Parker & Robinson, maybe two sides of...

(Maybe even) a (different) coin.Hi all,Does anybody have more info about this?http://www.decanter.com/news/48406.htmlRegards,Jose

Well, the Decanter article gives the basic information. The Jancis Robinson tasting note about the 2003 Château Pavie is the following (got from her purple pages):

Ch Pavie 2003 St-Emilion Premier Grand Cru Classé
Rating: 12/20 Drink: ?

";Deep blueish crimson. Completely unappetising overripe aromas. Why? Porty sweet. Oh REALLY! Port is best from the Douro not St Emilion. Ridiculous wine more reminiscent of a late harvest Zinfandel than a red bordeaux with its unappetising green notes. [I should make it clear that these notes, like the great majority, were written long before I knew what the wine was - and I have witnesses, necessary since I have been accused of being prejudiced against Monsieur Perse’s wines.]";

Parker posted in his forum on April 09:

";I had Pavie four separate times, and,recognizing everyone’s taste is different,Pavie does not taste at all (for my palate) as described by Jancis. She has a lamentable and perplexing history of disliking not only all of Perse’s wines,but virtually all of the garagiste wines of St.Emilion. The irony is that she seems to be very fond of Le Pin, which some of these wines resemble, and is the inspiration for many of them. That is her opinion, and she will have to answer for it as all of us do that practice this rather whimsical craft.

These recent comments(assuming they are accurate) are very much in keeping with her nasty swipes at all the Pavies made by Perse(1998 onward),and mirror the comments of not only reactionaries in Bordeaux,but also segments of the wine trade that are furious with Perse over his pricing shenanigans...As most of you discussed, Francois Mauss and his jury of primarily Europeans reached different conclusions about the Perse wines in 1998 and 1999 because the wines are very classical,just more concentrated than many of their peers.Moreover, Perse is a lover of the great classic vintages of Bordeaux,and 1929 and 1947 right banks are his reference point...he would never drink or even produce a wine such as described by Jancis.

Moreover,the line about ";not knowing"; is funny....yes, one can do these tastings blind,but Pavie is the only premier grand cru estate to use an antique form of bottle that...even when covered up,stands out like a black sheep.Of course, she realizes as I do, that most consumers won’t even have a chance to offer their opinion until 2006...when the 2003 Pavie is bottled and released....two last thoughts to ponder...why do some people object so strenuously when dedicated young men and women try and take an obscure piece of property,and passionately attempt to produce something special? And somewhat related...what is wrong with these young Bordelais adopting time-honored Burgundy wine-making techiques...cold macerations, malolactic in barrel, an aging of the wine on its lees, and minimal fining and filtering in their efforts to maximize whatever terroir and vintage character that is available?";

http://fora.erobertparker.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=030597;p=2#000062

Finally, this is what Tanzer had to say about the 2003 Pavie in his forum:

";This is the last specific comment I will make before the publication of Issue 114, but I would like to briefly comment on the 2003 Pavie. Basically, Jancis Robinson’s note did not resemble the wine I tasted. (I did not taste the same sample she tasted, so I can’t tell you if her bottle was representative.) Yes, Pavie was picked extremely ripe and very late (until October 10), but it’s a hugely rich (14%+ alcohol) and impressive wine. I actually had the chance to retaste Pavie, blind, with the rest of the St. Emilion premiers crus classes (minus Cheval Blanc and Ausone, which do not participate in these group events) on Friday morning (yesterday), and it was the best of the bunch. What struck me at this second tasting was that despite its obvious superripeness and high level of ripe tannins, the wine had plenty of energy in the<

I would say that Jancis is worthy of great respect for telling it like it is--for her. She dares to express a strong opinion about a wine and that opinion turns out to be diametrically opposed to that of the ";Great Guru of Maryland,"; his many lemming-like followers and, on top of that, the nincompoops at the Wine Spectator? >Well, bravissima!!! About time!!!

That Mr. Parker has resorted to attacks against Mrs. Robinson’s professional integrity is as shameful as it is expectable of him. Luckily, some of us know what’s what... The whole bit about ";the pot calling the kettle black comes to mind.";

The best line of Jancis’ tasting note is the one about Porto being just fine when it comes from the Douro, not from St.-Emilion. Of course, the vast majority of the wine press, with their heads stuck so far up their intestinal tracts (sorry, had to say it like that...), will argue for EVERYTHING being big, bold, brassy and improbably alcoholic. That’s become the way of the wine world, sadly, over the past ten years, the blind leading the tasteless, leading the hopelessly naive.

One of the doubts that come up over all this is whether Mr. Parker doesn’t recognize the legitimacy of an objection to purple-black, 14%+ claret? Yes, Jancis has often expressed a dislike of many ";garagiste"; wines which Mr. Parker adores precisely for their concentration and alcoholic strength, wines that, under almost any civilized definition, are freakish when compared to a classic ";table wine."; Regrettably, love of the freaks has become the ";new normal."; And if anyone’s in the mood to try to argue me down, I beg him/her to consider the analogy of the automobile world with the conception of ";wine"; defended by Mr. Parker and others like him... You walk out on any American street and see SUVs that look like armored troop carriers, gigantic vehicles that mostly bear no proportion to any rational being’s (and our world’s) needs. Hummers, Lincoln Navigators, give it a name. Used to be that people drove cars. Now they will only accept monstruosities as their mode of transportation.

Of course, I will probably be run over by some cretin drunk on Turley, or Harlan, or--why not?--2003 Pavie, while at the wheel of his gold-trimmed Hummer H2...

M.

There are two things about Mr. Parker’s anti-Jancis comments that have bothered me ever since I posted the reply to Juan, above.

The first is this talk about ";reactionaries in Bordeaux"; waging some sort of crusade against the likes of Gérard Perse and the garagiste winemakers in the rest of the Right Bank. I would be very curious about what exactly Mr. Parker opposes to those ";reactionaries"; and what sorts of wines they advocate (ooops, involuntary pun, Freudian slip, or whatever...). Of course, being a bit of a language buff, I can’t help but think of what the antonym of ";reactionary"; is. ";Revolutionary,"; no? Well, having grown up tormented by the consequences of the Cuban Revolution, I can say with enough Conaissance de cause that most ";revolutions"; are simply aimed at replacing one set of dirty politicians, crooks and cops with another.

I do wonder if those ";reactionaries"; are the same ones who dared to pursue a legal case against one of Mr. Parker’s business affiliates in Bordeaux and who have plenty of questions about his own agendas in the region. Was that ever solved satisfactorily?

Another thing that bugs me is this:

";...Why do some people object so strenuously when dedicated young men and women try and take an obscure piece of property,and passionately attempt to produce something special? And somewhat related... what is wrong with these young Bordelais adopting time-honored Burgundy wine-making techiques...cold macerations, malolactic in barrel, an aging of the wine on its lees, and minimal fining and filtering in their efforts to maximize whatever terroir and vintage character that is available?";

Mrs. Robinson, as far as I can tell from her notes and her riposte to Parker on her website, isn’t criticizing any ";time-honored Burgundy winemaking techniques"; adopted by young Bordelais... She simply tasted a wine that was, to her palate, horrible, freakish, undrinkable, or what you will. Alas, I don’t know about all that ";time-honored"; brouhaha Mr. Parker gets so uppity about. As far as I can tell, the virtues and vices of the Guy Accad school of making Burgundy are still cause for much debate.

And Mr. Parker use of the word ";terroir,"; given that his allmighty scores tend to favor wines that wouldn’t recognize terroir if it came up and bit them on the buttocks, seems truly absurd.

On Mrs. Robinson: I felt sorry for her when I read that she was out in California trying Zinfandels. These days, having to put up with the evils such wines are capable of inflicting on nose and palate (believe me, most of the Mediterranean atrocities I constantly complain about are nothing compared to a Turley monster...) that can be a true test of the dedication of any wine reporter. Better she than I, is all I can say.

M.

I have to say, Manuel, that I am all but completely agnostic about this issue. I wasn’t at this Bordeaux en primeurs tasting, nor am I likely be at any other in my lifetime. Plus, there is no question that this is a tempest in a teapot. Who really cares that much? But I wonder whether you are setting up a bit of a straw man. I don’t think there is any quarrel with a reviewer not liking Pavie’s style. The issue, as I understand it, is that Mrs Robinson gave the wine a score that denotes a technically defective wine, which everyone else without exception to my knowledge disputes - even those who agree with Jancis on the style issue. I generally find Tanzer, for example, to be quite accurate and without a major agenda, and you saw his comments above. Decanter hardly takes orders from Parker. Mike Steinberger, who occasionally writes about wine for FT, Jancis’s paper, was tasting along with her and had this to say:

";My take? The wine was a clear step up from the others in the portfolio, but it was a wine of extremes; the sweetness, ripeness, alcohol, extraction, and oak were all ratcheted up to the highest degree. It had too much of everything except what I want in a top Bordeaux: subtlety, elegance, a little discreet charm. It tries too hard to be liked. However, it is unquestionably a well-made wine, the product of meticulous work in the vineyard and the cellar, and plenty of people think Gerard Perse is the best thing to happen to Bordeaux since the Liberation. It would be a tragedy if every St. Emilion wine were made in the manner of Pavie, but that isn’t the case, so let a thousand bottles bloom.";

If something like a classic Penfolds Grange somehow came out of St. Emilion, should it be scored as a technically defective wine?

One of the amusing things about this quarrel is that Jancis Robinson now has been painted as a champion of the British Old Guard. I do not read her reviews religiously, but I catch them when I can, and she is anything but Old Guard. She has distinguished herself by championing many New World (and garagiste) wines and generally has a very eclectic tastes. Not long ago, we were remarking here about her enthusiasm for Anima Negra - the Callet based wine from Mallorca, which has been a staple in my cellar for years but, I dare say, would not be your cup of tea.

Sure, everybody has one, but then comes the moment to defend it. In this case Jancis has thrown a gauntlet she cannot stand by. The fact that Parker has become spokesman for the opposition may have helped polarize the debate but for me the whole thing is crazy.
Most people who’re talking on most boards--myself included now--have not tried the wine, let alone at that moment. The debate is mostly trivial (except for our Liquidator here, of course, who sees the whole of Western civilization conspiring against his way of life. I hope my exaggeration is obvious enough) and the so-called Parker ’attack’ on Jancis is of minimum relevance, as most other writers also seem to disagree with her, though sympathizing with her view of what claret should be.

It seems to me, dear Walt, that Mrs. Robinson’s distinguished FT partner is hedging his bets a little. Indeed, he never calls that Pavie a ";techically defective wine,"; but he also makes it clear that he shares Jancis’ view of the wine being hypertrophic and totally unlike Bordeaux. Remember, she was most upset about the Pavie seeming more like Port than anything else...

Again, I go to my comparison between those huge SUVs I see every day on the streets of Manhattan (just yesterday there was a Hummer stretch limo parked outside the building next door to mine, which makes me wonder about the kind of neighbors that may lie there...) Sure, a Lincoln Navigator, for example, may be just fine as far as its design and manufacturing goes, but aren’t we allowed to question its real utility and desirability in terms of our own tastes and needs? I will reiterate: If a wine seems to me overripe, overextracted, overalcoholic and overwooded, my reaction is to dislike it. I don’t believe in scores, since I don’t pretend that wine appreciation (th name says it all) is anything but subjective. Of course, you will hear me say ";Oh, please, get this tacky crap out of my face!!!";

The funniest part is how Mr. Parker immediately calls up the specter of ";reaction"; and starts talking about young upstarts in Bordeaux trying to make the most out of their vintages and--chucjle, chuckle--";terroir.";

You’re absolutely right that this is a tempest in a teapot. I tend to mistrust anyone who tells me they don’t have an agenda, especially if they’re in the wine world. In this case, I believe a pathetic little turf war may be brewing. Should be fun to watch, for at least half an hour.

Oh, about that Anima Negra: True, never really dug the big guy, but I was pleasantly surprised by a bottle of the bodega’s ";AN/2,"; with its cool, minimalist (some would say slightly ";Soviet-looking";) label. Big, yeah, but with nice balance. Of course, it’s helped enormously by the fact that Mallorca is not Bordeaux, so oe’s less driven by traditionalist expectations when tasting it.

M.

Gastro, PLEEEEAAASE!!! In fun or not, calling the forces that are indeed conspiring against all that is decent, nice, pleasure-giving, thought-provoking, and downright excellent, ";the whole of western civilization"; is just horrible. Rather, I would think that the whole paint-by-numbers ";school of excess"; in winemaking, gastronomy, filmmaking, music, plastic surgery, etc., is the exact oppostie. The barbarians, my friend, the barbarians are upon us!!!

Another thing that I must take exception to in your post is that bit about Jancis ";throwing a gauntlet that she cannot stand by."; As far as I can tell, she merely expressed an opinion. Whomsoever should take it as a slight has a problem, but not her. And as far as ";standing by"; her opinion, I have long been one of her admirers. I had the chance, for a fleeting series of moments, of meeting her, tasting 1998 claret ";en primeur"; alongside her and hearing her thoughts firsthand, as well as having my thoughts heard by her. From that experience, I can safely say that Jancis Robinson is more than capable of holding her own against whoever comes up to try and attack her.

I have not tasted 2003 Pavie. Alas, knowing what I know of that infernal vintage (almost anywhere in Europe it was infernal) and about Gérard Perse’s winemaking (I may not have tasted 2003, but I had 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 inflicted upon me at various ";serious"; tastings), I do believe I can form an opinion about what is to be expected and shall avoid the wine like I do Times Square or ay number of sexually-transmitted diseases.

Oh, and should Mrs. Robinson ever need an army (or at least a gang) to help her fight her battles, I will be first in line to volunteer. Yep, I’ve had enough of fruit jam and barbarism.

M.