It's critic bingo! (energetic, vertical, explosive beams of tannin)

[Jeff_Leve]

A 99-point St Em not called Cheval Blanc raises major red flags to me. A modern critics’ darling raises major red flags for me. This is a pretty glossy Chateau. Look who owns it. This is precisely why not to listen to many critics, especially the one that wrote this pretty bad note.

I am a bit bored tonight and tired of tasting wine, so to kill a few minutes before my last flight of the night, I checked in here. OK, what is your point, my friend? What do you mean by look who owns it? The same family, (Malet-Roquefort) has owned the property for generations. Probably centuries actually.

You would probably like the wines Galloni scores high. For some reason, I did not taste the finished wine, just the barrel sample. I will need to ask for a bottle.

[Andy_Sc]

A 99-point St Em not called Cheval Blanc raises major red flags to me. A modern critics’ darling raises major red flags for me. This is a pretty glossy Chateau. Look who owns it. This is precisely why not to listen to many critics, especially the one that wrote this pretty bad note.

Robert, of course you lay your personal preference profile on top of what critics tell you. I don’t buy a sherry just because three critics rated it highly, just because I don’t like sherry. In addition, of course you have to read the notes to see what kind of style you would get and if that would fit. There are many St. Emilion lovers out there (I know, not you and me - I didn’t buy it either) and for those, this high scores across the board are indeed valuable to find a potential under the radar outperformer.

[Robert.A.Jr]

A 99-point St Em not called Cheval Blanc raises major red flags to me. A modern critics’ darling raises major red flags for me. This is a pretty glossy Chateau. Look who owns it. This is precisely why not to listen to many critics, especially the one that wrote this pretty bad note.

I am a bit bored tonight and tired of tasting wine, so to kill a few minutes before my last flight of the night, I checked in here. OK, what is your point, my friend? What do you mean by look who owns it? The same family, (Malet-Roquefort) has owned the property for generations. Probably centuries actually.

You would probably like the wines Galloni scores high. For some reason, I did not taste the finished wine, just the barrel sample. I will need to ask for a bottle.

My bad, Jeff. I confused this with “Canon” la Gaffeliere, which is owned by Neipperg. Not a fan of his estates.

[Keith_Levenberg]

This La Gaffeliere is exactly why you should follow critics! . . . I’m not a fan of the winery either

Let me get this straight, you should follow critics so you can follow their recommendations to buy wines you’re not a fan of?

[David_Bu3ker]

29 pages in, it appears the main issue is that critics use these things called “words.”

[Keith_Levenberg]

29 pages in, it appears the main issue is that critics use these things called “words.”

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

[David_Bu3ker]

29 pages in, it appears the main issue is that critics use these things called “words.”

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

[Robert.A.Jr]

29 pages in, it appears the main issue is that critics use these things called “words.”

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

Keith is right, the word choices from some of these critics is totally clownish.

[David_Bu3ker]

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

Keith is right, the word choices from some of these critics is totally clownish.

No more clownish than the choices made here, on CellarTracker, or many other locations.

It’s pretty typical Berserker faux-superiority.

[John_Morris]

29 pages in, it appears the main issue is that critics use these things called “words.”

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

No, you can write simply and directly, avoiding cliches, endless repetition of the same stilted metaphors and meaningless phrases. Yes, you will end up repeating words like “tannin” and “acid,” fruit and wood descriptors and some other basics. But that isn’t an assault on the language.

Not all critics are hackneyed writers.

(And, to be pedantic, you’re misusing tautology here. )

[Robert.A.Jr]

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

Keith is right, the word choices from some of these critics is totally clownish.

No more clownish than the choices made here, on CellarTracker, or many other locations.

It’s pretty typical Berserker faux-superiority.

True. But we are rank amateurs, not paid professionals.

[Jayson_Cohen]

No, it’s that some of them use them very poorly.

It’s an exercise in tautology. There’s no way to do it well without endlessly repeating things, or going off in on oddball tangents.

Keith is right, the word choices from some of these critics is totally clownish.

A writer can engage in what seems like endless repetition well, as opposed to poorly. Grammar is still grammar. Words and phrases still have meanings. (Or they don’t in the case of some of the writing we have criticized in this thread.) Cliches, except in rare circumstances, should still be avoided. As should passive voice, except in my previous sentence or where necessary. Arguments should still make sense and have some logical flow.

The rules and style of good writing don’t fly out the window (cliche) because the subject of the writing is wine.

[David_Bu3ker]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

[Robert.A.Jr]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water. My wife would not subscribe, she’s thinks my taste in wine is idiosyncratic.

Each of you, including Keith, Jayson and John, would be infinitely greater than what we see from Galloni. I actually read most of y’all’s notes, and they are generally quite fantastic. That note on the La Gaffeliere, like many of his notes, is embarrassingly bad.

[Jayson_Cohen]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water.

But I’m a litigator. As is Keith. We are, therefore, basically professional writers. Writing, both persuasive and objective, constitutes a very large part of the work we do and the work our clients expect to us to do well and pay for.

[John_Morris]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

No, but writing is a central part of what Robert, Jayson and I each do for a living.

Do you really think that the task makes it impossible to write better than Galloni or Perrotti-Brown?

[Robert.A.Jr]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water.

Each of you, including Keith, Jayson and John, would be infinitely greater than what we see from Galloni. I actually read most of y’all’s notes, and they are generally quite fantastic. That note on the La Gaffeliere, like many of his notes, is embarrassingly bad.

But I’m a litigator. As is Keith. We are, therefore, basically professional writers. Writing, both persuasive and objective, constitutes a very large part of the work we do and the work our clients expect to us to do well and pay for.

Yea, but you ended a sentence with a preposition.

I have not seen your prose, but Keith is a uniquely gifted wine writer, really one of the best I’ve seen. And John, you gotta read his books, they are great. I just write contracts. Yawn.

[Jayson_Cohen]

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water.

Each of you, including Keith, Jayson and John, would be infinitely greater than what we see from Galloni. I actually read most of y’all’s notes, and they are generally quite fantastic. That note on the La Gaffeliere, like many of his notes, is embarrassingly bad.

But I’m a litigator. As is Keith. We are, therefore, basically professional writers. Writing, both persuasive and objective, constitutes a very large part of the work we do and the work our clients expect to us to do well and pay for.

Yea, but you ended a sentence with a preposition.

I have not seen your prose, but Keith is a uniquely gifted wine writer, really one of the best I’ve seen. And John, you gotta read his books, they are great. I just write contracts. Yawn.

It’s fine to end sentences with prepositions in the 21st century.

I was about to write before you chimed in that I’ve seen people praise Keith’s wine writing. Keith has a flare for it. Chris Coad likewise was a fabulous wine writer on the boards. Joe Dressner had a real knack too. And I’m happy to read John Gilman and Josh Raynolds and Neal Martin and of course William Kelley and numerous others … (I just dabble a bit on the interwebs myself.)

[David_Bu3ker]

Funny that none of you guys have started a newsletter.

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water.

But I’m a litigator. As is Keith. We are, therefore, basically professional writers. Writing, both persuasive and objective, constitutes a very large part of the work we do and the work our clients expect to us to do well and pay for.

It does not automatically translate to entertaining/engaging in every genre. I write legal disclosures for a living. It’s a completely different thing. Switching from one to the other is not easy, and not guaranteed.

[Jayson_Cohen]

Ha. I’d suck. There is a reason I sell time, not prose about wine. My newsletter would have around 5 subscribers, one of which is my mom. She thinks I walk on water.

But I’m a litigator. As is Keith. We are, therefore, basically professional writers. Writing, both persuasive and objective, constitutes a very large part of the work we do and the work our clients expect to us to do well and pay for.

It does not automatically translate to entertaining/engaging in every genre. I write legal disclosures for a living. It’s a completely different thing. Switching from one to the other is not easy, and not guaranteed.

I didn’t claim otherwise. The point is that wine writing can be good writing and entertaining/engaging, but bad writing is a turn off for many of us. Hence this 29-page thread.