Jump to content

Washington Post Wine Column


JPW

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think it is a pathetic excuse for a wine column....... How lazy to pull random people in to "score" wine and offer "professional" comments. Can't DC do better? I've moved to Charleston, SC and we have a pretty decent wine column each Wednesday -

Doesn't that seem weird?

Come on Ben, show us what you've got!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a pathetic excuse for a wine column....... How lazy to pull random people in to "score" wine and offer "professional" comments.  Can't DC do better?  I've moved to Charleston, SC and we have a pretty decent wine column each Wednesday -

Doesn't that seem weird?

Come on Ben, show us what you've got!

DC does indeed do better - DC magazine, that is.

Sorry, shameless self-promotion ... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The panel segment has been irking me for a long while too. See my post today on DCist:

http://www.dcist.com/archives/2006/02/17/the_posts_wine.php

I don't think it's an age thing; a 24-year-old can know a thousand times more about wine than a 42-year-old. It's really a question of experience and knowledge, and -- with the exception of one column -- the Post tends to be relying on panelists who lack both.

Does anyone know what Giliberti thinks about this panel segment?

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheval Blanc??? Why would someone pull that wine out as being the one just out of reach? Don't get me wrong, I love to ride the white horse, but if I were to lust after a current wine from Bordeaux, which I do quite often, it would Cheval Blanc is not the one I would choose. I have a feeling that the old guy watched Sideways and decided that it was the wine to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheval Blanc???  Why would someone pull that wine out as being the one just out of reach?  Don't get me wrong, I love to ride the white horse, but if I were to lust after a current wine from Bordeaux, which I do quite often, it would Cheval Blanc is not the one I would choose.  I have a feeling that the old guy watched Sideways and decided that it was the wine to have.

Cheval Blanc would be the one he likes. That you might like another is irrelevant to his argument - he's not saying it's the only one out of reach.

Cheval Blanc has its fans. Only most of them know the winery is in St Emilion, not Pomerol. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks the guest review panels (sommelier panel notwithstanding) are completely inane?

The panel this time, if you read the lead, at least were wine afficionados. However, by not publishing each "reviewers" full description I cannot place their three word comments in any context other than the numerical 90 whatever rating.

It's as if they took an idea that might have showed promise, and purposefully tried to screw it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, anyone know where I can get me one of those "soft Barolos from Tuscany" the old guy remembers so fondly in today's wine column?  :lol:

And when did Cheval Blanc move to Pomerol? :huh:

Those glaring errors annoyed the bajeezus out of me. It's one thing to be uninteresting but it's worse to be factually erroneous.

I have no idea where the Post is going with this concept, but once again it's "swing and a miss".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks the guest review panels (sommelier panel notwithstanding) are completely inane?

The panel this time, if you read the lead, at least were wine afficionados. However, by not publishing each "reviewers" full description I cannot place their three word comments in any context other than the numerical 90 whatever rating.

It's as if they took an idea that might have showed promise, and purposefully tried to screw it up.

I think they're trying to improve it, because in previous panels when they posted each "reviewer"'s comments, too many sounded alike.

This idea never showed promise - not with these panels, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree, the random collection of panels show no promise whatsoever.

This panel showed the briefest ray of hope, since the people assembled actually collected wine. Then they just gave their numerical scorings with the briefest of text, rendering the whole thing useless IMHO. :lol:

Edited by B.A.R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree, the random collection of panels show no promise whatsoever.

This panel showed the briefest ray of hope, since the people assembled actually collected wine. Then they just gave their numerical scorings with the briefest of text, rendering the whole thing useless IMHO. :lol:

I don't think that there was room to allow for more extensive comments from each taster. But I agree, this panel was much better suited to the format than some that have been in the past. I wish I had the collection that some of them have. I also thought it interesting that the panel fairly consistently rated the wines lower than Ben did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a lame answer from the Food chat:

Ocean View, Del. - transplanted from Bowie: Whatever is going on with the Post wine columns these days? Has the Post given up trying to please the wine enthusiasts in the region? Since Michael Franz's column disappeared, searching the Food section on Wednesday's is hit or miss when it comes to wine advice. Gilberti seems to have all but gone himself, and the articles that show up instead are less about wine and more about various subgroups (lobbyists???) enjoying wine. Is this an interim strategy or the face of the future?

"It's the WINE ... !"

Judy H.: Dear Ocean View. You wine lovers are a tough crowd. We are trying to add to your ranks by doing tastings and printing stories that will introduce new people to wine--while still offering lists of good wines to check out every week. Michael Franz is writing an online wine column you can read by going to http://www.winereviewonline.com/

Ben's tasting notes about some very good (and unfortunately, and uncharacteristically for us, very expensive wines) are in the first column of today's tasting chart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps they are listening, since today's wine writing has none of the annoying panel of critics: Here

Now this is pretty much the same article I read about 2 years in the Post ago about Rosso di Montalcino.  <_<

Basically, many of the 2002 Rossi he mentions are not available at wholesale any longer. Most wineries have released their 2003 and the 2004 vintage was previewed in New York at the Benvenuto Brunello event. His warning people away from 2002 in general is contrary to my experience of 2002 Rosso. Because so much Brunello was declasified in this vintage, the 2002 Rosso were quite good. The 2003's are suffering from inconsistency as some are tight and failry ageable wines and some are massive fruit bombs and some are delightful and well balanced wines. While I am enjoying the 2003's, they are a widely varying and not typical lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting pretty tired of the wine folks in the food section and today's column about rose didn't help. Name dropping and a superficial look at rose wines-please! I know Joe Riley has a thing or two to say as well. These wines are sooo good right now. I'm drinking a $6 Bordeaux rose I purchased from MC with great enjoyment. Domaine Ott is a nice wine but hardly a value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Domaines Ott Chateau de Selle Rosé de Provence is the favorite in St. Tropez and Cannes. That says enough right there.
Not to mention the Hamptons as an article earlier this summer in the NYTimes Sunday Styles section pointed out.

ETA - Yes, I read the Sunday Styles section. What's it to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, they made Kathy out to be a curmudgeon. All I can say was that she was very helpful to me when picking the wines to be served at my wedding.

I was struck by that too. I've never been to the restaurant or had opportunity to meet her myself, but I thought devoting a fifth of the article to one couple's complaints was beyond gratuitous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is 2007, not 1957. There have been woman astronauts, women running for president, women airline pilots, women CEOs, women Secretary of State, women in charge of every facet of our society for a long time. Why is a woman sommelier something that anyone would even think twice about, and why is a male sommelier automatically snooty? The last part of the article I thought was gratuitious and mean. In our business we meet between 1,000-3,000 peopla A WEEK. If 2 people out of one thousand don't like me, I'm way ahead of the game. Does this make sense to anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is 2007, not 1957. There have been woman astronauts, women running for president, women airline pilots, women CEOs, women Secretary of State, women in charge of every facet of our society for a long time. Why is a woman sommelier something that anyone would even think twice about, and why is a male sommelier automatically snooty? The last part of the article I thought was gratuitious and mean. In our business we meet between 1,000-3,000 peopla A WEEK. If 2 people out of one thousand don't like me, I'm way ahead of the game. Does this make sense to anyone?

I also thought the article was characteristically fluffy. Whoever thinks twice about a female sommelier just doesn't get out enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Mark - who thinks twice about a woman sommelier??

Hey, sommeliers have gotten rid of the Tastevin lugging around their neck, anyone with a good attitude should be welcome by any diner!

And the last bit about the complaining couple only brings up the point that people who dine out can be difficult - particularly if they lack wine or "dining" knowledge - this couple was committed to a particular wine - they wanted their Moscato, and nobody was going to change their mind - YESSIREEE BOB!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nadine Brown was a charming presence at our annual wine dinner (held this year at Charlie Palmers). I was delighted to give her the remainder of my 3L of 89 Prieure Lichine to enjoy with her staff. A very down to earth lady who knows her wine though she was somewhat overwhelmed with the quantity and quality of the wines we brought to drink with each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was struck by that too. I've never been to the restaurant or had opportunity to meet her myself, but I thought devoting a fifth of the article to one couple's complaints was beyond gratuitous.
All it showed me is that the complainers were weasels, and that she handled it as graciously as could be expected given that they were openly hostile.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today's column deals with Summer's conundrum - what to serve with ripe tomatoes. They suggest pinot grigio, sauvignon blanc, albariño and CHARDONNAY? Not a peep about riesling, gruner veltliner, savennieres. Chardonnay and tomato vinaigrette is one of the most disgusting food collisions you can put in your mouth. If you don't believe me- try it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today's column deals with Summer's conundrum - what to serve with ripe tomatoes. They suggest pinot grigio, sauvignon blanc, albariño and CHARDONNAY? Not a peep about riesling, gruner veltliner, savennieres. Chardonnay and tomato vinaigrette is one of the most disgusting food collisions you can put in your mouth. If you don't believe me- try it.

That's interesting. I wonder if perhaps the editors added that at the end, thinking you can't suggest a range of white wines and not include Chardonnay. Just as people might watch Fox News or Now with Bill Moyers to to have their own preferences validated for them, perhaps the editor wants to have that in there to validate the many Chardonnay people. Is there a WP wine conspiracy? :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I find the Post's wine advice quite useful. One of the picks this week, NV Freixenet Cordon Negro Brut Cava, will come in very handy at the 7-11 when I'm trying to decide between it and the Andre Brut that's on sale.

:lol: :lol: :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I find the Post's wine advice quite useful. One of the picks this week, NV Freixenet Cordon Negro Brut Cava, will come in very handy at the 7-11 when I'm trying to decide between it and the Andre Brut that's on sale.

I've refrained from commenting on the Post's wine column up until now, but this is unbelievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've refrained from commenting on the Post's wine column up until now, but this is unbelievable.
This is not the first time they've recommended Freixenet. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt up until the first time they did it, but that tore it. I wouldn't clean my catbox with the stuff.

It's also pretty clear that the only reason they mention the Henriot (which is gorgeous) is because they got invited to the schmoozefest tasting. Feh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of evaporating what minimal cred I have here, I actually enjoy Freixenet as a base for champagne punches and such, and moreover it's pretty much the only thing in the ultra-cheap bubbles category that's drinkable by itself. It's reliably manufactured, and a damn sight better than André, Great Western and the like, which I would describe as "filling a much-needed void": the best thing about them are their sturdy glass bottles. IMHO.

The P&D column, however, remains little more than an "and THEN we drank THIS" blog. I'm not learning a whole lot about typicity nor about what to avoid here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of evaporating what minimal cred I have here, I actually enjoy Freixenet as a base for champagne punches and such, and moreover it's pretty much the only thing in the ultra-cheap bubbles category that's drinkable by itself.

I agree completely. It's a respectable product. (But what it's doing in the WP wine column is of course another question entirely.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of evaporating what minimal cred I have here, I actually enjoy Freixenet as a base for champagne punches and such
Consider it evaporated :lol: Actually you can get better Cava's for only a few dollars more than Freizenet that are much better, there are also a large number of very drinkable and at the same time affordable Presecos that are again just a smidge more expensive. When I am making bubbly based cocktails these are what I go with and leave the supermarket bubbly for the 17 year old prom goers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The column just seems to continually select wines that people may have seen before in a store, albeit one that also sells Big Bites 24 hours a day, and they try to inform the reader "Its an ok wine." Its a joke and one has to wonder who is behind the madness, and I would hope that its someone behind the curtain, and not the writers themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The column just seems to continually select wines that people may have seen before in a store, albeit one that also sells Big Bites 24 hours a day, and they try to inform the reader "Its an ok wine." Its a joke and one has to wonder who is behind the madness, and I would hope that its someone behind the curtain, and not the writers themselves.
I keep thinking, based on no real information (and what better way to conduct a barroom discussion with oneself) that the rule is

"you can write about anything stocked at Rodman's on Wisc. Ave." But then, Rodmans has some pretty good stuff, now and then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice to see that today's column was paid for by Gallo and Fosters/Blass. Take a look here.

Great reporting! Keep up the good work!

After a day of presentations, we enjoyed the first sips of Andrew's pick this week: the NV Pommery Pop Champagne ($15/175 ml), which can be found wrapped in a red, white and blue foil version of the American flag. This well-established, high-quality house's elegant prestige Cuvee Louise can fetch upward of $300 a bottle for its 1998 vintage cuvee and 1999 rosé. We admire its efforts to make its champagne more accessible via this hip quarter-bottle size.

These must surely be two of the most inept wine columnists in the United States. This paragraph - which is representative of the column as a whole - can only be explained by corruption, naiveté, and/or contempt for the reader. Shame on you both, Karen Page and Andrew Dornenburg, for what appears to be gross negligence and abuse of the public trust.

It's time for them to go.

Don Rockwell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let this go down as the most cogent, measured, on-point, and thoroughly correct thing Rocks has ever posted at 2am. He even cites one of the least idiotic paragraphs in the whole screed.

There's a reason why the word "advertorial" sounds awkward. Because it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let this go down as the most cogent, measured, on-point, and thoroughly correct thing Rocks has ever posted at 2am. He even cites one of the least idiotic paragraphs in the whole screed.

There's a reason why the word "advertorial" sounds awkward. Because it is.

So I shouldn't think that they paid for the trip themselves? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...