SC - Past subjects

[Stefan li Rous]

Christine A Seelye-King wrote:
> 
> > You know I'm really tired and in pain (tooth problem) when I look at
> > the above and start wondering why Mistress Christianna is asking about
> > fizzy lifting drinks, stolen or otherwise...
> 
>         I don't even want to know what you're talking about here...

Good, 'cause I'm going to tell you. If you are either a) a case of
arrested development, or b) the parent of a young child (in which case
I'm doubly qualified, it seems) you will have encountered the movie
version of Roald Dahl's "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", watizzit,
"Willy Wonka and etc."? A major plot hinge centers on the alleged theft
of fizzy lifting drinks. Which, considering the Fleischmann's yeast used
in lemon beer, seemed apropos... 
 
> > Okay, rather than tell you again all about SCA funds, let's try
> > another way to put this in perspective. You know drinks like Malta
> Goya, or
> > the various near-beers, which are theoretically non-alcoholic, at least
> 
> > for practical purposes? Once upon a time, these beverages (before
> > pasteurization of beers) logged in at under 1% alcohol. Modern,
> > crappy American beer, that awful pseudo-pilsener made with lovely stuff
> 
> > like unmalted rice and corn, measure in at something like 5-6% or less.
> I
> > would guess, very rough estimate, y'unnerstand, that small beer gets
> > you something like 2%. Of course it varies greatly depending on how the
> 
> > malt was mashed, for example, if it was a hot mash and there are a lot
> of
> > dextrins, and therefore fewer fermentable sugars, the ale is lower
> > in alcohol, and a second running will be commensurately lower.
> 
>         Yes, yes, I know all about the legality issues, I'm trying to find out
> what the parameters are, I guess.  I think your answer above tells me
> what I was assuming, (and we all know where that will get you), that
> near-beer is presumably close to small beer.  Would near-beer be ok to
> serve at an event?  If so, and you made something that was under whatever
> the allowable  %  of alcohol was, can you serve it?  (For the purposes of
> this argument, let's assume we're not talking about donated goods, but
> raw materials purchased with feast funds, then turned into fizzy drinks.)

_IN THEORY_... it ought to be possible to mash malt (and any brewers you
know might want to investigate using adjunct specialty malts for this,
such as dextrine malt or crystal/caramel malt, in which case mashing
isn't much of an issue) at a temperature such that the sugars produced
in conversion from starch are mostly unfermentable, i.e. too
complex/heavy, all they do is produce a rich mouth feel and a good head
of foam, but don't taste very sweet or feed yeast adequately.

With that in mind, one of Charlie Papazian's books on home brewing (the
second one, I forget the title, but it might be "The New Joy of Home
Brewing") has a recipe for a dextrinous, heavy, "near-beer", based more
or less on the Latin American Malta formulas, essentially near-stout.
Using such a recipe, it ought to be possible for an experienced brewer
your way to tinker a bit and come up with a suitably weak, pale,
medievalish ale (really dark [English] ales seem to be 18th-19th
centuries, as far as I can tell, given Markham's malting instructions,
among other evidence) that is also less than 1% alcohol, with just
enough fermentable sugars to allow carbonation in bottles, if you want
it that way.

Now, this is all theoretical. Of course, if one wanted to make doubly
sure and donate the materials so as to avoid SCA liability, and thereby
risk incurring personal liability to an unknown extent, I will point out
that five gallons of such ale, probably enough for at least forty
breakfasts, would probably cost about $8 - 10 US, and that's in devalued
New York currency ;  ).

Of course, I could not in good conscience advise such a course... 

Adamantius seenoevilhearnoevilspeaknoevilnohablaespanol
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com