Adam Lee and Siduri: Noo Yawk Times article

WINE TALK
21

Adam, may you please forward this thread to Eric?

22

I read Jon Bonne’s article last week about pinot noir and its alleged demise, and considered posting. I was surprised that no one had done so. Now you have Asimov’s article regarding the Alcohol Seminar at WOPN, which was less critical than expected but still defensive. As a note, unlike Asimov’s claim the “switcheroo” proves nothing, I believe it proves much about the political position of the “non-flavor” elitists. The tasting demonstrates their movement is not about what is inside the bottle. Parr admitted to liking the wine but I would surmise he will never drink it again now that he knows how it was crafted. However, it is in line with the elitist sentiments coming from their camp as they are telling people not to drink wine that is made in a way they do not accept, regardless of whether you like the taste of it.

According to Bonne, who has never shown himself a fan of domestic pinot noir, the “pimped-out versions” of pinot (i.e. anything over 14% alcohol) are spoiling everything for everyone. He basically likened pinot with alcohol levels above this number to $6, “bottom shelf” plonk. In a follow up article Bonne claimed that any pinot over 14 percent and is “technically considered dessert or fortified wine,” which means “a great majority of high-end California wines are technically considered dessert wines.” A great majority, indeed.

Let’s be clear – Bonne and Asimov are not just attacking Adam Lee. Nor are they just attacking full-bodied pinot noir. They are attacking all domestic producers of pinot noir, except for a very tiny, elitist group of pals who, they claim, are the ONLY ones whose wines and style of winemaking are legitimate (and coincidentally are the ones that they themselves prefer to drink). They are attacking and denying a pinot producer’s right to craft wine in any style he or she chooses.

Both Bonne’s and Asimov’s position smacks of elitism. Both are spending a vast majority of time telling consumers what NOT to like rather than what they like. They are encouraging sameness. They are politicizing palates. They are rejecting the broad and beautiful stylistic diversity that pinot noir, more than any other variety of grape, can embody. And they are potentially ruining livelihoods of talented and innovative winemakers, including anyone who is not actively trying to craft a 13.1%, European-style wine. They are condemning pinots from Fred Scherrer to Ed Kurtzman to Michael Browne. If you buy wine based on their suggestions, there isn’t much left to enjoy – the remaining selection has lost its soul which lies in diversity of well-made pinot.

I want to be clear: My purpose is not to defend Adam Lee or Michael Browne nor any other winemaker whose winemaking style differs from what particular critics like to drink. Rather, I am defending every single pinot producer’s right to continue to craft well-made, excellent wines in whatever style they choose – whatever style they feel best suits the grapes, the vineyard, the vintage, and their own artistic vision. I am defending the amazing and wonderful DIVERSITY of style that is perhaps the greatest attribute of domestic pinot noir. And I am encouraging the consumer to discern only between good wine and bad wine, well-made wine and poorly made wine, not to allow the influence of elitists to narrow their thinking and annihilate their authority to taste and buy according to what their own palate tells them. Baroque Realism and Cubism are both legitimate art, and Picasso and Rembrandt are both legendary artists. Whether you hang either on your own walls is a consideration of your own preference, and is not reflective of the validity of the art itself.

I’ve always admired pinot’s amazing stylistic diversity, as well as the creative acumen of its artisan producers. And I admire those who extol the virtues of what they like rather than tearing down those they don’t, and this is especially true of a wine writer. What a wine writer’s job ought not be is to subjectively promote their own particular, political positions and preferences, and their own very small posse of like-minded winemakers. Doing so serves no one but themselves and their handful of friends in the industry, and throws the vast majority of talented, passionate, hard-working winemakers under the bus. And I wonder what the industry is going to do about it.

Regards,
Steve

23

He has been a member here for some time, although he has not signed on for a few months.

http://www.wineberserkers.com/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=5706

24

What better reason to forward? neener

25

While the article and exchange are very interesting, I think I’d be much more interested in seeing Adam MTV moment!

26

It seems that way too much is being read into this elegantly simple experiment. Quite simply, it conclusively demonstrates thar Parr and his crowd are frauds. Nothing more, nothing less. Let’s not try to turn it into a broader issue.

27

Here’s Jon Bonne’s article.

As a point of fact, the TTB’s rather antiquated definition considers wines over 14% alcohol to be dessert wines.

28

One more time with Asimov and the alcohol debate:

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/alcohol-and-balance-in-pinot-noir/?scp=4&sq=asimov&st=cse

Michael Browne proves Raj is reasonable

Warning; Warning - Squirrel Alert

29

Always good to hear from The Squirrel.

30

I fail to see what Adam’s ruse says about anyone other than Raj Parr. Why should Raj Parr’s opinion of the wine be attributed to thousands of people who’ve never tasted it?
But I’m not even sure it says as much about Raj Parr as you are presuming. The reports say that Parr inquired about buying the wine for a restaurant, not that he liked it personally (maybe he did, maybe he didn’t). Nor do I see any basis for concluding that he would never drink it again assuming he did like it.

Who has ever told someone else not to drink anything??
Most people I know are quite happy when someone else drinks wines we consider crap. More of the good stuff for us, is the usual thinking.

31

[rofl.gif] [stirthepothal.gif]

32

I think you should reread his last two paragraphs. He was making no attempts to be subtle.

33

Yup.

Wait. What? Really?

Parr never said he only like <14% ABV wines, and only uses that limit as to Pinot and Chardonnay. In fact, this exchange is probably the best view of his opinions:

I still think Parr puts too much stock in ABV as a proxy for balance, but that’s a matter of degree. And that he liked one Pinot at 15.2% is not inconsistent with his other statements, much less fraudulent.

34

I think I remember hearing this post before. The Otter Defense - YouTube

35

This seems like fairly ridiculous hyperbole to me. Can anyone even name a single California pinot over 16% alcohol? I can only remember a handful I’ve ever seen that were into the low 15% range (some Martinellis and some of the Kosta Brown SVDs from earlier in this decade, plus there is this Keefer Ranch pinot from the article). I think most of the prominent pinots that are derided as “overextracted high alcohol” styles these days, like Sea Smoke and Kosta Browne, produce pinots with alcohol in the mid 14% range.

I guess there could be some that are labeled at less but are actually 16%, though I don’t know how Asimov would be able to discern that any more than I would. Unless he ran them though a lab, and I imagine we all would have heard about it if he had done that and found a bunch of 16% alcohol California pinots.

But maybe I’ve just never seen them – does anyone know of a bunch of 16% alcohol California pinots which are of any note?

36

Also isn’t there a +/- tolerance level allowed on the label?

37

Steven, sorry to say, but you have a very close minded and emotional opinion of people with very different palates than you.

38

Wouldn’t all of this hand wringing have been avoided if Adam had simply announced that his wines would be served blind and bagged them beforehand?

Whether we appreciate the outcome, style of wines, intentions etc, this still has an air of unseemliness, at least to me. In the other blog post, it is contextualized that Parr was purchasing the wine for RN 74, in the NYT article, we read that it was for Mina steakhouses which I assume do not have Mr. Parr’s restriction on abv %.

To the poster who accused Bonne and Asimov of trying to force everyone into one style of PN, James Laube and to a lesser degree Bob Parker and Jay Miller are the arbiters of this trend. Both of these writers present wines from all over the world in varying styles in their columns and I hardly see that they are trying to internationalize Pinot Noir into their preferred style.

One of the great things about California wine in general is that there is so much of it that as consumers, we can make stylistic choices about what works for us.

39

Actually, no. The preconception aspect of the issue wouldn’t have been tested. If one were to really do a major testing of the issue, you’d probably do both blind and “mis-labeled” wines to check how much preconception plays a role in people’s perception of what they’re tasting.

40

I can vouch for how Adam Lee has an adventuresome palate, eating fried, eye-bulging shrimp heads at my urging.