My issue is with anyone, but especially someone who seems intelligent, that is either too arrogant or ignorant to understand that peoples tastes and physiological taste is different from one person to the next. If you don’t like the same wines as him you are uneducated or unsophisticated. It is the height of wine douche baggery.
Brings to mind years ago pouring a cool climate Cab for a significant wine buyer. He wasn’t interested, but exclaimed that their Bordeaux buyer would absolutely LOVE it. Price was less than a comparable Bdx, btw. I wonder if he’d think that such a hard sell these days.
I guess, Bob, that I’ve never picked up that slant from either reading Jon’s columns nor visiting w/ him in person. Jon certainly
makes his preferences known on what he likes in wines, not at all unlike Monktown attourneys or others. But I don’t seem to pick up
any tones of condescension in his columns. Maybe I just don’t read enough into his writings to pick up on that.
Tom
I read essentially all of Jon’s columns. I see the strong point of view that won’t please everyone.
I don’t see condescension.
Tom,
You’re reiterating what I said way back in post #11 - different strokes for different folks. I’ve never found him to be condescending either, and as a panel moderator, I’ve enjoyed his questions and how he’s handled himself.
Do I agree with all of his takes on wine? Heck no - I’ve yet to meet another person who I completely agree with on ANYTHING in life - but that’s the joy of it all.
Does he ‘push an agenda’? A case would be made for any reviewer who has visibility that this is the case. He serves as a ‘gatekeeper’ to the introduction or praising of wines, just as any reviewer is, and as such, does somewhat ‘control’ what is mentioned and what isn’t . . .
Cheers.
This is where I picked up the attitude
OK, I may have been tough on Jon but here is the way I look at it…I know hundreds of people that have been drinking wine for 20-30 years, all kinds from California to France to Spain to Argentina to Hungary and on and on. And I respect their palates and opinions. I give Jon credit for that as well. But as soon as you enter the public realm and claim to draw conclusions and make assertions of quality and judgements, you had better do your research and get your ducks in a row. I think Jon is way too casual about that. He supports his personal view and thinks the rest of us are bonkers, or “novices” or uneducated. Well, back at’cha, Jon.
I would remind him that 50 years ago, hot ripe alcoholic concentrated wines were the standard by which great Bordeaux vintages were declared. People prayed for rich deep wines like the 59s and 61s and they were all too few in coming. Vintage after vintage people had to drink thin, low alcohol, bitingly tannic wines flavored with weeds while praying for the ripeness and depth that California yields almost effortlessly. We used to call them “food wines” because you could not wait to get something else in your mouth. And most of the high quality wines, lean vintage or ripe, required age to come into balance.
Personally, I think that Europe and California are approaching perfection from two different perspectives…one the greener, low alcohol style and the other super ripe and concentrated. My opinion is that it lies somewhere in the middle, but then I ask myself, what will we find there? And why is that better than a juicy mouthful of Kosta Browne?
If Jon is so convinced he knows what the apex of wine is, or should be, he’d better damn well define his terms, explain how he got there, and have a defensible argument of what “quality of wine” means. Else he should limit his contribution to wine literature to the Chron.
Hmmmm…I guess you & Fred have a more nuanced interpretation of Jon’s screed than I was able to muster up, Bob. If you know that he
is insufferably arrogant and condescending, then…yeah…“Pinot novices”, “irrational exuberance”, and “educated/younger” can readily be
read to mean a put-down.
I sorta took that writing at face value…that people who are just starting to explore Calif Pinot (“novices”) are probably drawn to the more exuberantly fruity style
of Brian’s or Dan’s (never had an Aubert) Pinots, rather than the thin/eviscerated/minerally/green style of Arnot-Roberts or WindGap that Jon favors in Pinots.
Maybe I should have read more into his words & I’d have come to the same conclusion.
I’ve only interacted w/ Jon on the surface level maybe 12-15 times at RR and HdR; in personal conversations and the panels he’s moderated, and e-mail exchanges. So…don’t really
know him very well. My read of him certainly has been neither arrogant not condescending. Could very well be that, though, “Gawd…this TomHill is such a doofus. I can hardly
wait for him to get out of my space, whadda dip$hit” was continually running thru his mind. Probably wouldn’t be far from the truth.
Jon certainly makes his likes known in the SFChron columns he writes. Not sure why anybody would take umbrage at that, but many seem to. No different
than Parker or Laube or Asimov. Knowing his preferences from the SFChron, I have little doubt that he’d rather drink a skin-contact Ribolla (85 pts) than a mature
Mayacamas Chard (96 pts). The former he’d write about w/ irrational exuberance and the latter he would probably dismiss w/ terms like “monumental/profound/magnificent”.
Is he serving his SFChron readers well w/ such a blatant bias?? Probably not.
At the end of the day, after I’ve read a buncha wine columns, wine articles, wine blogs; I ask myself if I’ve learned anything new?? Usually the answer is “yes”.
I recently learned (from Bonne) that SteveMatthiassen is growing Schioppettino, learned that (from Asimov) some of the DOC regions surrounding ChiantiClassico
are making Sangiovese-based wines that should not be dismissed, learned that (from Parker) the new Dominus is a 100-pt wine. So…at the end of the day, I’m happy.
I find that, more often than not, I’ve learned something from Jon’s column. But sometimes they’re also not worth reading…I learned nothing of note.
I ordered Jon’s book, sight unseen, because I hope to learn something new from it. Maybe I won’t…who knows. The unreleased book has already been thoroughly scourged
on one wine blog (though not by name) by a blogger who has (probably) not read the book and who will (probably) not deign to read the book. Maybe I will learn from it, maybe I won’t.
If it’s vapid and self-serving, I’ll report back here w/ my BR. But I would suggest you’ll probably find BillKlapp’s BR a better, more controversial read. He does have a way w/ words that I admire.
Tom
Adam,
I was under the impression that the coke vs. Pepsi ‘culture war’ served both sides extraordinarily well.
Actually, soda sales are at an 8 year low in the United States and continue to fall.
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
Tom, et al.
I really don’t think Jon’s perceived (by some) tone is of the utmost importance. More important, IMO, is the presentation of facts and whether or not the represent reality or not. The book excerpts are just that, excerpts…so really we need to see the whole book (yes, I have a copy on order) before making any truly accurate comments. That being said, after reading the excerpts I am left wondering:
-
Were wine buyers from New York to Tokyo really abandoning California wine due to “big flavor?” Certainly there are some anecdotal stories…but from any numbers I have seen, I don’t see that California wine sales were doing anything but growing during the period that Jon highlights (the 97 vintage release and in subsequent years). From what I’ve read of Jon’s writings (every week online), he often seems to set up a straw man, only to knock it down. It is a fairly elementary literary technique, but sometimes the straw men themselves don’t hold up under the light of day, and so then I think it is wise to question the rest of the argument.
-
I think the presentation of K-B with the phrase “irrational exuberance” is questionable. Could one argue that the style of the wines was that way…certainly. But since that Greenspan phrase is loaded with other connotations (including an inevitable collapse), I think I would have chosen something different. From what I see, K-B is an American success story that retains a substantial following. (they are friends of mine, so I may be biased).
-
The title (perhaps not chosen by Jon, as headlines are often chosen by others) of Pinot Noir Style Mess makes me wonder. From what I can tell, there is more variety now in California Pinot Noir, from more sites, than ever before. Rather than seeing that as a mess, I think that is only a great opportunity for consumers, retailers, restaurant buyers, and wholesalers alike. From my POV, it makes Pinot Noir the most exciting category in CA wine now…and why Pinot discussions go on here at Berserkers for countless pages.
That’s it. Please forgive any typos. On a plane…and GoGo seems spotty.
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
That was then, this is now. Then the discussion was “which is better, Coke or Pepsi?” That helped both brands. Now the discussion is “which is better, drinking cola or not drinking cola?” That’s not helpful to either brand.
Ironically, the latter question would probably work out okay for Pinot producers if there ever is an equivalent Pinot “culture war”.
No BR coming from this quarter, Tom. They will have to rely on you, and perhaps Ron Washam, who reviewed the book without buying or reading it on The HoseMaster…
I am sure you are right on the Soda Wars. Definitely a different animal as well, with only 2 brands truly dominating the marketplace. One of the most remarkable things to me about the wine business in the United States is the growth…and the continuing growth even in a down economic environment, of smaller wineries (and smaller breweries as well). To the best of my knowledge (and I am no expert) virtually any other area of drinks is controlled by just a few companies (albeit under different brand names), but wine and beer seem to be growing smaller companies at a fantastic rate.
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
Shocked…SHOCKED, I am, Bill. Since when do you actually have to read a book to offer up an opinion on it?? You’ve let me down!! ![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
Tom
I guess I was not aware of the Greenspan connotations…so that phrase wasn’t as “loaded” as I would have known.
To me, my girlfriend is the epitome of “irrational exuberance”. When she find a new trail up AtalayaPeak, she gets so excited about it that she wants to take other people up that trail and show
them what’s she discovered. When she finds a new recipe for BraisedLambShanks, she gets all excited about it, runs out and buys some, and invites a bunch of people over to try it.
It’s not rational to get all worked up over such trivial things when we should be getting worked up over nuclear proliferation and genocide in Somalia. I find it somewhat amusing…but
that’s my Susan and that’s why I love her!!! 
But that’s what “irrational exuberance” means to me and I can think of any number of Pinots that fit that description.
- The title (perhaps not chosen by Jon, as headlines are often chosen by others) of > Pinot Noir Style Mess > makes me wonder. From what I can tell, there is more variety now in California Pinot Noir, from more sites, than ever before. Rather than seeing that as a mess, I think that is only a great opportunity for consumers, retailers, restaurant buyers, and wholesalers alike. From my POV, it makes Pinot Noir the most exciting category in CA wine now…and why Pinot discussions go on here at Berserkers for countless pages.
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
Guess I didn’t see that headline. The headline I linked to didn’t have that on it, just something innocuous about new winemakers. But I totally agree that this is an exciting time for Pinot in Calif.
Tom
Tom,
I love parsing Greenspanisms (just got The Map and the Territory – his new book). Here’s a like to the phrase “irrational exuberance” from Wikipedia: Irrational exuberance - Wikipedia
And I’d argue that all Pinots would be “irrational exuberant” from the POV of Somalia genocide or nuclear proliferation. But I don’t understand why, in the world of Pinot only, KB would be so.
The headline is part of the second excerpt from the book…
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
OK, Adam…reading that link, I don’t think I’d characterize K-B wines as “irrational exuberant”. Now I understand.
Tom
I completely agree. I think Bonné is one of the best wine writers working in the US now. I haven’t read the book yet, but I read his articles with relish. I like his writing, I like his thoughtfulness, and I agree with his taste, so I find him useful.
From what I’ve seen of the book, its very forthright about the fact that it is a polemic. Bonne is putting forth his opinion about the best direction for California to grow and highlighting producers who are paragons of that direction. There are plenty of wines that Bonne highlights that for years were ignored or lambasted by Parker, who was pushing and continues to push his own agenda of what wine should be in California and internationally. Wine styles swing like a pendulum, and FWIW most of what Parker was pursuing as he grew to prominence did right by the wine world and pushed overall quality significantly higher until it didn’t. I think (not surprisingly, perhaps, based on what I do for work) Bonne’s message is similarly spot-on and that will be born out in time, though there are some pieces that he is, maybe, irrationally exuberant about. The classic producers he highlights reach the core of what makes California interesting, a lot of what went on at the height of the aughts was a mess (although I’ve never had a Kosta-Browne wine that I didn’t think was extraordinarily well made and think there might be better, if less prominent, examples of irrational exuberance) and everything that is going on right now at the forefront of ‘the new California wine’ was made possible by the irrational exuberance of the aughts, whether one considers the plethora of plantings made 97-99 that are beginning to grow into themselves or the fact that the bulk of winemakers making waves now learned their craft in the last generation of cellars… Ultimately, I think it should be taken as compliment that one should be identified as witch to be burned. It means you’ve reached a certain level of prominence, survive the assault and you become an institution.
Having only seen pieces, I think the book is the chronicle of a ‘disruption’ (to borrow from Gladwell) that is already in full effect. It’s not much different from the disruption that occurred bringing Adam and his cohort to prominence, nor the next disruption that will occur in response to this stylistic shift. Some producers will continue to thrive through the disruptions, others won’t, but the story of the continued development of wine in California hurtles along.
And I say that with the utmost respect for Adam, Ken Burnap, et al. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I stole several pieces of their playbook… Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
Ian