The Big Parkerization Lie

I’m sure this article by Lisa Perrotti-Brown will start some discussion.

I’d be more interested in a debate over whether Thucydides’ theory that the Peloponnesian war was inevitable was correct. It at least raises pertinent issues of historical interpretration, which is one more pertinent issue than this debate would raise.

Nope, can’t see any reason for discussion here. Seems perfectly in order and with controversy to me.

The article was too boring to finish.


Difficult to see how something written on this subject, by someone with a vested financial interest in the Parker name, could be seen as in any way impartial. A bit like the bumf that comes out from the cork producers.

The punctuation seemed pretty well done.
But I skipped around a lot.


Next time you are in town. We can drink SQN, Martinelli Jackass Zin, and 2003 Pavie in celebration of our liberation from Parkerization.

Nothing like a revisionist pov from WA to confirm the general decline of the publication. Many Bordeaux lovers have spend decades at this point noting the changes in wine making across Bordeaux to make bigger and richer wines to match Parker’s tasting sweet spot. [stirthepothal.gif] [cheers.gif]

I’m liberated from it. I never buy those wines. I do have some 84 Monbousquet left, though, to contribute as well as a bottle of Clos St. Jean 03 (again bought before I knew I had to give up on him even for CdP) I can contribute.After we line up all those wines, we can all go to another table and drink what we like.

If we are going to line ‘em up, better bring something to knock ‘em down.

BTW you are on the hook to supply the wines, for the lineup that is. I don’t have such things.

She notes her inherent bias early in the article.

But not her ignorance. :wink:

I thought you were offering those wines. I don’t have any but the ones I mentioned either. So let’s just pretend we did that tasting and move on to the next one.

And there is no mention of the anti-flavor wine elite.

I launched in, and quickly came to that conclusion. Does anyone who waded through want to point out any illuminating or controversial statements?


Reading her say that she had her first glass of wine in 1990 and then assert that pre-Parker, pre-Peynaud wines were dirty and thin was pretty gag-inducing.


Which reminds me … I need to add “hagiography” and “sycophancy” to the cool words thread in Asylum…

I believe I read it pretty closely, best I can tell she is not denying that Perkerization is a historical fact, only claiming that it occurred because of Parker’s excellent reflection of wine consumers’ preferences, rather than some evil plot. Personally I don’t see these two as mutually exclusive.

Boring, but I persevered (slow day at work). Here’s a quote further down that you probably didn’t get to:

“Today, Parker should remain a liberating symbol as the palate of the people …”

Speaking of inherent bias…this group?