Someone reminded yesterday of a wonderful critique of the modern system of wine tasting and evaluation. I hadn't read it for a long time, and it was refreshing to check it out again today. It is Joe Dressner's astute take on the whole analytical approach to wine evaluation. He published it in 2005, and I must quote a passage that struck me as especially good:
How boring the world of Points/Tasting notes has become! I even see my
friends, people I like, writing endless tasting notes with endless
useless fruit/wood/earth analogies that are of no possible use to
anyone. Yes, they drop off the points, but they are still using the
same methodology. Furthermore, modern oenology has learned how to
manipulate wine to create manufactured aromas and flavors that fit into
the "tasting palates" artificial construct.
Has anyone besides me noticed that the methodology Joe criticizes is exactly parallel to the New Criticism in literature? This misguided movement sprang up in the 1940s as an effort to be less subjective and impressionistic in evaluating a poem or novel or, I suppose, the copy on a box of Rice Krispies. The injunction was to consider only what is in the text, as if the sacred Text in question had been dropped from above by Neoplatonic angels. Forbidden was consideration of cultural, personal, economic, political, etc., etc., factors which may have contributed to the conception and development of the text.
Fake scientism. In litteras, in vino.
Let's leave all that behind. Please.
Allegedly Joe Dressner



















Recent Comments