I noticed on Twitter that James Suckling had tossed out a provocative question:
“Wonder if most people think top quality red wines need to be dark colored, even black?”
He received a stream of replies that said, essentially, “NO! What kind of idiot would think that?”
I found the question strangely passive-aggressive, considering Suckling’s proclivity to score black wines highly. So I did some quick analysis.
*7 of the top 20 Brunellos that Suckling has ever rated include descriptors of “black” or dark color, even though it’s not made from a grape that traditionally produces dark wine
*15 of the top 20 Brunellos included language exalting the oak in the wine
*One 98-pointer included seven descriptors; five were describing the oak
*4 of the 8 2005 red Bordeaux that earned 100 points included descriptions of “black” or “almost black” color
I decided to challenge him on these points on Twitter, given the implication I found in his question. After pointing out his scoring, I finished with, “The implication is that you’re above needing a wine to be black. The reality is, you love it. And that’s fine.”
He responded, “Like both Evan. Texture is more important for me.”
I told him that I found his initial question to imply that there are silly critics fixating on a wine’s darkness, and I found the texture thing to be a straw man. He replied, “I wasn’t implying anything. I was just curious.”
I thought he was ducking it, so I firmly replied, “Sorry, but it was passive aggressive. And not very self-aware, given the scores you hand out for black wines. Do you disagree that it is unnatural for Sangiovese Grosso to be black in color?”
His response: “what’s unnatural and how many vineyards in Montalcino are planted with Sangiovese Grosso? When is the last time you were there?”
Given the fact that he had recently tweeted another question on the “being there” subject (“Is it important for a wine critic to have visited the region where he or she is supposed to be an expert?”), I wasn’t surprised. I told him I had been there recently and had spent long hours in the vineyards and cellars with about a dozen producers, some of whom I still keep in contact. I told him that these producers (not simply Soldera) don’t consider Brunello to be naturally black.
He then tweeted, “What’'s natural? Do the wines make thmeselves? Next time your in Tuscany look me up.”
And it’s a fair point. Wines don’t make themselves. Wine is not a perfectly natural product. I gave him that point.
I like his reviews because I find them rock-solid consistent, even if his preferences are not for me. But is it healthy for Brunello producers to seek out high scores with black-colored wines? Is Suckling correct to say that wine isn’t natural to begin with, so it’s not relevant to focus on color as a component of nature?
I wish James well and I’ll be curious to see where he goes next.
