“Professional Wine Snob in Booze Junket Payola Scandal”

http://gawker.com/5865476/professional-wine-snob-in-booze-junket-payola-scandal

I’m asking the question if a change in critics at Robert Parker’s The Wine Advocate could lead to wine producers changing their winemaking to suit different palates.

Is that the fodder for British tabloids (since your IP address shows you’re in Britain)? Over here, tabloids focus on babies with three heads, celebrity affairs and plastic surgery gone awry. If British tabloids focus on wine and wine making, then I guess I should check them out!

Thanks for stopping by and filling out your resume more completely–I didn’t mean to shortchange you!

Good luck to you adding to an already full workload! I, for one, look forward to your reviews from the Pacific Northwest.

Tyler

First, you’re too kind in your praise of my erudition – but I’ll take praise where I find it, thanks! You mentioned my having once been an importer of German wine. Just for a fuller record, any interested readers can read the next paragraph.

I was a restaurateur 1977-1980 (when close acquaintance with California wines sparked by livelong love affair with wine in general); a retailer from 1981-1997 (during which time, besides writing on the side inter alia for Steve Tanzer, I imported wines from Germany and France that weren’t otherwise available stateside, the jurisdictions in which I worked – DC and KY – having made that legally possible). During my early years in DC, I was surely among the first outside the Pacific Northwest to become actively involved in selling wines of the then-emerging Willamette Valley. From 1997-2006 I worked as an importer-distributor, in which capacity I did not however import wines of Austria or Germany, since I wanted to be able to keep writing about them without conflict of interest (which when I was importing solely for retail customers and without regard to importer affiliation was not a serious concern).

Secondly, I am humbly aware of my lack of recent experience in Oregon and (especially) Washington and I’m just as humbly aware I’m merely the guy with the good fortune to have been offered this opportunity. My background – involving as it does a lot of experience with places where Pinot Noir, Riesling, and Cabernet & Co. grow – when combined with the fact that I am a quick study in matters of history, terroir, and viticulture could, and I believe will, create conditions for useful perspective on the wines of Oregon and Washington. Readers of my reports – or of my (some will say incessant, ponderous, and interminable) postings over the years at eRobertParker.com or JancisRobinson.com – will already know how I rate wines and perhaps more about how I view wine ratings and the role of the wine critic than they ever wanted to know, so I shall refer anyone with interest in the allegedly fine points of methodology or epistemology (and occasionally ethics!)to those reports and web site bulletin boards.(I am also a long-standing columnist for The World of Fine Wine and Vinaria … ok, I know, the first is frightfully expensive to subscribe to and the second in German, but that’s just in case anybody is really, really interested, which I am not so arrogant as to presume.)

Miguel and Per – Yes, I do think it is possible to be a good taster and offer useful advice about the wines without ever venturing to the region. For example, if you don’t like a lot of oak in Chilean red wines over $20, venturing to the country will likely not turn up anything more than you could find in stores in the US. But in Spain–the diversity is astonishing and much of it has reached our shores relatively recently. Going there would have meant that a critic would have had his finger a bit nearer to the pulse of this emerging trend.

Evan Dawson had a good post about whether critics should speed through winery visits or marinate themselves more in the region. I like a blended approach, writing from a physical remove yet visiting frequently enough to get a feel for what’s happening on the ground.

Miguel- I also wonder if Neal will come to the US to taste through the portfolios of US importers as Jay had done?

Paul – Thanks for the comment. And good to know about Ken Wright’s dramatic change!

1 – what’s-in-the-bottle-focus

You can make a strong argument that what matters most, or even what is the ONLY thing that matters, is what is in the bottle. The wine. If that is your belief then it really does not matter if you have “only been to Burgundy twice” since what is most important is what is in the bottle, and that you can equally well taste at home, e.g. in Chicago.

2 – what’s-the-wine-and-what-does-it-represent-focus

Another line of thought is that wine is more than just a beverage. When you drink wine you also drink an origin. there is a provenance, there is a person that has made the wine, there is climate, terroir (if you believe in terroir), there’s a history and culture etc etc. If you think that is important, then going to “the source” is important. Meeting the people is important. When you drink wine it is more than just sipping water, alcohol and flavours.

Can you claim that one view is better than the other? Don’t know.

But it certainly makes a big difference for how you look at wine critics, wine reviews, wine writing and wine appreciation.

I think I’ll have to write something on this on BKWine Magazine one day. Interesting debate. But I’ll have to think a bit more about the headings…