Hyperglyphics

My thoughts in the last post I wrote ended up kind of truncated because I was rushing to finish the post and hadn’t really thought about how the Hemingway story I highlighted relates to some of the other issues I find myself dealing with on an almost daily basis in my work as a writing professional. So I want to take the time to explore some of those issues a bit further…

In addition to the RiP flick and the new Hemingway edition, several other items floating around the interwebs have kept me revisiting the subject of revision over the last week or so.

Here’s a fascinating one: Did you know that the rum cocktail known as the “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” is actually patented? I did not (see, this is why newspapers are still relevant - for this kind of tough, hard-hitting investigative journalism). I happen to love this particular cocktail, but I had no idea that when I order one at a local bar (I will not name names here because I don’t want to cause legal trouble for anyone over a stupid cocktail) that there is trademark violation going down. Apparently, a particular rum company has claimed what are essentially intellectual property rights to the recipe for a drink and any bar owner, restauranteur, professional mixologist, or private citizen who uses the term “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” to describe a mix of rum and ginger beer that does not strictly adhere to that recipe (which, of course, calls for the rum this company produces) is treading on trademarked turf.

Personally, I find this hilarious, on the one hand, and disturbing on the other. That no one else can use the words “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” is the height of absurdity to me and I think is a commentary on the way capitalism attempts to commodify and privatize things that should be open to creative remixing. The article notes that the art of the cocktail is just that: an art, in which bartenders put “creative individual spins on time-tested drinks.” This is about as literal as you can get when talking about remix culture, wouldn’t you say?

Think about it this way: what if Beefeater or some other gin company had trademarked the name and patented the recipe for the martini? A bartender who used a different kind of gin, even if s/he followed the recipe otherwise to the letter, could not call that drink a martini. Martini purists might like this, actually, since it would certainly prohibit the use of the dreaded vodka! What what if you patented the recipe for the “gin and tonic”? All of a sudden, you’re putting everyone who mixes gin and tonic together and calls it what it is into a legal bind. I know that example is not quite the same - the “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” name is not simply a recitation of ingredients, but a creative term some genius (probably in marketing) came up with to give this particular brand of rum something to differentiate it from the pack. Still, I can’t help but love the solution to this legal conundrum suggested by the bartender considering adding a splash of unauthorized lime juice to her otherwise by-the-book “D’n'S”: just change a letter to a symbol and you’ve got a perfectly legal Dark & Stormy made just the way you damn well please.

I’ll just post this much for now and continue this train of thought with some more thoughts on remixing shortly. Til then…