How to know a wine writer has lost it

[David M. Bueker]

Recent tweet from Alice F.

"Am convinced that Coturri is a national treasure."

This woman needs serious help.

Are Coturri wines the ones that feature an explosion of brett?

[David M. Bueker]

Are Coturri wines the ones that feature an explosion of brett?

Among other things - having tasted at the winery, the wines can be incredibly delicious from barrel. Unfortunately they are about 95% likely to go down the tubes post bottling. The winery is a hygienic mess. The guy is great though. It's a lot of fun to visit.

If the wines could be kept in cryo-suspension until consumption they might be other worldly.

Alice obviously enjoyed her visit and was seduced (in a manner of speaking) by the wily Italian.
So the wines such as they actually are took on secondary importance.

So who (really, honestly) expects wine writers to be objective?

WLDG should have an essay-writing contest on this very subject (limit 500 words).

Best regards,
Alex R.

So who (really, honestly) expects wine writers to be objective?

WLDG should have an essay-writing contest on this very subject (limit 500 words).

You asked one question and posed one suggestion.....

With regard to wine writers being objective - I not only expect it, but I demand it of those critics and writers who are worth their salt.

With re the essays (or alternatively a separate thread) - Oh boy, I will have a good deal more than 500 words to say on the subject.


Best
Rogov

[David M. Bueker]

Alex,

I am not looking for objectivity, but rather useful information. Coturri wines are very tasty as barrle samples & Tony Coturri is an incredibly engaging guy. Unfortunately the wines are not stable enough to ever leave the winery, even with pristine handling. This is a problem for the consumer that no romantic notion about natural winemakig can solve.

Are Coturri wines the ones that feature an explosion of brett?

On a good day...and usually a whole lot more of other things as well.
They are put to btl w/o sulfer additions and no filtertration and contain a witch's brew of bacteria. They often are very interesting
when first released...but they're so unstable that they head South pretty fast.
"Natural wine" in all its glory. You gotta love Alice F***ing...at least she's consistent.
Tom

Alex,

I am not looking for objectivity, but rather useful information. Coturri wines are very tasty as barrle samples & Phil Coturri is an incredibly engaging guy. Unfortunately the wines are not stable enough to ever leave the winery, even with pristine handling. This is a problem for the consumer that no romantic notion about natural winemakig can solve.

I thought Phil was the farmer (Enterprise Vineyard Management) and his brother, Tony, was the winemaker?
Best, Jim

[David M. Bueker]

Alex,

I am not looking for objectivity, but rather useful information. Coturri wines are very tasty as barrle samples & Phil Coturri is an incredibly engaging guy. Unfortunately the wines are not stable enough to ever leave the winery, even with pristine handling. This is a problem for the consumer that no romantic notion about natural winemakig can solve.

I thought Phil was the farmer (Enterprise Vineyard Management) and his brother, Tony, was the winemaker?
Best, Jim

Correct - my mistake. I will edit.

With regard to wine writers being objective - I not only expect it, but I demand it of those critics and writers who are worth their salt.

Daniel,
Not to be overly provocative, but how can any wine writer be "objective" when the subject matter is so subjective?
Best, Jim

You guys could've figured out Alice when you read her book. That she's writing about wine is incidental---merely a vehicle----and she's really just writing about having a series of torrid romantic affairs.

Impossible to be objective about something like that.

[Robin Garr]

she's really just writing about having a series of torrid romantic affairs.

And this differs from Ruth Reichl's books in what way, exactly? I'd submit that Alice knows her field better than Ruth knows hers ...

she's really just writing about having a series of torrid romantic affairs.

And this differs from Ruth Reichl's books in what way, exactly? I'd submit that Alice knows her field better than Ruth knows hers ...

They were carrying on torrid affairs in a field??

Wouldn't that scare the horses?

[James Roscoe]

This thread is getting a little scary.

They were carrying on torrid affairs in a field??

Wouldn't that scare the horses?

Only if they were doing it properly.

[David M. Bueker]

This thread is getting a little scary.

Much like the subject tweet.

With regard to wine writers being objective - I not only expect it, but I demand it of those critics and writers who are worth their salt.

Wine reporters, yes. But when we use the expression 'wine writers', 99% of the time we mean 'wine critics'. And objectivity is inherently incompatible with published criticism, which entails emitting personal judgments. Objective cinema critics, literary critics, wine critics? Come on! It's a contradiction in terms.

Plus - who would want to read them? What a bore...

Wine reporters, yes. But when we use the expression 'wine writers', 99% of the time we mean 'wine critics'. And objectivity is inherently incompatible with published criticism, which entails emitting personal judgments. Objective cinema critics, literary critics, wine critics? Come on! It's a contradiction in terms.

Have to disagree. If you taste a wine and give your honest opinion of it, uncoloured by any feeling you may have for the producer, whether positive or negative, that's objectivity. When you allow your personal biases to affect your notes, that is not objective.

Giving an honest opinion based solely on your impression of the wine is in that sense objective, although certainly the judgement of aesthetic matters, including food/wine taste is by nature subjective in the sense that there are no universal standards and it does come down to how well do you like it and why.

Have to disagree. If you taste a wine and give your honest opinion of it, uncoloured by any feeling you may have for the producer, whether positive or negative, that's objectivity. When you allow your personal biases to affect your notes, that is not objective.

Take a look at the Merriam-Webster, Bill. You're confusing objectivity with honesty. Two different things. A critic is subjective, always, and should be honest, of course.

If you taste a wine and give your honest opinion of it, uncoloured by any feeling you may have for the producer, whether positive or negative, that's objectivity.

Opinions are subjective, not objective. That's why they're opinions.

Not to be overly provocative, but how can any wine writer be "objective" when the subject matter is so subjective?

Not provocative at all, Jim. I think much depends on how one defines objectivity. As I define it it means setting and accepting standards. Standards within which of course there is a certain amount of leeway on either side within which a given wine can still meet one's criteria.

Agreed that the personal palate enters into the picture but so long as extraneous factors (e.g. labels, prices, friendships, etc, etc) are kept out of the judgement the reader gets to know the critic's palate and then can judge precisely how objective he/she might be and to decide at what level the critic's palate is atuned with his/her own and of what possible use the critic's decisions might be.

Best
Rogov

If you want to change the meaning of words, then subjectivity can be turned into objectivity.

Me, ignorant hack from the forlorn southwestern corner ofr Europe, I don't dare change the meaning of words. Particularly in the English language.

Not to be overly provocative, but how can any wine writer be "objective" when the subject matter is so subjective?

Not provocative at all, Jim. I think much depends on how one defines objectivity. As I define it it means setting and accepting standards. Standards within which of course there is a certain amount of leeway on either side within which a given wine can still meet one's criteria.

Agreed that the personal palate enters into the picture but so long as extraneous factors (e.g. labels, prices, friendships, etc, etc) are kept out of the judgement the reader gets to know the critic's palate and then can judge precisely how objective he/she might be and to decide at what level the critic's palate is atuned with his/her own and of what possible use the critic's decisions might be.

Best
Rogov

Daniel,
I think I understand. And I see Victor's point, as well.
But regardless of the words we use, I don't think you're going to convince me that criticism lends itself to objective standards.
Whether food, art, wine or literature, it seems to me we're talking about what one likes and what one doesn't. And while I agree that we should expect honest opinions from whomever we listen to, I don't think objective standards (other than honesty) apply.
But then, I think we have had this discussion a time or two - 'always good to listen to a professional's thoughts on these matters.
Best, Jim

[James Roscoe]

This is why there is a difference between the words integrity and objectivity. I agree with Jim that I find it hard to believe that a critic can be objective as I understand the meaning of that word. I demand integrity of every critic! Unfortunately integrity is not always found in this world.

By the way Rogov, your integrity as a critic and a person is beyond reproach IMO.