Let me explain:
Several weeks ago, I was in the Starbucks at the corner of 56th & 7th and I was waiting for my medium mocha with an extra shot of espresso and no whipped cream (which is the English translation of a “Tripled Grande No-Whip Mocha” in Starbuckese, a language I refused to use), because I don’t like their coffee. Starbucks makes crappy coffee–for the most part over roasted and burnt. Here’s the thing, they should be able to make a decent cup of coffee, seeing as that is their stated raison d’etre. But they don’t. Ok, bad coffee I can deal with, but as I stood there, waiting for a 19 year old barista who wouldn’t know his arabica from his robusta, I realized that I was surrounded by people who were ordering “triple caramel lattes” and “tall cinnamon mocha swirl” or what ever else silly, sugar-laden, dessert-y drinks served that have very, very little to do with coffee.
It was embarrassing: a bunch of grown men & women ordering liquid dessert for breakfast. I felt dirty. So I made a vow, then and there, never to be a Starbucks whore, never again to offer myself up to the corporate–at least this particular corporation–trough and drink deep the muddy waters of crappy coffee, never to suck at the teat of that crazed looking woman from the log (I mean, doesn’t she just look like she is ready to eat your soul?), never again, never again!
As Neitzsche said:
“everything ugly weakens and afflicts man. It recalls decay, danger, impotence; he actually suffers a loss of energy in its presence . . . Whenever man feels in any way depressed, he senses the proximity of something ‘ugly’ (Twilight of the Idols, 90).
Maybe that “loss of energy” is why we keep sucking down the caffeine and sugar? Starbucks is, ultimately and aesthetically an “ugly” choice for coffee consumption and I for one will continue to say “no” to their product.
A big, fat, triple venti “no” latte with vanilla syrup and whipped cream.