WTN: An antidote to depression

So Robert Parker's 2009 Bordeaux scores are out. And people have - predictably in some cases - reacted in a variety of different ways. Predictable reaction #1 is "Wow, what amazing scores! What a great vintage - I'm buying!" which is a brave statement to make before you have seen the prices. With that latter point in mind predictable reaction #2 is "Wow, what amazing scores! Prices will rocket - bye-bye, Bordeaux". Every time prices rise, a few more people click into sanity and turn their attention instead to better value regions. But there are always others, more wealthy "collectors" (or, just as likely, trust fund managers) to replace them.

One reaction that I never would have imagined, but which I have seen this year and last, is the "Wow - that means X really nailed the vintage!" where X is the person who posted on the Parker forum (because these people aren't reading anything else) his/her notes but more importantly scores before Parker's were published. They "nailed it" because their scores correlate more closely to Parker's than anyone else's.

This implies that for some people, when they read the opinion of those who have travelled to Bordeaux to taste barrel samples, they aren't looking for independent thought, or original tasting notes, or insight into the vintage; they simply want to know if you get the wines the same way Parker does. So forget diversity of opinion, forget ingenuity of style, forget whether or not you write in serious and academic tones or entertaining comedic, forget trying to enlighten, edify or elucidate. Forget all that, because all they want to know is whether or not you show you possess the universal palate. Basically - can you tell me what Parker's gonna say?

If not, then you got the vintage "wrong". No, it's not that you have different opinions. You are all wrong.

I find that really depressing.

An antidote to depression; maturing Bordeaux away from the hype of 2009 (but tasted in the midst of the primeurs). Two wines from outside the four great Médoc communes, both Haut-Médoc. The first from an over-performing estate in a 'lesser' vintage, the second from a less exalted name but in a great vintage.

Chateau Sociando-Mallet (Haut-Médoc) 1999: Tasted at the domaine over lunch. Good colour, showing some early maturity. The nose is quite supple and composed, showing the scents of iron and maturing fruit, in a very clean and bright style. On the palate, lovely texture, full and fleshy, with gentle tannins still fading and giving a nice supporting layer, and with fresh acidity. Very impressive for the vintage. Very good style. Approachable now but still on the way up for sure. 17+/20

Chateau Belgrave (Haut-Médoc) 2000: Tasted at the Ban du Millésime in Bordeaux. A mature hue, and dark, slightly inky, meaty fruit on the nose. Certainly appealing, with tea leaf aroma. Fresh on the palate, supple fruit, meaty, with some peppery midpalate tannins. Good substance here, and a freshness behind it too. There is still more to come from this wine, although it is approachable now. And it is rather attractive with it. My only issues are that it does seem to lack a good framework in the mouth, seeming rather loose-knit at present. It may come together more with time, but I'm not sure. 16.5+/20

[David M. Bueker]

Chris,

While I share some of your depression, it's really a small group of people who go through the "Parker alignment test" every year. It's a small subset of those who read eBob (even or perhaps especially now). We have to face the fact that there is a lot of money "over there" and that leads to certain priorities: the best as defined by the most famous critic/critics. It no different than buying a Rolex when any old watch will tell time just as well.

Then there is the undeniable fact that if someones likes Cabernet Sauvignon in a certain style there is really one place to get it: Bordeaux. Couple that with the fact that very few people get the chance to taste prior to release (compared to the huge number of people who buy), and I don't think it's surprising that folks lok for validation in the scores. Those who appreciate Parker's palate preferences will look for other views that coincide with it. They also look for the negative reactions from some other critics (e.g. Robinson) to further validate style for particular wines (Cos is the obvious poster child here). When the stars align that is the green light for buyng that certain wine.

The level of the discourse is oftentimes depressing, and in fact it lines up quite neatly with the deteriorating political discourse in the USA (where there are two sides: my side & the wrong side so to speak). I think the instant, constant communication of the internet & the 24 hours tv news cycle has done much to damage critica thought in all areas, and when one combines that with the casual commentary style of online fora it can seem rather mind-numbing.

I would have thought that the Loire (where Points may not tread) would be an excellent antidote to Bordeaux-related depression.

Both posts suggest that lucidity itself is fine antidepression medicine. Not to discount the Loire.

[David M. Bueker]

I would have thought that the Loire (where Points may not tread) would be an excellent antidote to Bordeaux-related depression.

Not if one is looking for full-bodied (note: not super sized) Cabernet Sauvignon, which some of us actually like.

Not if one is looking for full-bodied (note: not super sized) Cabernet Sauvignon, which some of us actually like.

I think a lot of people like the wines. Hence the reason for Chris' depression.

But yes, I never meant to suggest that the Loire cabernets could provide identical aesthetic pleasures.

Chateau Sociando-Mallet (Haut-Médoc) 1999: Tasted at the domaine over lunch. Good colour, showing some early maturity. The nose is quite supple and composed, showing the scents of iron and maturing fruit, in a very clean and bright style. On the palate, lovely texture, full and fleshy, with gentle tannins still fading and giving a nice supporting layer, and with fresh acidity. Very impressive for the vintage. Very good style. Approachable now but still on the way up for sure. 17+/20

I have been a fan of this wine for some time. Not sure how much I have consumed already but I have had to restock twice and still only have two bottles left. Not hard to pull the trigger when one could pick it up last year for under $35. Quick check of my source's on-line inventory unfortunately no longer shows it available so those may be my final two bottles.

[David M. Bueker]

Not if one is looking for full-bodied (note: not super sized) Cabernet Sauvignon, which some of us actually like.

I think a lot of people like the wines. Hence the reason for Chris' depression.

But yes, I never meant to suggest that the Loire cabernets could provide identical aesthetic pleasures.

And so we come to the rub - the idea that it's depressing that people don't like the kind of wines someone else does.

I say - too bad.

And so we come to the rub - the idea that it's depressing that people don't like the kind of wines someone else does...

????

Not sure where you're going with this?

My point was that lots of people like Bordeaux so it is expensive/sought after/prized. Hence Chris' depression at all the chasing. But that seems hard to avoid with great wines these days.

[David M. Bueker]

And so we come to the rub - the idea that it's depressing that people don't like the kind of wines someone else does...

????

Not sure where you're going with this?

My point was that lots of people like Bordeaux so it is expensive/sought after/prized. Hence Chris' depression at all the chasing. But that seems hard to avoid with great wines these days.

Misunderstanding. Ignore what I said.

This implies that for some people, when they read the opinion of those who have travelled to Bordeaux to taste barrel samples, they aren't looking for independent thought, or original tasting notes, or insight into the vintage; they simply want to know if you get the wines the same way Parker does. So forget diversity of opinion, forget ingenuity of style, forget whether or not you write in serious and academic tones or entertaining comedic, forget trying to enlighten, edify or elucidate. Forget all that, because all they want to know is whether or not you show you possess the universal palate. Basically - can you tell me what Parker's gonna say?

If not, then you got the vintage "wrong". No, it's not that you have different opinions. You are all wrong.

I find that really depressing.

I very often visit your site and have great respect for your efforts and talent. Even greater by reason of the above post.

I was also at the 2009 en primeurs. We should share a few bottles over a good meal sometime.

N

Thanks for all these responses. I think what I rail against most is the concept of the universal palate. After that comes other issues, such as points-chasing.

Most importantly of all though....yes, the Loire is an important antidote to.....well, everything!

I think Bordeaux provides its own antidote to depression: Sauternes!!!

I think variety is essential to combat depression, but, if there's just one wine, it has to be Renardat-Fache's sparkling Cerdon de Bugey, frequently, in homeopathic doses. If that fails, you'll need a more intense intervention.

A lot of sure things in this world have turned out to be not so sure, and I'm guessing more than a few people who have been big players in the Bordeaux market aren't feeling quite so brash anymore. So it is more important than ever that they feel an investment in '09 must be a sure thing. Perceiving Parker as the most trustworthy arbiter of quality, they depend on him to guarantee the wisdom of their purchases. Therefore, anyone who disagrees with Parker is someone who is threatening the value of their investment.

So yeah, they're definitely locked into the "universal palate." The value of their investment depends on it.

And it is depressing.

...and as has been pointed out on this thread, as well as in other precincts, a nice Bourgueil works wonders for Bordelaise Malaise.

Thanks for all these responses. I think what I rail against most is the concept of the universal palate. After that comes other issues, such as points-chasing.

Chris, I share this sentiment completely. We see it in pretty much any field that requires a fair amount of knowledge to really navigate: people flock to a few so-called "experts" who are seen as having the final, correct say on the subject. Nevermind if they are actually qualified to occupy this position - and nevermind that in the case of wine, it's a highly subjective field with few "true" answers. If you don't agree with them, it's because you don't get it.

When I host wine events and parties, I have to constantly remind people that they don't need to attain some mystical level of "sophistication" before they can talk about wine. Sure, it helps to study wine a bit so that you know what tannins, acidity, weight, etc. are, but even the greenest wine lover can state whether or not they are interested by a wine, whether or not they enjoy drinking it.

And that's what it all comes down to, or at least what it should come down to, right? The enjoyment of drinking something remarkable. No one can tell you where you're going to find that.

Melissa
It's really good to hear that you're arguing such a free-thinking approach to wine, especially where you're likely to be influencing a number of people 'at the start of the journey'. They'll have every chance to work out what works for them (rather than some 'authority') with your influence.
regards
Ian

And that's what it all comes down to, or at least what it should come down to, right? The enjoyment of drinking something remarkable. No one can tell you where you're going to find that.

This is just crazy talk. Now what am I going to do with the money I paid out for the "How to Drink Wine Correctly" course?

heh, Kelly - you can set out to become the next Robert Parker...and donate half your proceeds to me. I am willing to accept full payment in First Growth Bordeaux.

[Jenise]

And that's what it all comes down to, or at least what it should come down to, right? The enjoyment of drinking something remarkable. No one can tell you where you're going to find that.

Totally agreed. I didn't coin the phrase, but I often reassure less experienced people that they're never wrong about what they like. Of course, I'm usually moved to say that when my take on the same wine is about 180 degrees the other direction.