It's Time For Wine Critics To Stop Defending Themselves........

on wine forums. While they are out there with boots on the the ground doing the work, the hoi polloi likes to use them as fodder for their own little petty controversies. If you think you have no use for their opinions, ignore them. And if you say something libelous about them, let them pursue litigation. It’s all subjective and the opinions of the critics of the critics, is no more valid than he critics themselves. Stop the whining and drink your wine.

Agreed. They are just personal opinions.

I disagree. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with criticizing a wine critic. I think it was Pat B in the other thread who said something along the lines of the critique should have substance, as any argument should.

I even heard there is a thread about the bad ones

somewhere

[popcorn.gif]

1 Like

Agree and Disagree.

I think it’s very easy to ignore those whose opinions you don’t trust, or don’t find useful. That’s what I do. It’s actually quite easy. Really.

Also: wine critics are part of the wine scene landscape. They are public figures, by design. Critiquing the critics is absolutely an acceptable/meritorious topic of conversation. And, just as one can do with others’ opinions, one can easily avoid those conversations if they so choose. :slight_smile:

While I would agree that professional critics defending criticism on the forums is probably not a wise use of their time I hardly understand how people shouldn’t also have opinions about critics. This is a place to share opinions about all things wine. That would include what critics are saying about wine. You’re free to not agree with those posters just as you’re free to disagree with critics. I’d say those threads probably have more useful information than a thread criticizing critics of critics will.

6 Likes

It’s funny that this is brought up - that was one of, though not the main, downfall of ERP - people started taking nasty potshots at RMP - very nasty.

No problem disagreeing with critics - just don’t be a dick or get ‘personal’ about it.

Cheers

6 Likes

Obviously, one can disagree about an appraisal of any particular wine. But to imply nefarious motives is dispictable. And if one finds that they frequently disagree with a critic, it’s simply time to move on. And any attempt to disparage said critic is simply immature.

1 Like

I think it’s probably a mistake to try to argue scores, particularly with folks who haven’t tasted the wine or posted their own review of the wine, but when one’s professional integrity is questioned, or one is accused of having a vendetta against a family or winery, or other ulterior motives, because of a specific review or comment, I think the reviewer is entirely justified in defending themselves. I’m specifically referring to the AG thread currently on the board, although this also happened after underwhelming Aldo Conterno reviews a few years ago.

2 Likes

I think it’s great that we have some critics participate here. And calling BS when necessary is something that every forum needs once in a while to remind people to think before typing.

We have two rules in our golf group, don’t be a dick and always visit the nineteenth hole. At times I wonder if we’d let some Berserkers play in our group.

If someone has something substantial about a critic’s nefarious motives, I want to hear about that too. It’s unfounded speculation that’s unnecessary.

‘Those who criticize their betters are just jelly’ - JS

1 Like

Hey, he lives in Tuscany. Give him a brake.

What brought on this thread?

brake? yes, of course

The AG 2017 Barolo thread

It’s cool that Suckling is drinking from the bottle. Not criticizing, mind you!

1 Like

I think it’s great that critics should participate in discussions here. I agree that such discussions should always be civilized. But gone are the days when a critic just threw out anybody who had the temerity to disagree with his opinion. Although we should be grateful that it happened - without the kneejerk reactions of the time, WB would have never existed - and perhaps, neither would Vinous.

1 Like

It’s probably true that wine critics should not respond to those who criticize them, just as authors shouldn’t respond to reviews of their books. It’s not that it’s somehow ethically wrong. It just rarely comes out well for either the critic or the author. I don’t see how that extends to not criticizing critics (or authors). It’s a condition of publishing that one should expect disagreements with you in print. And while objections to reviews of specific wines has limited interest, objections to stylistic preference is an important part of arguments about what one looks for in a wine and evidenced and reasoned objection to specific critical practice as questionable is also important (and here critics maybe should break the rule of thumb to respond to false information being conveyed if that is what is happening).