Originally posted by wine+art:
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:|
Haha. I’m from the hood so I don’t know if I’ll ever crossover into a full yuppie, but I’ll take jetsetter!! I think the content from a producer profile, vintage profile and travel/lifestyle perspective is still really strong and especially so this year. I do not read the tasting notes though. I do think Molesworth and Sanderson are very good tasters and often agree with their assessment of a wine, but I just don’t buy based on critics notes anymore so I skip over those sections.
I am surprised though at Dave Canada and others saying that their role as wine critics is over? I would still consider it better than the WA due to the blind tasting and again I think Molesworth and Sanderson are very solid. I don’t have foundation to make much of an opinion on Laube and Steiman as I just don’t drink or like the same style of wines as they do. The top 100 is supposed to generate buzz and conversation about the year of wine and obviously sell magazines! I don’t see how that is related to not being able to take their critics serious? I think it’s a crappy choice for #1 as well based on my own tastes in wine, but guess who thinks it’s a great choice? The thousands of people that love Shafer wines!
A lot to reply to there, Glenn.
First, I think both WS and Cigar Aficionado are excellent products, and clearly both Thomas Matthews and Marvin Shanken have their finger on the pulse of their marketplace.
I'm very confident that the vast majority of true wine enthusiast are also very interested in travel, food, other adult beverages, hotel/lodging choices along to many other
nuances in their lifestyle. I find the WS and CA a great resource. D and I think nothing a flying/driving to a city just to try a restaurant we read a review of, then returning home the next day.
I agree that Molesworth is an excellent critic, but think the
role of the critic has changed and is ever changing in the digital world. There was a time ( pre-internet) that single voices could completely drive a market. I think of people like Clement Greenberg ( modern art) and Robert Parker (American wine market) that had clear and powerful influence. Prior to the internet, both possessed specific information in their field that was not easy for the average person to obtain. There was a time you had wait to be
informed in a print format that 1973 was a dreadful vintage in Bordeaux some 2-3 years after the fact, but when a hailstorm and terrible weather wiped out most of Piedmont in 2002 we knew in real time, and today it would be a tweet.
I buy
nothing off of any critics scores today, and in fact am not even aware what their score is in most cases. What I do care about are things like... general information about the overall quality of regions I enjoy, emerging new wine regions making quality wines like Priorat in the late '90's and Northeast Italy ( Friuli - Venezia Giulia) and their stellar white wines within the last 10 years. I also look towards the critic inform of major changes at wineries like winemaker, designed style changes et al. In someways, I'm looking more for a
wine reporter than a
wine critic. I have much more to say in response to Glenn's post, but need to run...
