Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

an interesting read by Richard Jennings on a recent speech given by Parker at a wine writers' symposium http://www.rjonwine.com/wine-critic/robert-parker/

Thanks, Jay. My favorite quote is

“2003 Pavie was a very controversial call. Jancis, for whom I have a lot of respect, said it was akin to late harvest Zin and basically undrinkable. Clive Coates, for whom I don’t have the same respect, said ‘Parker needs a brain transplant.’”

My favorite passage immediately follows that quote:

Parker then mentioned a recent charity event for the U.S. Seal Foundation, supporting Navy Seals, for which he provided Bordeaux from his cellar for a “master class,” and where the 2003 Pavie was poured. “Three quarters of the people there loved the wine. I was having problems with it though. The gritty tannins seemed to me to be excessive. It is a vintage that’s evolving very fast. I kept those problems to myself though, until today.”

I guess I would have two observations. One would be why there was no follow-up question regarding why he "kept those problems to [him]self." Certainly I am wondering why he felt the need to keep them to himself. The other would be to wonder if we will now see a convergence to "gritty tannins" in tasting notes of this wine going forward.

Parker has been wrong (or half wrong) about two different vintages in the past decade. 2003, at least on the right bank, has not turned out to be the phenomenal vintage he originally thought it was, and he has been majorly backpedaling on 2008 since initially proclaiming it a great vintage.

He's looking a little bedraggled in the picture from the conference, and from the sound of it he's rather hobbled as well. Whatever one might think about his views and the tone of some of his recent missives, I hope he's okay and recovers his health.

Strange that he would withhold his opinion on a wine while conducting a "master class" on it.

Stranger still - five years ago this post would have sparked a tremendous and highly entertaining food-fight here. Of course the candidate has yet to weigh in. Perhaps his handlers are steering him clear of these hot-button issues. At one time criticizing Parker was like touching the third rail.

I love Steve Tanzer's comment to the writer:

“I am sure Parker meant well with his comment that he hoped “the wine writing profession” doesn’t “wither away” on his retirement, but it hit me as one of the single most arrogant statements I have ever heard him say.”

I wasn’t there to hear what he said, let alone to know what he meant, but I take it to mean that there isn’t a business model anymore. You, Richard, lose money on this and do it for love. As do (guessing) 95% of wine writers. You certainly add value to the world of wine, but few would pay you for that value, and if wineries didn’t supply their product for free, I do think the general wine writing profession would wither. After all, the word proessional is defined by “for payment” not by level of competence.

Greatly entertaining write up. Good he came out to speak to his peers.
But he looks like those homeless crazy guys I see on the streets of San Francisco!

Michael-P

RJ's report was illuminating and entertaining. Lo Hai Qu's report on this event to the Hosemaster of Wine was more entertaining than illuminating.

I should clarify that I loved the drama Tanzer made dismissing this guy.
Why would you write such a thing................

So, what, Tanzer is saying that anyone who writes a free-to-read wine blog is a narcissistic ass clown who's in it for the free wine the producers throw his way? Imagine that. Is he feeling the heat or something? Jockeying for the pole position?

I liked the guy who dissed the entire British contingent as the "fillerup" crew. Nice.

I don't think that's the crux of what Tanzer meant, Art, but who knows? I think he meant that it would be difficult for many bloggers to maintain their output if they had to pay for all the wines they sampled without any income from their writing to offset it. But there were some snarky dismissive tones in there. Are bloggers in general more narcissistic than the average "ass clown?" I'm not so sure about that either. I think (major generalization coming) American society has been pretty narcissistic for a few decades, say the '70s or so. It's just that we now have the internet to show it off in public to a mass audience instead of just a close circle of friends and neighbors.

DavidG wrote:RJ's report was illuminating and entertaining. Lo Hai Qu's report on this event to the Hosemaster of Wine was more entertaining than illuminating.

Bad satire is bad satire. Not that funny and got annoying pretty quickly.
Ron Washam is not Hunter S. Thompson.

Very true, Rob. Washam is funny (IMO) in small doses but not even in the same galaxy as Hunter Thompson. The first paragraph or two was funny, then it got to be a bit too much like an over-alcoholic, over-oaked Cab. After the first glass, it becomes work...

DavidG wrote:Very true, Rob. Washam is funny (IMO) in small doses but not even in the same galaxy as Hunter Thompson. The first paragraph or two was funny, then it got to be a bit too much like an over-alcoholic, over-oaked Cab. After the first glass, it becomes work...

Agreed.
It was just too much after a while and a forceful read.

Reading Washam made me appreciate learning speed reading as a kid.