Comments on: The World Wide Wine Federation http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/ An American Winegeek in London Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:46:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Steve De Long http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29622 Steve De Long Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:51:19 +0000 http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29622 Hi Eric, Yes, it's all cartoon-like, but being thoughtful and sensible would sell far less books! I found Mondovino interesting for exactly the same reason you did and it's easy to see how Rolland, Parker, Suckling, etc must feel betrayed. Nossiter's polemics aside, it was an welcome glimpse into the opaque world of wine. Hi Eric,
Yes, it’s all cartoon-like, but being thoughtful and sensible would sell far less books!

I found Mondovino interesting for exactly the same reason you did and it’s easy to see how Rolland, Parker, Suckling, etc must feel betrayed. Nossiter’s polemics aside, it was an welcome glimpse into the opaque world of wine.

]]> By: Eric Lecours http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29567 Eric Lecours Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:51:29 +0000 http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29567 The discourse here is reminiscent of recent international relations and politics. There is no acknowledgment to validity in any of the other side's views or positions. The approach that the other's opinion is groundless, the other, a fool, is...infantile. In essence: I'm 100% right, you're 100% wrong. I'm good, you're evil. I'm enlightened, you're retarded...not exactly sophisticated. Nossiter's film is an editorial, not an objective documentary; that is for sure. He duped the antagonists into believing they were protagonists. They let their guard down and were sincere. It's not always pretty when people tell you what they really think. More than learning their opinions, you get a glimpse into their real attitudes and character, who they really are. It's like those rare occasions where politicians forget the microphone is still on and one learns more than they want known. That is what is intriguing about the film for so many. Someone left the microphone on, which evidently won't be allowed to happen again. But this is not politics or foreign intervention, these are editorials on wine and its direction. Let's leave the simplistic, "you're retarded" discourse on the primary school playground for the teacher-on-duty to sort out. The discourse here is reminiscent of recent international relations and politics. There is no acknowledgment to validity in any of the other side’s views or positions. The approach that the other’s opinion is groundless, the other, a fool, is…infantile. In essence: I’m 100% right, you’re 100% wrong. I’m good, you’re evil. I’m enlightened, you’re retarded…not exactly sophisticated.

Nossiter’s film is an editorial, not an objective documentary; that is for sure. He duped the antagonists into believing they were protagonists. They let their guard down and were sincere. It’s not always pretty when people tell you what they really think. More than learning their opinions, you get a glimpse into their real attitudes and character, who they really are. It’s like those rare occasions where politicians forget the microphone is still on and one learns more than they want known. That is what is intriguing about the film for so many. Someone left the microphone on, which evidently won’t be allowed to happen again.

But this is not politics or foreign intervention, these are editorials on wine and its direction. Let’s leave the simplistic, “you’re retarded” discourse on the primary school playground for the teacher-on-duty to sort out.

]]> By: Steve De Long http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29325 Steve De Long Mon, 05 Nov 2007 22:26:37 +0000 http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29325 Thanks, Marcus! Yes, the art/craft relationship is very interesting and important. The 1855 classification of Bordeaux was done for a world exhibition that showed off industrial products of exhibiting countries. The same wines are now auctioned by Sotheby's and Christie's. The fact remains that wine is and always was a craft, albeit a fine one. Thanks, Marcus!

Yes, the art/craft relationship is very interesting and important. The 1855 classification of Bordeaux was done for a world exhibition that showed off industrial products of exhibiting countries. The same wines are now auctioned by Sotheby’s and Christie’s. The fact remains that wine is and always was a craft, albeit a fine one.

]]> By: Marcus http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29222 Marcus Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:01:17 +0000 http://www.delongwine.com/news/2007/11/01/the-world-wide-wine-federation/#comment-29222 This is great! You're last line sums it up perfectly. These are people who cannot settle on the terms on which to operate, and as such can always arrive at a formula that makes them ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. And why wouldn't they find that equation? Isn't wine actually a craft that problematically lends itself an appreciation normally allotted to an art? To me the art/craft split is the linchpin from which all the Saturday smackdowns shall follow. Because disputes like these are not over being able to proclaim one's own taste in assessing wine -- that's why you found it ironic. The dispute is over where to put the line that separates an impressionistic proclamation from more discerning judgments that are either true or false. Parker thinks Nossiter acts to restrict wine craftmanship; Nossiter thinks Parker acts to restrict wine craftmanship. Yet each thinks the other is doing so by conflating a somewhat interpretive artistic dichotomy into a convergent exercise. As for the Steely Dan anecdote, it now turns out music is NOT unrelated to wine appreciation, so you've now been <a href="http://weingolb.blogspot.com/2007/11/wineblog-and-dayjob-apollonian-and.html" rel="nofollow">warned</a>. This is great! You’re last line sums it up perfectly. These are people who cannot settle on the terms on which to operate, and as such can always arrive at a formula that makes them ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. And why wouldn’t they find that equation? Isn’t wine actually a craft that problematically lends itself an appreciation normally allotted to an art? To me the art/craft split is the linchpin from which all the Saturday smackdowns shall follow. Because disputes like these are not over being able to proclaim one’s own taste in assessing wine — that’s why you found it ironic. The dispute is over where to put the line that separates an impressionistic proclamation from more discerning judgments that are either true or false. Parker thinks Nossiter acts to restrict wine craftmanship; Nossiter thinks Parker acts to restrict wine craftmanship. Yet each thinks the other is doing so by conflating a somewhat interpretive artistic dichotomy into a convergent exercise.

As for the Steely Dan anecdote, it now turns out music is NOT unrelated to wine appreciation, so you’ve now been warned.

]]>