Wednesday, February 1, 2012


While doing a bit of research for an upcoming post, I realized something: I'm so tired of seeing PNTO reviews.  They go like this: The pour... The nose... The taste... Overall... (e.g. this).  And yes, they're rampant on BA, where everyone and their brother is self proclaimed cicerone.  Beer For Lunch hit it out of the park in this post, but I'm talking about the structure of a boring, snobby, formulaic, shitty review.

In the world of beer, is there anything more obnoxious than a PNTO review?  Maybe, but not right now.  Certainly I don't claim we here at the Non Snob firm write fine prose or poetry (certainly this is neither), but I like to think we've done a good job maintaining our connection with this thing called reality.  Shit happens in everyone's life, and beer is usually involved somehow.  So why must a "review" have to proclaim some sort of beer truth, like there's only one way to experience or taste a great (or even shitty!) beer.

But let's say you can evaluate all the components of a PNTO in fine detail (and yes they are important!).  Is the problem then that you're so uninspired that you can't place some context behind your review?  I hope not, because that would make BA a barren wasteland, like the sad ending in Wayne's World (nothing like the Scooby Doo or Super Mega Happy endings).

So, please, if you insist on writing a rigid, boring, uninspired PNTO review, why don't you just GIIIIT OUT.


  1. I think you missed a caveat: you can follow the PNTO rule if you do it while showing off your rockin tits

  2. objectivity is for scientists, not beer drinkers. DUUUUUHHHHHHH.