedleyman at 11:06 AM on March 23, 2007


Lemmy > everthing
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:19 PM on March 23, 2007


Lemmy > ∞ > whiskey > beer > tea > coffee > Lemmy
posted by tehloki at 9:20 PM on March 23, 2007


tehloki's paradox?
posted by Firas at 9:37 PM on March 23, 2007


Smedley (Lamarr):"Has anyone visited all the Scotch whisky distilleries?"

I'm with you Smed, most of the so called, "fine" single malts that make it to this country are the hyper-processed and food dyed Starbucks coffees of Scotches. I can only imagine how good the real stuff is.

To add to my comment above, I see no reason to believe this guy is not an idiot, but I'm all for the idea of reclaiming and re-humanizing corporate spaces. More of it should happen. People should have poetry readings in White Castle's, Free medical care should be available at Burger King's, Women should give birth in iHop's, lovers should get it on, on the salad bar at Bob's big boy. Music recitals should happen in Dunkin Donuts (their coffee is better than you know who...), Knitting groups should hold meetings at Pizza Hut, Senior citizens should tell stories of the "olden days" at Denny's...something like that. It could be like Fastfood 2.0 (tm.)
posted by Skygazer at 9:31 AM on March 24, 2007


I call it a Hawking Hole
posted by tehloki at 12:19 PM on March 24, 2007


Nice to see the usual Languagehat and a few others fighting the starbucks hate. It's an endless job.

Approximately, yes, justgary. I'm not skeetshooting while skydiving, I guess, by my goals are better than "visit more than 28 identically branded coffeehouses in one day". My goal -- for this day, at least -- is to ensure that 1,200+ students get the health insurance that they're entitled to. I'll let you know how it goes. Or, maybe you could follow me with a camera.
posted by boo_radley

Update: The students are covered for the upcoming semester. Hooray.
posted by boo_radley

Boo Radley, my comment had nothing to do with your occupation. I don't know, nor care, what you do with your valuable time. Cure cancer, save the rain forest, it doesn't matter to me. You were commenting on what a lame life someone lives while sitting on your ass posting to a website. That's worth a chuckle.

Life is too short. People should do whatever it takes to make them happy, as long as it hurts no one in the process. If his calling is to go to every starbucks in the world, if that makes him happy, who are you to judge? Should we all put our occupations and rank them by importance? Would that make you feel better? You obviously feel your work is important, work that you chose to do, that should be enough for you. Why the need to put down others? Keeping score in life really is kind of pathetic.

So to answer your question boo radley, you're either bitter about your job and desperately need validation (did the favorites help?) or you're a judgmental jerk, so I'd rather take pictures of starbucks guy. At least he's too busy doing what he loves to be either of those.
posted by justgary at 10:36 PM on March 26, 2007


« Older No Impact Man...   |   Uyghur goes pop!... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments