Heave-Ho Hedonistic

Awesome topic and I am new to this side of the forum, but not to wine tasting. Anyway, I am guilty of some overuse in my notes, but if you take away ful bodied, what do I use to denote the wine's weight. I hate voluptuous as it adds no meaning to me what so ever, but I have been guilty here and there.

Totally agree that cassis is sweet and ripe and rich blackcurrant. What about overripe and so new world that the wine is a fruit bomb, sorry I had try? How do you denote that the wine is so over the top and so fruity and ripe that it almost tastes sweet or oxidized? I use date or raisin or new-world, but I admit that has no real meaning, yet the wine world understands it.

Love this topic, very cool.

David

Also I almost never use hedonistic, mostly because it sounds so base and uncultured to me, but I guess more correctly because it has no real meaning. If a wine is so attention grabbing and makes you want to leave your significant other for it, I would suppose the word hedonistic would come to mind, but I have not had the pleasure, or thank goodness the opportunity to have such a wine, I actually really like my wife

David

[Jenise]

Where does it leave us? It leaves me pondering Jenise's comment that "Opulent is a meaningful descriptor when used sparingly." What prompted this thread was The New Yorker magazine's mock banishment of a dozen or so words, mostly for commiting the sin of overuse. But in our discussions here we often have tolerated and embraced frequent usage because sometimes repetition has lead to common understanding. For instance, we now probably all have come to the same understanding of the ubiquitous "Fruit Bomb." But repetition of "Opulent" has led nowhere. The corolary of some people never learn maybe is some wine words never teach?

But maybe 'opulent' was easy to understand in the first place. It was, at least, a word existing in our language to describe overt luxury vs. a newly created term to identify something we all recognized but that no one had yet put a name to. Perhaps 'opulent' is just one of many descriptors that all who use it may not use it in exactly the same way, so some context is required. As someone who no longer reads Parker or the Wine Spectator, I have very little exposure to the type of writing where this purported overuse is occuring. Should I banish it now from my language lest I be lumped in with the people who never learn (if I haven't been already)?

Awesome topic and I am new to this side of the forum, but not to wine tasting. Anyway, I am guilty of some overuse in my notes, but if you take away ful bodied, what do I use to denote the wine's weight. I hate voluptuous as it adds no meaning to me what so ever, but I have been guilty here and there.

Totally agree that cassis is sweet and ripe and rich blackcurrant. What about overripe and so new world that the wine is a fruit bomb, sorry I had try? How do you denote that the wine is so over the top and so fruity and ripe that it almost tastes sweet or oxidized? I use date or raisin or new-world, but I admit that has no real meaning, yet the wine world understands it.

Love this topic, very cool.

David

I'll agree here with two of David's points: This is a fun topic, and what should I use instead of full-bodied in my notes? I confess to using it, or some variation, almost all the time in my notes.

Also completely agree that pain grille needs to go. I'm still unclear on how it differs from toast - as in toasted bread, not toasted oak. 'Crunchy' is another term that has never made much sense to me.

Jenise, I'm not literally suggesting banishing words nor referring to you in my learn-teach corollary sentence, although on rereading my post I can see why you wondered if I might have been. I apologize for the confusion. Please know that my postings have all been intended in the same spirit as The New Yorker contest, as a "fun" thing as some of this thread's posters have put it.

Years ago Robin suggested that writing about writing about wine has its down side. Maybe we have arrived at that point and should put the thread to bed.

As you say, writing about wine does indeed have its downside.

Even dyed-in-the-wool wine lovers can have problems relating to what similarly geeky people write.

Some vocabulary is, of course, universal. but the more subtle the wine, and the greater the wine, the more words fall short of their purpose.

Still, in light of the neanderthal-like fixation on percentage point scores, words very much have their place.

I compare this to people who write about art. Some of them are in their own little bubble. Their texts are excruciatingly difficult to read and, above all, incomprehensible.
Likewise, some critics and wine lovers get entangled in their verbiage and do not succeed in communicating.

However CAN one actually share, in a jumble of 26 letters, the experience of tasting fine wine?
As Hamlet said "That is the question".

Best regards,
Alex R.

Thank you, Alex, for spelling "dyed-in-the-wool" correctly. You use any adjective you want, bro', I got your back.

Seperately: I have never used "fatuous" in a tasting note, but I might. Soon.

[Jenise]

Jenise, I'm not literally suggesting banishing words nor referring to you in my learn-teach corollary sentence, although on rereading my post I can see why you wondered if I might have been. I apologize for the confusion. Please know that my postings have all been intended in the same spirit as The New Yorker contest, as a "fun" thing as some of this thread's posters have put it.

Years ago Robin suggested that writing about writing about wine has its down side. Maybe we have arrived at that point and should put the thread to bed.

Clint, my mistake in not being clear enough, not yours. I didn't take your comment personally, was just attempting rhetorical banter by throwing your ball back to you. I should have thrown in some smilies.