Topline:
L.A.-based perfumer duo SAMAR created a fragrance inspired by death. That scent includes rainfall, butter cookies and guinep.
The context: SAMAR’s scent is part of a wider exhibition at the Institute for Art and Olfaction, which showcases fragrances from different perfumers who were each inspired by a cultural memory or mythology.
Read on ... to learn more about the exhibition and how these scents are created.
Have you ever wanted to relive a significant memory from your childhood? Or wondered what it would be like to smell a mythological being — like the African goddess of the ocean, Yemayá?
In the new exhibition Storycraft: Twelve Olfactory Narratives, at the Institute for Art and Olfaction in Chinatown, 12 local perfumers were prompted to create scents linked to a specific cultural memory or myth. Storycraft is a sister exhibition of the IAO Olfactory Storylab at the Craft Contemporary museum.
I sat down with two of the perfumers to explore how and why they created a death-themed scent for the exhibition.
Na-Moya Lawrence and Debbie Lin — known collectively as SAMAR — are an independent perfume duo that’s among the 12 perfumers featured at the Storycraft exhibition.
Lawrence wanted to evoke a very specific memory with her scent — when she experienced death for the first time at 7 years old at her great-grandmother’s funeral in her hometown Accompong Maroon in Jamaica.
She remembers smelling the thunderstorm, butter cookies and guineps.
“It was really rainy, it was dark, and everyone was out dancing in the streets except for the chickens who were hiding in the doorstep. And I just have these really visceral scent memories from that moment of the earth and the rain and the fruit,” Lawrence said. “So this perfume is kind of this balancing act between the first experience of grief but also the celebratory nature of this moment with my family.”
For Lin and Lawrence of SAMAR, translating an idea into a scent involves a lot of chemistry and testing.
They build their perfumes by pulverizing and distilling extracts from real plants and fruits.
Then, there’s an editing process.
One person makes a blend of fragrances, or an "accord," as it's called in the perfume world. The other acts as a copy editor, noting what’s missing.
For example, in their exhibit fragrance, the duo used a chemical called geosmin to emulate the smell of a thunderstorm.
“ Realism has always been a big goal for us because we want to have people who smelled our work to really have a visceral kind of reaction or memory,” Lin said.
“For the residency and for the exhibit, we emphasized newer perfumers — people who haven't been around for 10-plus years — and folks from the local area 'cause we really wanted to highlight Los Angeles' thriving perfume scene,” Institute for Art and Olfaction co-founder Saskia Wilson-Brown said.
At the Storycraft exhibit, visitors will see a display of 12 different glass jars with white beads infused with fragrances alongside an accompanying artwork or object. And you can open the bottle and take a sniff.
“We chose to show the scents in that way because we all have memories of being sprayed at the department stores. No one likes it, you know? So we wanted an opt-in experience,” said Wilson-Brown, who also is one of the co-curators for the exhibition. “But also the perfumes were developed not necessarily for skin application. ... They're designed to be experienced in the bottle as they are being displayed.
Perfume is kind of having a moment right now. In 2024, fragrance was the fastest growing sector within beauty because of Gen Z and teen boys increasingly buying fragrances, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Wilson-Brown attributes this trend to perfume’s price tag in comparison to other luxuries.
“ With social media, there's this sort of hyper-fixation on the uniqueness of every individual,” she said. “[Perfume] is relatively affordable in terms of luxury.”
Wilson-Brown also said the independent scent scene in L.A. has been thriving in the last decade. Although for independent perfumers like SAMAR, the objectives to scent aren’t necessarily commercial.
“Scent isn't just a commodity. Scent is artwork, right?” Lawrence said. “And scent doesn't always have to be something beautiful. It can just be something that makes you feel something.”
Storycraft: Twelve Olfactory Narratives is open now until Oct. 31. It complements the IAO Olfactory Storylab installation at the Craft Contemporary, which is ongoing until Oct. 26.
Topline:
President Donald Trump is set to address the nation on the Iran war at 6 p.m. Pacific time tonight, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying he would be providing "an important update," without providing further details.
Why now: On Tuesday, Trump said he expected the conflict to be over in two to three weeks, adding, "we'll be leaving very soon," and promising gas prices would then "come tumbling down."
Keep reading... for updates on where the war now stands more than a month into the conflict.
President Trump is set to address the nation on the Iran war at 9 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday night, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying he would be providing "an important update," without providing further details.
On Tuesday, Trump said he expected the conflict to be over in two to three weeks, adding, "we'll be leaving very soon," and promising gas prices would then "come tumbling down."
Trump shrugged off what would happen to the blockaded Strait of Hormuz – which has cut off one fifth of the world's oil supply – saying, "we're not going to have anything to do with it." He said that it wouldn't affect the U.S. and would be something for other countries to deal with.
"They'll be able to fend for themselves," he said, having previously told European allies who have refused to enter the war to "go get your own oil!"
The assertion to wrap up the war quickly comes just days after Trump threatened to up the ante if there was no deal and Tehran didn't reopen the strait. He said he could seize Iran's oil and blow up all of their Electric Generating Plants and desalinization plants. He also said he was considering an invasion of Iran's key oil export terminal, Kharg Island.
But on Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed his boss's latest comments on the war being over in a matter of weeks, saying the main goal of preventing Iran from being able to build a nuclear weapon had been achieved.
Rubio has expressed frustration in recent days over news reports accusing the administration of lacking clear objectives in Iran.
He said the objectives were: the destruction of Iran's air force, the destruction of its navy, the "severe diminishing" of its capability to launch missiles, and the destruction of its factories.
Regime change, previously touted by the administration as a goal, was not mentioned. Earlier this week Trump said he considered regime change had been achieved, despite the fact that it remains a hardline theocracy led by the son of the previous ayatollah.
Here are more updates on day 33 of the Iran war:
Fighting overnight | World leaders | Iran | American journalist kidnapped| Hegseth visits troops | Aid hold up | Peace plan
The Israel Defense Forces said they hit 230 targets in Tehran while also widening an invasion into Lebanon. Meanwhile, Iran is striking back at Gulf neighbors, especially military bases used by the U.S. this week. One of those attacks injured as many as 20 U.S. service members in Saudi Arabia.
Since the war began over a month ago, 13 U.S. service members have been killed. Iran says more than 1,700 people have been killed in Iran.
Also overnight Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels claimed missile attacks on Israel, which the Israeli military intercepted. The Houthis have vowed an "escalation" in attacks.
Israel's emergency services reported Iranian missiles fired at central Israel had injured 14 people, including children.
At Kuwait's international airport, Iranian drones hit fuel depots, causing a huge fire, a day after a Kuwaiti oil tanker off Dubai was hit.
In Qatar on Wednesday, a missile launched by Iran hit an oil tanker leased to QatarEnergies, which said no one was injured and reported no environmental impact.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer addressed the nation on Wednesday about how the rising cost of living caused by the conflict will affect British citizens and what his government is doing to try to mitigate that.
He repeated a previous vow that the U.K. will only take "defensive" action against Iranian attacks in the Middle East and would not get drawn into the war. He also announced his foreign secretary would organize an international summit on the Strait of Hormuz aimed at restoring freedom of navigation.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese also gave a national address on the war on Wednesday.
Earlier this week Albanese announced his government would halve the fuel tax for three months to give Australians some respite from the rising costs.
He urged Australians to use public transport and not to hoard fuel. He also warned that "the reality is, the economic shocks caused by this war will be with us for months."
Ebrahim Azizi, the head of Iranian Parliament's National Security Committee, said on X in a message to Trump that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen "but not for you."
Referring to the period since Iran's 1979 revolution, he added: "47 years of hospitality are over forever."
Iran this week approved a bill to charge vessels for crossing the vital economic waterway.
"Trump has finally achieved his dream of 'regime change' — but in the region's maritime regime!" Azizi said.
It's not just vessels that are now trapped near the Strait of Hormuz.
An estimated twenty thousand seafarers are onboard — in an active warzone — and the U.N. is trying to extricate them.
Most seafarers are from the Philippines, Bangladesh and India and some vessels are reportedly running low on food and water.
The U.N.'s International Maritime Organization is negotiating with all sides to try to evacuate them.
American freelance reporter Shelly Kittleson was kidnapped in Baghdad Tuesday, according to Al-Monitor, a Middle Eastern news site for which she has written.
Iraqi security forces said they intercepted a vehicle that crashed and arrested one of the suspected kidnappers, but are still searching for the kidnapped journalist and other suspects.
U.S. officials say they're working to get her released.
"The State Department previously fulfilled our duty to warn this individual of threats against them and we will continue to coordinate with the FBI to ensure their release as quickly as possible," Dylan Johnson, the assistant secretary of state for global public affairs, said on social media.
He said Americans, including media workers, have been advised not to travel to Iraq and should leave the country. The statement did not condemn the kidnapping or express concern.
Johnson said Iraqi authorities apprehended a suspect associated with Iran-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah, believed to be involved in the kidnapping.
Press freedom organizations expressed deep concern. The Committee to Protect Journalists called on "Iraqi authorities to do everything in their power to locate Shelley Kittleson, ensure her immediate and safe release, and hold those responsible to account."
Based in Rome, Kittleson has reported on Iraq, as well as Syria and Afghanistan, for years, according to Al-Monitor.
Reporters Without Borders said she is "very familiar with Iraq, where she stays for extended periods."
"RSF stands alongside her loved ones and colleagues during this painful wait," the organization said.
Al-Monitor said in a statement it is "deeply alarmed" by her kidnapping. "We stand by her vital reporting from the region and call for her swift return to continue her important work," it said.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made an undisclosed trip to the Middle East to visit troops on military bases over the weekend. He did not divulge the location for the troops' safety.
"I spoke to Air Force and Navy pilots on the flight line who every day both deliver bombs deep into Iran, but also shoot down drones defending their base. Many had just returned from the skies of Iran and Tehran," he told reporters in a briefing Tuesday.
He said he "witnessed an urgency to finish the job" and tried to draw a comparison with America's earlier drawn-out wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He said the U.S. is improving bunkers and layered air defenses as a priority to protect troops and aircraft.
This comes after more than a dozen U.S. service members were injured, several severely, and U.S. aircraft were damaged in Iranian strikes on a base in Saudi Arabia last Friday. The Pentagon says 13 U.S. service members have been killed and 300 wounded in what it calls Operation Epic Fury.
He repeated the administration's assertion that the U.S. is negotiating with Iran, despite Iranian officials' denial that talks are happening.
The World Food Program says tens of thousands of tons of food aid are stuck in ports as a consequence of the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.
The WFP says there is a whole disruption in the global supply chain with carriers not able to use the Strait of Hormuz and choosing not to use the Suez Canal through Egypt out of concerns of attacks there, too.
The agency says this is adding a month to shipping time and costing more because of spikes in fuel prices from the war. It noted that as people around the world pay more for fuel, more families will struggle to put food on the table.
Some 45 million additional people will fall into acute hunger around the world if current conditions continue through June- reaching 363 million globally, the WFP said.
Pakistan's and China's foreign ministers issued a joint statement on Tuesday calling for talks to the war on Iran as part of a broader peace plan. The statement called for a halt to fire, an end to attacks on civilian infrastructure, and reopening of the State of Hormuz.
For days Pakistani officials had said they hope to help mediate talks to end a war that has seized up the global economy, pushed up the price of fossil fuels, and key commodities like fertilizer — and that has killed thousands of people, mostly Iranians and Lebanese.
The joint statement with China came after high-ranking Pakistani officials led a flurry of meetings with regional powers. China is Iran's biggest customer for oil — and it's seen as sympathetic to the country.
Jane Arraf in Amman, Jordan, Diaa Hadid in Mumbai, Quil Lawrence in New York, Giles Snyder, Michele Kelemen in Washington, Emily Feng in Van, Turkey, Aya Batrawy in Dubai, and Kate Bartlett in Johannesburg contributed to reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR
Topline:
The Supreme Court chamber will be packed today, as the justices hear arguments in a case that almost certainly will result in a historic ruling.
Why now: At issue is President Trump's challenge to a constitutional provision that has long been interpreted to guarantee American citizenship to every child born in the United States.
When does it start? Live NPR coverage begins at 7 a.m. PT. Keep reading for a link to that stream.
Stay up to date with our Politics newsletter, sent weekly.
The Supreme Court chamber will be packed on Wednesday, as the justices hear arguments in a case that almost certainly will result in a historic ruling. At issue is President Trump's challenge to a constitutional provision that has long been interpreted to guarantee American citizenship to every child born in the United States.
Listen to arguments and live NPR special coverage beginning at 10 a.m. ET:
Loading...
Trump has long maintained that the Constitution does not guarantee birthright citizenship. So, on Day 1 of his second term, he issued an executive order barring automatic citizenship for any baby born in the U.S. whose parents entered the country illegally or who were here legally, but on a temporary, or even a long-term visa.
"We are the only country in the world that does this with birthright," Trump said as he signed the executive order. "And it's absolutely ridiculous."
That actually is not true. There are nearly 33 countries, mainly in North and South America, that have birthright citizenship — including, among others, Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina.
Can't see the video above? Watch it here.
But Trump has long been determined to rid this country of its longstanding protection for birthright citizenship. Wednesday is D-Day in that effort, and to understand the issues, it's worth taking a stroll through American history.
While citizenship was not defined at the nation's founding, the colonists were largely pro-immigrant, according to University of Virginia law professor Amanda Frost, author of American Birthright: How the Citizenship Clause made America American, due out in September.
The founders "wanted to populate this mostly empty continent," she observes, adding that, in fact, one of the complaints against the British king in the Declaration of Independence was that the British "were discouraging immigration."
Indeed, she notes, after the Revolutionary War, even those who had been loyal to the king but wanted to stay in America were granted U.S. citizenship.
Birthright citizenship didn't make it into the Constitution, though, until after the Civil War, when the nation enacted the 14th Amendment to reverse the Supreme Court's infamous Dred Scott decision — a ruling that in 1857 declared that Black people, enslaved or free, could not be citizens of the United States.
To undo that decision, the post-Civil War Congress passed a constitutional amendment that defines citizenship in broad terms. It says, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
President Trump, however, maintains that the constitutional amendment was intended to be more limited than it has been in practice. "This was meant for the slaves … for the children of slaves," Trump said last January. "I'm in favor of that. But it wasn't meant for the entire world to occupy the United States."
But as the University of Virginia's Frost notes, the framers of the 14th Amendment had more than one explicit purpose. They wanted a clear, bright line definition of citizenship; they wanted the former slaves and their children to be citizens, and they wanted to include immigrants, many of whom were the targets of great hostility.
"I like to remind my students that between 1845 and 1855, approximately 2 million people from Ireland fled to the United States," Frost observes. They were fleeing from famine and harsh British rule. And while "there certainly was some prejudice and discrimination and xenophobia," she says, "their children soon would automatically become American citizens" when born on U.S. soil after enactment of the 14th Amendment.
Trump's interpretation of the 14th Amendment is avowedly far more restricted. What's more, it has not been embraced by the courts or the legal norms of the country for 160 years.
"The president's executive order is attempting a radical rewriting of that 14th Amendment guarantee to all of us," says Cecillia Wang, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Indeed, even as both Republican and Democratic administrations have sought in modern times to deport large numbers of individuals who have entered the country illegally, the notion of birthright citizenship has remained so entrenched that during World War II when Japanese citizens were held as enemy aliens in U.S. detention camps, their newborn children were automatically granted American citizenship because they were born on U.S. soil. And Congress later codified that understanding in the 1940s, '50s and '60s.
At the Supreme Court on Wednesday, the justices are likely to focus on some of the key court decisions that have protected birthright citizenship during the past century and a half. Perhaps most important among these is the case of Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese immigrants who ran a small business in the city. Back then, immigrants like Wong's parents were largely free to enter the U.S. without any documentation, but his parents eventually returned to China. And after their son visited them in 1895, officers at the port in San Francisco refused to allow him back into the United States, contending that he was not a qualified citizen.
Wong challenged the denial and, in 1898, the Supreme Court ruled in his favor. By a 6-2 vote, the justices interpreted the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to mean that all children born in the U.S. were automatically granted citizenship. The court noted that only three exceptions were specified in the amendment: The children of diplomats were not deemed to be U.S. citizens because their allegiance was to another country; the children of occupying armies were similarly excepted, as were the children of Native American tribes. Of these three exceptions, the only one that still applies is to the children of diplomats, as there are no invading armies, and Native Americans were granted automatic citizenship in 1924.
The Trump administration, however, argues that Wong Kim Ark's situation was very different from many of the children who become automatic American citizens today, because Wong's parents, though undocumented, were here legally, by virtue of having a permanent residence in the U.S. And the Trump administration points to language in the 1898 Supreme Court opinion that assumes the parents had legal status in the country because they had a permanent residence in San Francisco.
The Trump administration makes an even broader argument. "An individual who is naturally born in the United States is only considered a citizen if their parents have allegiance to the nation," says Daniel Epstein, vice president of America First Legal, the organization founded by the architect of Trump's immigration policies, Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff. "It is a misdemeanor to come into the United States without authorization. That is a crime," he says. "That is strong evidence that you don't kind of meet the traditional notion of allegiance."
Countering that argument, the ACLU's Wang will tell the Supreme Court that the men who wrote the 14th Amendment deliberately chose to confer automatic citizenship on the child, not the parent.
"And the idea — that actually goes back to the founding — is that in America we do not punish children for the sins of their fathers, but instead we wipe the slate clean. When you're born in this country, we're all Americans, all the same," Wang says.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is supporting the president's position, along with 11 other GOP senators, and 16 House members, who signed on to the America First brief.
"As a policy matter, birthright citizenship is stupid," Cruz says, "because it incentivizes illegal immigration. It makes absolutely no sense that someone breaks the law and they get rewarded with a very, very, precious gift, which is American citizenship."
The ACLU's Wang counters that Trump is trying, by executive order, to change the meaning of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, a measure that was approved overwhelmingly by the Congress in 1866 and, after a great public debate, ratified by more than three-quarters of the states. She argues that the consequences of such a dramatic change by executive fiat would have untold consequences.
"What will immediately happen is that every month, tens of thousands of U.S.-born babies will be stripped of their citizenship. They may be stateless because their parents' country of nationality may not consider them to be citizens. And so you'll see a permanent underclass of people who have no nationality, who are living in the United States, who can't pass on their nationality to their children born in the U.S.
In a separate brief, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops stresses the problems that would be created by generation after generation of children who are stateless, with no country to call home, and no citizenship to pass on to their children.
"The children … would be the ones to bear the brunt of this," says Bishop Daniel Flores, vice president of the bishops conference. "I have people asking this now in my diocese. 'Bishop, am I going to get into trouble if I give food to somebody that I'm not sure of their documentation? … Can we help these people? Because we think we need to, because they're people and they were born here."
The Trump administration counters that birthright citizenship raises two other problems: a generic potential threat to national security and the problem of so-called "birth tourism."
In fact, even birthright defenders concede that a cottage industry has long existed in which women pay money to come to the U.S. and have their children here. But the numbers are consistently very small. Even the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors limited immigration, estimates only 20,000 to 26,000 birth tourism children are born in the U.S. each year, compared to the overall birth count of 3.6 million babies born each year.
Daniel Epstein of America First Legal contends that numbers are not important. "I view just one illegal act as illegal, and birth tourism is illegal and it's against the law, and the law matters."
Population experts say that if automatic birthright citizenship were to be voided, the consequences would be profound — and counterintuitive. The Population Research Institute at Penn State, for instance, estimates that a repeal of birthright citizenship would result in 2.7 million more people living here illegally by 2045, people who previously would have been entitled to birthright citizenship, but now have no such citizenship for themselves or to pass on to their children or the generations thereafter.
Also likely to come up at today's Supreme Court argument are practical questions, like those raised by Justice Brett Kavanaugh last year in a related case. How would a hospital know that the parents of a child are illegally in the country? What would hospitals do with a newborn? What would states do? The answer from Trump's solicitor general, D. John Sauer, was "Federal officials will have to figure that out."
Copyright 2026 NPR
What to expect: With the exception of a stray shower here and there, we're in for a dry and mostly sunny afternoon. High temperatures will be similar, if not a degree or two warmer in some areas.
Read on ... for more details.
With the exception of a stray morning shower here and there, Southern California is in for a dry and sunny afternoon.
The afternoon sun will warm up the area a few degrees today. For the coasts, we're looking at highs around 67 degrees and up to the low 70s for the inland coast.
The valleys will see similar temperatures with highs from 68 to 74 degrees. The Inland Empire, meanwhile, will be cooler with highs around 63 degrees.
In Coachella Valley, temps will reach 81 to 86 degrees.
A wind advisory still is in effect for the San Bernardino, Riverside County mountains, including Coachella Valley, until 11 p.m. Thursday. The Antelope Valley will see some gusty winds later this afternoon as well.
Topline:
It’s been a tough year for NA bars. Since 2024, at least three NA-only bars have shut down in Los Angeles or gone online retail-only. The fanfare that came with New Bar’s openings in Venice and West Hollywood are long gone and the '90s-themed events at Stay Zero Proof in Chinatown have said bye, bye, bye.
Yet more people than ever are avoiding alcohol. So what’s going on?
What's happening: Some say these bars have been the victims of their own success. They helped popularize non-alcohol drinks — which are now being sold by big-box retailers, often at a lower cost.
How are NA bars adapting? Some are creating community by offering neighborhood "third spaces" where you can also play games or watch a comedy show. Others still are adding extra things to attract customers, like vegan and allergy-free food.
It’s been a tough year for non-alcoholic (NA) bars. Since we wrote our last NA bar round up, during 2024's Dry January, at least three NA-only bars have shut down in Los Angeles or gone online retail-only. The fanfare that came with New Bar’s openings in Venice and West Hollywood are long gone and the '90s-themed events at Stay Zero Proof in Chinatown have said buh-bye.
Yet more people than ever are avoiding alcohol. So what’s going on?
In some ways, perhaps, the bars that closed, like the two L.A. outposts of San Francisco’s New Bar, were victims of their own success. “I think that the non-alcoholic space has evolved,” Bar Nuda pop-up owner Pablo Murillo said.
”So when New Bar came out, they were pretty much the only ones doing what they were doing. There's so many more options now, with big-box retailers that are offering great non-alcoholic options and possibly at a lower price point.”
That can have an impact even if you offer a top-notch experience. Stay Zero Proof was the brainchild of Stacey Mann, a film set designer-turned-interior designer who opened the cozy bar in Chinatown in 2024. It closed last year.
“We built an amazing space with such a great vibe and a terrific staff and, in my opinion, the best NA cocktails around. They were exceptional. They were designed and developed by Derek Brown out of D.C., who really led the movement quite a long time ago,” Mann said. “And that wasn't enough to get people in the doors spending money.”
Mann, who is 39 years sober, said she was surprised at how few sober customers came in the door compared to her “sober curious” clientele. “It did not bring in the sober crowd. ... It's the cost, [and] it's the idea that a lot of sober people aren't really thinking about sitting in bars.”
These bar owners all say that Dry January is quickly becoming a thing of the past — their customers are drinking less alcohol but hanging out more all year-round.
“I think it kind of spreads throughout the whole year, just a kind of lifestyle versus like a 30-day [challenge]," said Dean Peterson, who runs Burden of Proof, a bottle shop and market in South Pasadena.
That shift also has spurred bars that do serve alcohol to up their NA game. Owner of Abbot Kinney speakeasy Force of Nature (which serves both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages) Leena Culhane said her January was just as busy as her December.
It's not just being alcohol-free. The NA bars that are still in business are adapting to meet other customer needs too.
“We always wanted to have a place in L.A. that we could actually just go and chill out and relax at and play games, board games, watch an open mic, watch a comedy show, do yoga,” said Kavahana co-founder Neil Bahtia, whose Santa Monica spot features drinks that use the kava root, a Pacific Island-native herb, instead of alcohol.
“These are different activities that I think are really important to having a brick and mortar, that maybe a traditional bar doesn't really need to do. I think for us, it's always been about curating a really nice experience.”
Stacey Mann agreed, even though it wasn’t enough to keep her venue open.
“In order to sustain the model, you really have to build out programming,” she said. “Our biggest night was comedy night, and that was amazing.”
Meanwhile, the owners of Free Spirited in Alhambra, Amber Pennington and Arleo De Guzman, focus on being vegan and allergy-friendly in addition to providing a completely 0.0% alcohol experience, which means people find their place through several different channels.
“The culture still isn't to ‘go out to drink non-alcoholic,’" Pennington said. “Hopefully that will change in the next couple years, but having the food in addition ... that's super helpful.”
De Guzman added that “People don't want to go out just to eat nowadays. They want to have more value added to their experience, but also it helps in a non-alcoholic bar [to host events], because some people are still afraid to go out and socialize sober, so attach an event that's in the space and people are like, ‘OK, I'm going to go to this thing. I guess I'll see what the vibe is.’”
Murillo of Bar Nuda’s Mexican-inspired concept is focused on craft non-alcoholic cocktails that draw on his bartending experience.
“People, I think, aren't looking so much for a non-alcoholic version of a margarita. They're looking for something more creative, something that they possibly have never tasted before,” he said.
Culhane agreed that now a non-alcoholic option can feel just as special as that glass of champagne.
“People often are choosing wine based on what the label looks like. We can't underestimate how much the eye is kind of the first sense of taste,” Culhane said. “I think that's the most important part — feeling like there's an adult experience of something that's convivial and celebratory, and just special.”
As drinkers and non-drinkers alike seek out alternatives to booze, it’s clear these businesses need more than just a great mocktail to stay alive. But with trying times and relentlessly stressful news, the neighborhood watering hole serves a larger purpose of being a third space, and these bars are finding Angelenos willing to pay the premium for a well-balanced mocktail — as long as there’s a little something extra on the side.
