Cheers................Mahmoud.
Statistics: Posted by Mahmoud Ali — Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:59 pm
]]>
Mahmoud Ali wrote:So what I said was that I don’t think that Messrs. Broadbent, Robinson and Johnson’s palates are stagnant.
Is there another famous Robinson in the wine scribing world?
Statistics: Posted by griff — Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:02 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by kirragc — Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:51 am
]]>
To tell someone that to only focusing on reds or whites is not a 'full wine experience' is a bit rich. I believe its very much each to his own - if you don't like whites, you don't like whites or if you enjoy reds drink them!
Personally, being able to try and match wines with foods is what I enjoy the most about wine. For me its not a case of do I like white or red, its about what would go best with the food I’m eating (obviously I have to like the wine as well – as I enjoy most styles I can experiment with both whites and reds). For example - I find the combination of whites and seafood magic, do I try riesling with prawns or would semillon do the job, if I pick a riesling, which one, what age, region? It’s the same with trying different reds with red meat or having a go at matching a wine with spicy food.
There are just so many experiences out there for all of us to enjoy – so go out there and taste – find out what you like and then enjoy it.
Cheers,
Steve
Statistics: Posted by Sorbtastic — Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:12 am
]]>
I don't see any point in responding, it's obvious we are never going to reach consensus and it really doesn't matter at all.
Statistics: Posted by Red Bigot — Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 am
]]>
I may be a bit pedantic but drinking white wines and then preferring reds is not a “progression.†Your attempt to redefine the discussion of progress as “moving along†is disingenuous. One may prefer Auckland to Sydney but moving there cannot be called progress in any sense of the word. Switching from white to red wines or from red wines to port is neither progress nor a progression. Both are examples of preferences. If you played tennis and then switched to rugby that is not a progression. Progression is if you improve or develop something along the same lines. Switching from Biology to Geography at university is not progression, but going from a BSc to a PhD is. Hence a person can progress if they improve their palate and learn to appreciate better wines. Just switching is not a progression.
You, like many others, may have found that you prefer red wines. Like I said, that is just fine. Also, your appreciation of red wines may have progressed. That is commendable. However, to say that moving from white to red wine by itself is progress is, I believe, incorrect, no more, no less. In fact I believe that even though you prefer reds to whites, your palate has likely improved (or progressed if you will) to the point where you can probably discern the better whites.
Red Bigot, I think you should also re-read what I said about “stagnant†palates. You completely misinterpreted it. I did not say that people who prefer certain styles of wines have stagnant palates. What I said was that if people choose to define the preference of red wines to whites as “progress†then they are implying that the people who continue to drink white wines are, relatively speaking, not progressing or stagnant. So what I said was that I don’t think that Messrs. Broadbent, Robinson and Johnson’s palates are stagnant. You may have misunderstood what I was saying but my comments were not “repugnant†and you should be able to see the difference.
As for the “shudder†comment I think you know it was a tease. I had just finished saying that it was perfectly fine to prefer red wines just as it was to only drink white wines. As there are a few self-professed red bigots on the board I thought that it was a funny aside. I guessed wrong. It seems that some red bigots are a bit defensive.
Let’s get one thing straight. Nowhere in any of my posts have I said anything pejorative about people’s wine preferences. All I have done is defend preferences; in this case the people who like white wines. But despite my defence of those who appreciate white wines somehow you seem to want to interpret my remarks as critical of both red and white wine drinkers. By defending people’s preferences, in your eyes I am the wine bigot. Remarkable! Brian, you call yourself the Red Bigot, not me. It is your by-line that reads “Life’s too short to drink white wines.â€Â
I meet wine bigots all the time. They always have some idea ab that ne that I feel compelled to oppose. Maybe that’s my problem. There was the French woman who scoffed at the Californian wine. Then there are some Australians who think that all Italian wines are thin and weak. There are people who think that Grenache cannot make good wines. There are even people who think that Australian wines don’t age. In each instance I tend to argue the opposite. Sometimes I can do something to remove the bias. I once took the same Portuguese wines to a dinner, the 1985 and the 1995 that was currently available. Everyone was surprised, including the agent who represented the very same wine. She didn’t think that Portuguese table wines could age so well. Another time after constantly hearing about how Australian wines couldn’t age I pulled a 20-year old Victorian cabernet and served it blind. The tasters were quite shocked, remarking about how amazing that an Australian wine survived 20 years and that its bouquet was Bordeaux-like. Recently I was reading about how Sangiovese wines cannot age for the 20-30 years that Bordeaux can and couldn’t help thinking about how I would love to serve the author of the article a bottle of the delicious 1974 Castello di Nipozzano that I last had in 2004. There are lots of stereotypes, biases and bigotry, if you will, in the world of wine. So it is with red and white wine bigotry. Though I don’t care if people prefer red or white wines, and to drink it exclusively, I will always defend the tastes of people who appreciate and enjoy all the different styles of wine in the world.
Frankly, I get the distinct impression that there is an element of defensiveness about this red wine/white wine debate. Its as if some red wine drinkers feel compelled to explain away their almost exclusive preference for red wines. Don’t worry, it’s not a big deal. Those of us who drink and enjoy different styles of wine know that there are people who don’t like peas, others hate broccoli, and some won’t touch brussel sprouts. There is nothing wrong with your tastes, it’s just a matter of preferences. You don’t have to explain.
Cheers………….Mahmoud.
PS: Robert Parker once said that "Life is too short to drink Croizet-Bages." He was talking about a fifth growth Bordeaux from Pauillac that was performing well under par. Well, your truly, once again the dissident voice, has kept a bottle of the 1978 Croizet-Bages to see if Parker was right.
Statistics: Posted by Mahmoud Ali — Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:38 pm
]]>
Mahmoud Ali wrote:By the way, one doesn’t “progress” to red wines.
Some do, I did and I know a lot of other people who started on sweetish white wines and "progressed" (in the moved on sense) to prefer reds.
Mahmoud Ali wrote: I hardly think that Hugh Johnson, Jancis Robinson and Michael Broadbent’s palate haven’t “progressed” and have remained stagnant all these years. You may find that you prefer red wines and that is just fine. There are even people who only drink white wines (shudder).
I find the term "stagnant" repugnant in this context. There are surely less pejorative terms to describe someone who prefers particular types and styles of wines and that preference doesn't change for many years. Personally I think my palate is "mature", I've tried just about every type and style of wine over the years and it's my considered choice to stick to a subset of them that I like and can afford.
I also have some good friends who drink almost exclusively white wine, apart from sparkling reds, I don't shudder at that thought, it's their choice and cannot be wrong for them. So when we get together we share red and white bubblies and go our own way on the still wines.
Sometimes I wonder who are the real bigots in the wine-drinking world, none of the "red" ones I know are actually intolerant of other peoples wine choices.
Statistics: Posted by Red Bigot — Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:14 am
]]>
By the way, one doesn’t “progress†to red wines. I hardly think that Hugh Johnson, Jancis Robinson and Michael Broadbent’s palate haven’t “progressed†and have remained stagnant all these years. You may find that you prefer red wines and that is just fine. There are even people who only drink white wines (shudder). A person’s palate can progress or develop through the years but it can do so in any or all directions. My first wine drinking experience was a slightly sweet German wine called Winzertanz that I drank at my grandmother’s place. It was slightly better than the Blue Nun and Black Tower brands that did so much to ruin the reputation of German wines. But since then I have progressed to appreciate the wonderful qualities of the vineyard designated German Rieslings. I have also experienceded the magic of some very special (and expensive) Rhone whites, as well as the character filled white wines from southern Italy made from Greco di Tufo, Falanghina and Fiano di Avellino. And then there are the glories of sherry, particularly the olorosos. In red wines there have been similar discoveries along the way. Once again Italy turns out to be the home of character driven reds made from varieties like Negroamaro, Primitivo (a relative of Zinfandel), Aglianico, Nero d’Avola, and Uve di Troia (literally grapes from Troy). There is even a Greek variety called Xenomavro that is supposed to age well and resemble a Barolo. I have put a few bottles away to see if its true. There are many ways to progress, experiences to be gained , and lessons to learn along the vinous byways.
A Keane, you may be interested to know that in a BBC series on wine Jancis Robinson also admitted to being unexcited by Sauvignon Blanc. When Stoneleigh’s Sauvignon Blanc first appeared on the scene in Canada I loved the exotic nature of the New Zealand style however it didn’t take long for the novelty to wear off. Now you could say that I have developed a bit of bigotry towards New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc and the copycat styles in Australia. I much prefer the more subtle style of Bordeaux whites, which is a blend of Semillon and Sauvignon, and the Australian blends that tames the wilder side of the Sauvignon Blanc.
Cheers........Mahmoud.
Statistics: Posted by Mahmoud Ali — Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:59 am
]]>
a_kean wrote:
I guess I understand that if you know what you like then that's what you will prefer to drink, but I just wanted to argue the point that if variety is what you are after, sticking to reds will satisfy that urge just as much as drinking both whites and reds. They seem to be two very different approaches to enjoying wine.
And both just as valid as each other, there is no right and wrong in wine preference.
Absolutely. (OK, I got to 5 posts)
Statistics: Posted by a_kean — Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:03 pm
]]>
a_kean wrote:I guess 5 years is very different to 15 years! I am definitely still at the stage where I want to try as many different things as possible because you never know what you might like.
Yeah, I finished that (15 year) stage about 25 years ago and worked out what I liked and didn't like. It hasn't changed that much since, you could say I'm in a rut, but it's still an enjoyable rut to me. I still try a few things outside my normal preference zone when the opportunity comes along, seldom find anything that impresses me enough to buy.
a_kean wrote:I guess I understand that if you know what you like then that's what you will prefer to drink, but I just wanted to argue the point that if variety is what you are after, sticking to reds will satisfy that urge just as much as drinking both whites and reds. They seem to be two very different approaches to enjoying wine.
And both just as valid as each other, there is no right and wrong in wine preference.
Statistics: Posted by Red Bigot — Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:46 pm
]]>