Might seem funny at first, but after a while, it’s just sad.
Not just Bob.
That frankly sounds about like most of the AFWE rants about “Parkerized, blueberry milkshake, score whores, vodka kool aid, blah blah blah” wines, just on the opposite side of the argument.
To me, the beauty of wine is the infinite different expressions of all the different grapes, from different harvest times, to different terroir and climate, to different winemaking techniques, to different vintages, at different ages, etc. And those of us who collect a diverse cellar of good wines in many styles, we get to experience the diversity and the ability to match wines to mood, company, food, weather, time of day, etc.
I have never understood people on either side of the spectrum who think this is some kind of either/or, us versus them, thing, like you’re a Michigan fan or you’re an Ohio State fan. Like you have to exalt one thing and tear the others down. Drink what you like, by all means, but this isn’t some kind of tribal war of us against them.
The difference is, once again, that he is not just saying that he hates (for example) Trousseau but is attacking anyone who claims to like it.
FWIW the first Trousseau I had was a CA wine which I loved - the 1998 Wild Horse Trousseau San Benito Siletto Ranch Vineyard. I ended up trying trousseaus from the Jura as a result once I discovered how excessively rare the CA versions were.
Is this different from Jon Bonne, just on the opposite side of the world?
I was thinking the same thing.
Of course it’s different. A majority of active posters here agree with John Bonne. ![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
Paging Bill Klapp–we have a nice, fat matzo ball hanging out there for you.
I’m not anti-RMP but this drivel is just sad and pathetic.
f*ck Ohio State.
Regarding Parker… yawn.
As for those debating the Asimov/Bonne/AFWE vs Parker/pro-ripeness “camps”, I would just advise: it’s really nice when you reach the point where you know what you think is right, but you’ve decided to stop fighting with people on the Intenet about it.
Bravo!!! HUGE +1!
Sometimes, a picture really is worth a thousand words
Jay, I’m not sure you know what “difference” means.
Just to be clear, this was NOT a post on the Squires board, but rather it is an “Article of Merit” on eRP.com.
So this is not something he wrote off the top of his head.
Somebody sent me the piece, and I started to post it and then dismantle it sentence by sentence. I decided that his brain is now so addled that it would not even be a challenge. Like shooting Russ and Daughters smoked fish in barrique…
I respectfully disagree. It’s quite common for the AFWE form rant to say that the people who drink those wines are score whores, point chasers, don’t think for themselves, have a palate from eating McDonalds and drinking Coke, and so forth. And even when it isn’t explicitly stated, it’s about one millimeter below the surface – if you’re saying SQN and QC and KB taste like vodka kool aid or a McDonald’s blueberry milkshake or pancake syrup, then it’s quite clear that the point is to say that people spending hundreds of dollars on those wines are rubes and suckers and beneath you.
It would be the easiest thing to criticize those wines or say that you don’t like the style without the explicit or all-but-explicit condescension and snobbery towards those who like those wines (for example, read a Frank Murray tasting note sometimes – he dislikes pinots like KB, but he’s doesn’t denigrate anyone who does in the slightest in his TNs), but some choose not to approach it in that way, I assume deliberately.
Anyway, not life and death stuff by any means, just an opportunity to gain some perspective on how a rant like Parker’s is sometimes mirrored on the other side of the “debate,” and how it looks outside the bubble of like-minded people high fiving each other and giggling over the slam.
Not new, he’s quoted that work a number of times before.
Not different at all from anyone who has an equally intolerant either/or view of the wine world. I haven’t read enough Jon Bonne to know if the shoe fits or not…
Chris, this is perhaps the 50th time you have posted this point of view. The “why can’t we all get along?” approach is not resonating with people. The reason is simple…the concept of AFWE exists only in the mediocre minds of Parker and the likes of Alice Feiring. Brodie got it right: Parker’s is a false dichotomy. His view of wine is extremist, and the overwhelming majority of his critics are merely attacking his extremism and restoring balance, not advocating the other extreme. The natural wine movement and Parker are both on the skids, because both embrace foolish and absolutist notions about wine that simply are not true, and each of those camps will not rest after stating their points of view, but instead, adopts and aggressively pursues a scorched-terroir policy with respect to the other’s wine preference. Like you, I drink wines of many different styles. However, that I drink some wines that Parker likes as well does not make him any less arrogant or stupid, nor does it make either of us a wine genius. I reject your point of view because it is predicated upon the same 
approach that Parker constantly spews…
Not to mention Pinot Noir being blended with Rhone wines to correct vintage or winemaking problems. If Parker has cleaned up and revolutionized the world of fine wine, then can he do no better than quote somebody who posted his last note in 1868, about wines that bear no rational relationship to 20th- and 21st-century wines, and from a region that Parker has never understood? He has that quote, his own tortured interpretation of the work of Peynaud and his bromances with Michel Rolland and a few other “consultants” to buttress his myopic view. Not nearly enough…