Single Malt or Blended?

I have a cousin who answers to the name of Murali. On one of his visits to me for lunch, without checking my liquor stock, I tried to impress him by proclaiming that we would have “Pink Gin”, for I had that small bottle of Angostura Bitters simply called, Bitters. In Defence Canteens Bitters was beginning to be in short supply and so I had whacked a bottle a few years ago and preserved it. It was used very sparingly. Murali came and I went for the bottle of Gin which I was sure I had in stock. Sure enough, there was no Gin! I felt stupid as I had not bothered to keep some beer cold, either. As I looked open-mouthed at Murali not knowing what to do, since drinking whiskey during day is not elegant (though I had Vodka), he coolly came up with a solution. He said: We will have “Old Fashioned”. What? I said. Now Murali is a master at making cocktails, a mixologist as it were, as was told by his charming wife Bindu. Normally wives don’t speak high of or praise their husbands. But not Bindu. That’s what charm – read love - is all about. And so we had that drink as beautifully prepared by him and enjoyed it thoroughly. I found it terrific. Try it.

Whiskey drinkers consider themselves to be a class apart. And in that there is a super class. The Single Malt club (I don’t know whether there are other “exclusive clubs”). The latter assign themselves a lot of snob value. Blended whiskeys are simply passé for them. I am not in the league to understand the nuances. You know the colour, the smell, the smokiness and what have you that the so called connoisseurs brag about. Actually it is an acquired taste. You swim through, reach your level of happiness and having arrived you pitch your tent, a bivouac really, there.

But that loyalty is as far as liquor is concerned. What about loyalty towards own ethnicity and nationality?

You see, being somewhat interested in, okay let me be blatant about it, being crazy about sports and games, I try and watch (that’s all my involvement now!) as many sporting events as I can on TV. Once upon a time, I followed cricket earnestly, but as time went on I got completely weaned off the willow wielding. You know the reason. It ceased to be a sport. It got seized by crass, self-abasing commercialisation. I go for the honour and glory of sports, whether you play for your club or the Nation. You are representing something or other and in that order the highest is the Nation. So honour is all about it. I remember getting goose pimples while during our school athletic meets when the school captain holding the school flag took the oath, ending it saying “.....in the true spirit of sportsmanship, for the glory of sport and the honour of our school”. Same with other higher meets with appropriate change of the last word and the flag. Sportsmanship, Glory and Honour stayed put, always, everywhere and every time. Writing this gives me goose pimples now!

Once the sponsors came on the scene of cricket, the name and emblem of India became insignificant in front of the prominent “sahara” or “wills” or a host of other commercial establishments. The cricket players became walking bill-boards. They played for money of any kind. Honour of the country got damned! Obviously corruption had to walk in boldly with head held high into their dressing rooms! Match fixing became the norm and that was the end of my interest in cricket. Somehow the underworld and me don't jell! 

Long ago, as a kid, I had wondered about the US of A. If the Blacks were not there they were nothing in sports. And if the Jews were not there they would be plodding in poverty. But America is a special country. There is nothing like an ethnical (or even ethical) American. If at all there were, they were the Red Indians. The later immigrants, the swindlers with money bags, cheated the brave locals of that vast country of their race, of their pride, of their talents and their skills and finally managed to wipe them out completely. (The early ones, my beloved cowboys lived more in harmony with the locals). American people are multi-racial and multi-cultural. You will notice each person having a multitude of ancestry. So when you say “an American”, except for the language, there is nothing that you can put your finger on as his ethnicity.

My problem is, when you talk about a country’s National team, you imagine people of that ethnicity, culture and colour. You have an image of a particular country’s people. Chinese, Japanese, African, Russian, British, West Indian...you get my drift, no? You are not imagining a person light of skin and blue eyes when you say ‘African’. And when you day Chinese, you are not imagining a black person, never a Negro. (I will use this politically incorrect word. To my mind, they should be proud of being termed so). It is only when you mention an Arab; there could be black ones and white ones and others in between. For reasons such as belonging to two continents and other complicated reasons. Generally most of the countries are homogeneous in population.

In this year’s Football World cup, French team became the butt of many jokes, fundamentally due to too many black players. The young Mbappe of mixed ancestry became the toast of the football world. The Belgian, Lukaku, a great player, agonised that for the Belgians he is Belgian when he scores goals and when he doesn’t he is of Congolese descent. He meant a lot, right? In fact in most of the football teams there were Blacks to embellish and strengthen the team. Eastern teams being exceptions.

Western Europe has become multi-racial in general. If you are born in a particular country, that too after a generation or two, you can have loyalty that is totally weaned off from that of your ancestors and have loyalty aligned with the country you are born in. The first immigrant generation will not have it, the second would be in a dilemma but third generation onwards their loyalty would be firm. In spite of their ethnicity.

In this year’s Asiad, Bahrain and Qatar put up African athletes to win medals. (They also have East European athletes in disciplines such as wight lifting). This is a kind of a win-win situation for the countries and athletes. For the athletes it was well nigh impossible to make a living in sports in their own countries as they would not be able make a mark there, the standard being higher. And for Bahrain and Qatar, it was a way of getting into prominence in sports. To be a strong developed country, strength in sports is important as in economy. And these Black athletes pipped other Asian athletes at the post. These athletes are actually mercenaries. One could see when the country’s national anthem was played and the flag was going up, these mercenary athletes standing on the podium were devoid of emotion. Most of them were not even singing their national anthem. Do you see what I mean about Loyalty and Ethnicity?

Asian countries may crib. They may say that they feel they are not competing with Asian nations but African nations. To my mind, in a way, it is okay. Being a frog in the well, you don’t learn and improve. No competition (Oh, hell, discounting China and Japan). Better the competition, better you become. So that is fine as far as that is concerned. But the nation becomes like a club, while buying out athletes and players. But all are not mercenaries.

Chinese badminton and table tennis players represent Australia and European countries as their citizens. The dread locked Dustin Brown, a bi-racial tennis player has no look of a German, though his mother is one. In the recently concluded US Open Tennis, the sensational young lass, a doll, Naomi Osaka, with her complexion and at 5’11” was hardly the image of a Japanese! She too is bi-racial, with a Haitian father and I don’t mean to rob even an iota of her glory (much as I would like to of her opponent in that final which will be remembered for all the wrong reasons). I am sure that she is destined to be a legend.

You see, each race or ethnicity has its own basic characteristics. Due to their social, cultural, historic backgrounds and geographical locations, they develop certain unique abilities, traits and identities. These get reflected in their genes. When this gets mixed I wonder whether it is good or bad. When mixed marriages multiply in geometric progression, after a stage race or ethnicity vanishes. Only nationalism would remain that too only because one chooses to live there. If so why nationalism even? Why should we have nations with borders, which have been changing over each war, especially the World Wars. The world could be one nation with borders only for ease of administration.

God! Where I am I going? What am I saying? Why am I trespassing into the areas of anthropology? All I want to say is, when I expect a Chinese diver I am not expecting him to look like a German. An East European weight lifter should not look Negroid. A Korean footballer should not look like a Sri Lankan. Mongolians don’t look like the Nordic. If they do, that is incongruous! 

Ethnicity is best represented by the cuisines, I suppose. When I order Chinese noodles in a restaurant, I don’t expect to be served beef steak. Masala Dosa is not the name of a Korean dog, for heaven’s sake!

Even Nature has created her own unique identities depending on the regions as fancied by her. There are no oceans within the desert or vice versa. There are no tropical forests in the Arctic. If nature would regard, why should man disregard his own ethnicity? Why try to make the rivers flow upwards? Why create chaos in the order ordained by Nature?The only ones who can be excused by me on this count are the Americans. Anybody or anything can be American.

That’s all I wanted to say. But what all nonsense did I say! Do pardon me for my rants.

Pssst. Indians look like a lot of people, have you have noticed?

As far as ethnicity or ancestry is concerned, I prefer single malt. Murali’s cocktails are something apart, though. Molotov is also a cocktail! That’s what the world is making today.

By the way, single malt is also technically, in strict terms, a blended whiskey!

Cheers!