Maybe he’s floating? Maybe there’s something else in that wine…
Ahem, being a Top Gun fan, I need to quibble with your quote a little. I believe it’s Maverick saying, “He’s going vertical. So am I…” to which Goose replied, “We’re going ballistic, Mav’, go get him!” 
No, the juxtaposition is vertical (feel) and horizontal (persistence), so vertical, yet horizontal. Maybe it’s extending in all dimensions. Or two anyway.
I think the real problem with the syntax of the original is not the descriptors but the “built on.” His descriptors all reference his experience (particularly “resonance,” which if I have intuited the meaning correctly, refers to an effect on an external party), but “built on” suggests the elements that make up the wine. So he writes about a wine constructed on its effects on tasters. That’s awkward.
I think, though, that it is an awkwardness inherent to the style of tasting note Galloni – and many other critics – want to write. They both want to describe the wine and describe the experience it evokes in a short tasting note, so both a Parker-style tasting note and a more “writerly” note on the tasting experience and the writer’s response to it. Interestingly, the second part is most likely a response to criticisms of points and thus an attempt to express the points in verbal form. Which makes me appreciate the point of points in support of tasting notes.
Parker was actually very good at expressing relative quality, and thus his reaction to, and emotional experience of, a wine through tasting descriptors. Not many others can do it as well. David Schildknecht, Neal Martin, William Kelley, maybe Stephen Tanzer, can do it. Galloni tends to write about his feelings about a wine; sometimes, his entire note consists of nothing but his feelings, which, as people occasionally point out here, makes it sound vacuous or like a mere instance of puffery. On the other hand, Lisa Perrotti-Brown has such a dry set of descriptors that she absolutely needs points to convey relative quality (or else toss in a “Wow!”).
I think, though, that it is an awkwardness inherent to the style of tasting note Galloni – and many other critics – want to write.
This.
As to the other - stretching, length, horizontal, it’s so nuanced, (in fact it is LOADED with nuance) that it makes little sense anyway we stretch it!
I think you’re on to something regarding Parker though. He wasn’t a brilliant writer, but he let you know what he thought about a wine while doing his best to describe it. In his later years he seemed to become a parody of himself and he started throwing in technical opinions regarding viticulture, etc., that destroyed his usefulness. But early on, while his writing was pretty dry, it conveyed something. “Gobs of fruit” may be the expression of a simpleton, but it actually carries more information than stating that something has nuances of white and yellow flowers and cast iron pan.
But back to the game!
One might say “nuanced to the core.”
One can’t help palate differences, but writing is a craft. If you write thousands of TNs a year, you should in theory improve if you work at it. I may not agree with Jancis Robinson’s palate but man she can write.
One of the best ever from Galloni (lol): “The 2008 Dom Pérignon is fabulous… what I admire most about the 2008 is the way it shows all the focus, translucence and energy that is such a signature of the year, and yet it is also remarkably deep and vertical. In other words, the 2008 is a Champagne that plays in three dimensions.”
Which dimensions? Are those the only important dimensions or are there other dimensions that matter? ![[head-bang.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/b1cd199e4b2b2988b5107c3c9598fd28dc92a776.gif "[head-bang.gif]"){kind=small}
Contrast this with JR’s note, which is a paragon of brevity and restraint: “Very fresh and lively and creamy, lovely undertow. Long and tense. Really refreshing”
Agreed, Jancis is a clear, snappy, direct writer who communicates the point with a minimum of fuss.
Galloni communicates less in many more words.
+1
If you really look at his language, it’s not about his feelings – it’s extremely abstract qualities attributed to the wines (dimensions, beams, nuance) that are subjective yet don’t manage to convey anything about his sensory experience. Often they’re just surplusage. For instance, how is “beams of tannin” different from “tannic”? Another writer would say “round tannins” or “green tannins” to convey the texture in the mouth.
It’s not helpful to readers/buyers when everything is scored 93-96 and every note ends “Don’t miss it!” and everything else is piffle.
Great lawyer word, I’m stealing this. Not for tasting notes.
But even that Jancis note, does it really tell you what the wine tastes like? Any fruit, earth, spice, etc.? Other than knowing it is a note on DP, would you know if it is a red or white wine?
Normally, I don’t weigh in, because tasting notes are hard, but John will love this from AG (latest article on Sonoma):
“Here, it is the wine’s resonance and textural resonance that make the strongest impression. This is a flat-out gorgeous wine. Don’t miss it.”
Both resonance and textural resonance.
Dehlinger wines appear to be quite resonant; four feature the term (counting the above note as one).
I picked one note from AG’s recent article to demonstrate what I mean.
“The gorgeous 2016 Cuvée Moriah is all class. Bright, vibrant and delineated, it beautifully blends 67% Grenache from Dry Stack (in Bennett Valley), 20% Mourvèdre (from Sonoma Valley) and 10% Syrah (from Sonoma Mountain). On the palate, it exudes balance and sophistication; the interplay of bright red-toned fruit and mouthwatering acids is compelling. The 2016 is one of the finest (maybe the finest) Cuvée Moriahs I can remember tasting. Don’t miss it.”
“All class”: I think we can agree that wines do not exhibit class nor are they classy. “Class” here is an expression of AG’s summary judgment about the wine. It purports to attribute to the wine an idiosyncratic allusion that exists in his mind.
“Bright, vibrant and delineated.” I have no issues with any of those terms. I use “bright” myself, although I am vaguely troubled by the use of a visual term to describe a taste experience, but describing the various experiences of fruit is hard. I think the recent advent of “sparks” and “pixelated” to describe fruit is part of this attempt.
“Exudes balance and sophistication”: “Exudes” is an awkward verb for two descriptors which do not exude, i.e., externalize a (previously) internal element. “Sophistication” is another one of those summary judgment terms like “classy” that doesn’t really seem to fit wine. It would have helped to know what made this particular wine sophisticated. It seems related to the following clause, but while I can see “the interplay of bright red-toned fruit and mouthwatering acids” as what makes up the balance, I don’t see how that is sophisticated.
“…the interplay of bright red-toned fruit and mouthwatering acids is compelling.” I have no issue with that description.
“The 2016 is one of the finest (maybe the finest) Cuvée Moriahs I can remember tasting. Don’t miss it.” Judgments, but okay. Putting this vintage in the context of other vintages is useful information.
Of this note, only “the interplay of bright red-toned fruit and mouthwatering acids” and the isolated phrase “bright, vibrant and delineate” really describes the taste; and the latter terms are somewhat vague metaphors, although we (I anyway) can relate meaning to them and the first clause is married to a judgment (compelling). The rest – gorgeous, beautifully, all class, sophisticated, compelling, finest, etc. are all what I would call AG’s feelings about the wine.
I completely concur in your exegesis, Chris. I would just add that this note had an uncharacteristic amount of useful, meaningful information. It sounds like this is a wine with fruits in the red fruit direction (“bright” and “vibrant” suggest that even before he says red-fruited explicitly), and the comment about acid is helpful. The descriptors are in contrast to a lot of grenache, so this is helpful. It just doesn’t seem typical of his notes, having read hundreds of them for this thread.
Eh, many of his notes have fairly normal descriptors. See, for example, this note on an Arnot-Roberts wine, which is more or less selected at random:
“Arguably the highlight in this range, the 2017 Syrah Que Syrah Vineyard is outrageously beautiful. A wine of exotic beauty, the 2017 has so much to offer. Super-ripe black cherry, plum, lavender, spice and black pepper are front and center. The Que Syrah stands out for a compelling interplay of exotic ripeness and cool climate savoriness. It is one of the most exciting young wines I tasted in Sonoma this year. Don’t miss it.”
Other than the doubling of beauty and exotic, most of the note is useful and reads fine, including the obvious implication that he really, really liked it.
Incidentally, two of the Arnot-Roberts wines are described as “outrageously beautiful.”
In one note, he threw in a new descriptor that includes two of your bugaboos: “beams of salinity.” The crossbars to pillars of salt?
I do get a sense of the dark fruit profile here, but most of the rest is just piling on unhelpful superlatives (bolded). After the first one, they add nothing. The biggest problem, though, is that I don’t understand how “super ripe” and “exotic ripeness” can coexist with “cool climate savoriness” (underscored).
And then there are the reflexive “so much to offer” and “don’t miss it.”
What was the score? I’m curious. 95± 2, I would guess.
I guess you will have to try it to find out. The use of “interplay” suggests he is aware that ripe fruit and savory elements are two things generally in opposition, except in southern Rhone wines, where I find it quite common.
I think the score was a 97.
Speaking of crimes against our native tongue, did anyone catch the first sentence of Lisa Perroti-Brown’s announcement of Parker’s retirement yesterday:
Lisa Perrotti-Brown
16 May 2019 | News & Views
The father of modern wine criticism, our publication’s founder and namesake, my greatest mentor and a dear friend, > it is with mixed feelings that I announce that Robert M. Parker Jr. will, as of today, be formally hanging up his wine criticism boots and retiring from Robert Parker Wine Advocate. I say “mixed,” because if anyone deserves a rest from our frenetic world of wine reviews, it is Bob. And yet, his contribution to significantly raising the bar of critical, unbiased wine writing and wine quality cannot be overestimated. His unrivaled tasting experience and expert, straight-talking opinions will be sorely missed by consumers and trade alike.
What is the bolded phrase? On first read, it seemed like a salutation addressed to Parker. But then it seems like a parenthetical description that should have come immediately before or after his name but was pasted into the wrong spot.
Does anyone read this stuff before it goes out? ![[scratch.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/4/42a16863a8714da3c1604419e3eb9206bb87aa50.gif "scratch"){kind=small}
And she split an infinitive!
Sigh . . . .
In the wake of Parker’s retirement, and clearly wanting to out-do Leve and his liquid sex, Lisa Parody Brown now brings us sex on a rug:
97-99 points Robert Parker’s Wine Advocate
The 2018 Pontet-Canet is made up of 70% Cabernet Sauvignon, 22% Merlot, 5% Cabernet Franc and 3% Petit Verdot. Picking began on September 24 and finished on October 5; aging is in 55% oak barriques and 45% amphorae. Very deep purple-black in color, it comes rolling sensuously out of the glass with all the opulence and seduction of Cleopatra on a carpet. It emerges with flamboyant scents of crème de cassis, preserved plums and blueberry compote, and after a few moments, it bursts with nuances of molten licorice, sandalwood, Chinese five spice, candied violets, dark chocolate and dried roses, followed by underlying earthy suggestions of fallen leaves, black truffles, underbrush and wild sage. Full-bodied, wonderfully dense, rich, impossibly layered and very, very decadent, the palate delivers all it promises on the nose, with a firm, wonderfully velvety frame and finishing with epic length, a scintillating wave of freshness and a beguiling perfume. This is one for true hedonists. (LPB) (4/2019)
How this doesn’t get a barrel range score of 100-100, XXX or three bunnies defies imagination. ![[gen_fro.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/acc371fe8341f433d5c0ed34025c962acc33ad59.gif "fro"){kind=small}
Pardon me while I go take a cold shower . . . .