BRLite: The Psychology of Wine by Evan&Brian Mitchell

The Psychology of Wine: Truth & Beauty by the Glass by Evan & Brian Mitchell
Just finished reading this quiirky little book. Can't says that I got a whole lot out of it. Written by a PhD Psychologist and an EnglishLit major who segued in the wine biz as a somm and restaurant consultant. After I completed reading it, I just sorta shook my head in puzzlement. "What did I learn from it"?? Quite frankly...next to nuthin'. The list of chapters suggest that it covers some pretty interesting topics (The Terror of Terroir, What You Won't See on the Label, Merry/Merry Meritage, etc). Most of the chapters address a very specific topic. But they all seem to have a paucity of hard facts, answer no questions, and do much quoting of philosophers/psychologists/authors/writers; most of whom I've never heard of.
I guess what I'm saying is that these guys have an intellectual level, grounded in a liberal arts education, way above mine. When your liberal arts education consists only of reading "Shakespeare for Dummies", the HardyBoys mystery series, and an occasional Classic comic book; it's no wonder that they write at an intellectual level well above my simple engineering background. It's just a book I couldn't comprehend.
That said, I think these guys put a lot of thought into the writing of this book. At no point was I tempted to $hit-can the book. I kept on reading the next chapter in hopes that I'd suddenly see what they were trying to say. Never did happen.
So....I guess I'd only recommend this book to folks w/ a very high intellectual level and who are into fuzzy thinking. Probably most wine geeks won't get much out of it or any hard information they can sink their teeth into. Unlike TerryTheise's book, I'm not in the least tempted to re-read it to see if I can understand it.
Tom

I guess what I'm saying is that these guys have an intellectual level, grounded in a liberal arts education, way above mine. When your liberal arts education consists only of reading "Shakespeare for Dummies", the HardyBoys mystery series, and an occasional Classic comic book; it's no wonder that they write at an intellectual level well above my simple engineering background. It's just a book I couldn't comprehend.

Tom, don't confuse intellectual level with facile use of words. And I speak as a very well educated "liberal arts student."

I guess what I'm saying is that these guys have an intellectual level, grounded in a liberal arts education, way above mine. When your liberal arts education consists only of reading "Shakespeare for Dummies", the HardyBoys mystery series, and an occasional Classic comic book; it's no wonder that they write at an intellectual level well above my simple engineering background. It's just a book I couldn't comprehend.

Tom, don't confuse intellectual level with facile use of words. And I speak as a very well educated "liberal arts student."

Not sure I'd characterize their writing as facile, Hoke. Simple ole engineers are always in awe of writers who can call upon Proust, Kant, Neitzsche, etc to make their points.
Sorta like ParisHilton and LindsayLohan are in awe of engineers who can solve the Boltzmann transport and Schroedinger equations at the drop of a hat!!!
Tom

You're not doing too bad yourself, sir. Managed to get Proust, Kant, Neitsche, Parish Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Boltman and Schroedinger all packed into two short sentences.

You must have taken a few liberal arts survey courses yourself.

Gee, it would be fun to transport a lady with a demonstration of my Boltzmann computational abilities, Tom. Way way above my abilities though, except in the punster world.

The book has four solid positive reviews on Amazon -- all well written, but perhaps flack jobs. Three of the reviewers have only this one review, and the fourth has only reveiwed four books, two the same book, and she may be the author. A bit of suspicious back slapping I would say as an experienced reviewer on Amazon.

Better yet, Amazon has a very generous sampling of the contents. I haven't sampled it yet, but your dislike for it has put it on my To Be Read list --more accurately, my To Be Sampled list.

http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Wine-T ... cr_pr_pb_t

Regards, Bob

Not sure I'd characterize their writing as facile, Hoke. Simple ole engineers are always in awe of writers who can call upon Proust, Kant, Neitzsche, etc to make their points.

Why would you be in awe? Or were you joking.

They read some things so they make references to them. You read other things so you make references to them. No big deal either way.

Of course I'm not fully convinced that people need to make as many references as they do. Often it is more direct/useful to just make the points without referring to authors that not everyone has read, especially since that could alienate some readers and usually doesn't add anything substantive to the argument anyway.

'I'd only recommend this book to folks w/ a very high intellectual level and who are into fuzzy thinking' is very good, Tom.

Just a simple computational physicist, eh?

'I'd only recommend this book to folks w/ a very high intellectual level and who are into fuzzy thinking' is very good, Tom.
Just a simple computational physicist, eh?

Yup....to paraphrase the late/great Sen.SamErvin...."just a simple little ol' country computational physicist".
Reading this book, and much of the stuff RandallGrahm writes, all these quotes and references seem way over my head and hopelessly arcane.
Just like applying the discrete ordinates method to the linear multigroup Boltzmann transport equation seem hopelessly arcane to ParisHilton
when I try to explain it on our dates.
Tom

'I'd only recommend this book to folks w/ a very high intellectual level and who are into fuzzy thinking' is very good, Tom.
Just a simple computational physicist, eh?

Yup....to paraphrase the late/great Sen.SamErvin...."just a simple little ol' country computational physicist".
Reading this book, and much of the stuff RandallGrahm writes, all these quotes and references seem way over my head and hopelessly arcane.
Just like applying the discrete ordinates method to the linear multigroup Boltzmann transport equation seem hopelessly arcane to ParisHilton
when I try to explain it on our dates.
Tom

Are those the dates with your oysters and scheurebe?

Of course I'm not fully convinced that people need to make as many references as they do. Often it is more direct/useful to just make the points without referring to authors that not everyone has read, especially since that could alienate some readers and usually doesn't add anything substantive to the argument anyway.

Can I refer to you when I use this quote, Rahsaan?

'I'd only recommend this book to folks w/ a very high intellectual level and who are into fuzzy thinking' is very good, Tom.
Just a simple computational physicist, eh?

Yup....to paraphrase the late/great Sen.SamErvin...."just a simple little ol' country computational physicist".
Reading this book, and much of the stuff RandallGrahm writes, all these quotes and references seem way over my head and hopelessly arcane.
Just like applying the discrete ordinates method to the linear multigroup Boltzmann transport equation seem hopelessly arcane to ParisHilton
when I try to explain it on our dates.
Tom

Paris Hilton once appeared scantily clothed on the packaging of a canned Prosecco, so I'm sure you two have a lot to talk about