WTN: recent ness

originally posted by mlawton:
I still can't get my head around "correct" in an absolute sense. "Correct" for me to purchase, sure - that's an easy concept. But lots of people think Guigal is the model for Cote Rotie.
Including the INAO.
 
originally posted by mlawton:
I just can't make the logical jump to a certain style being "correct", just as I still can't identify what is "correct" in St. Joseph or Hermitage.

No one is asking you to make the jump. I doubt anyone would say it is impossible that the story I told above could be true. It fits with my experience and is, by nature, anecdotal. However, I don't actively participate in tasting lots of Condrieu and tend towards Eric's style, so if you insist that the story is different, I certainly respect that.

The Hermitage and St. Joseph issues have been discussed elsewhere at length. It is very hard to come up with what the "true" expression ought to be like.

Who knows.

Maybe I'm just not dogmatic enough.

Really? A different view is dogmatic, but calling a differing view dogmatic isn't dogmatic?
 
originally posted by mlawton:
I still can't get my head around "correct" in an absolute sense.

Sure, but there is an answer there if we think hard enough about it.

I'm a sucker for emergent consensus.
 
originally posted by VLM:

Maybe I'm just not dogmatic enough.

Really? A different view is dogmatic, but calling a differing view dogmatic isn't dogmatic?

Dogmatic: characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts

My whole point is that there have been no facts presented. I don't have any. You don't have any. Lots of anecdotes. These anecdotes could be true or false, I'm not sure, I can't judge them. I have lots of opinions. So do you. Some of them are the same, believe it or not(!). That doesn't make them factual.

Including the INAO.

Kinda an inevitable conclusion, that, no?
 
originally posted by mlawton:
My whole point is that there have been no facts presented. I don't have any. You don't have any. Lots of anecdotes. These anecdotes could be true or false, I'm not sure, I can't judge them. I have lots of opinions. So do you. Some of them are the same, believe it or not(!). That doesn't make them factual.

Well, I guess we could parse what we call "facts" or "evidence" in this case. The problem remains the same though. Viognier doesn't seem to be the most transparent of grapes to begin with.
 
originally posted by mlawton:
lots of people think Guigal is the model for Cote Rotie. Or Jaboulet for Hermitage.
Are you trying to pull my leg? Among wine lovers? Set aside the rubes and the hucksters, can you name one? I've always thought that my luke-warm endorsement of Jaboulet was possibly a little bit out on a limb.
 
The Jaboulet booth is one of the most crowded, year after year, at the Ampuis Marche. They also take credit cards. I see lots of Jaboulet boxes on twowheelers, too. They may all qualify as rubes a la francais though. I'm not sure.
 
My comment was more an assessment of crowd size than of relative merit but I've not had a Gangloff that I've liked, other than one from the early 90s with his privates on the label. We did buy one bottle of his "cuvee" (available to buy, but not to taste - odd) one year. I think the consensus was that upon tasting it, we now knew what a Helen Turley Cote Rotie would taste like.

OTOH, to narrow my brush a little, some Gaillard and Cuilleron have gone down well. Clos de Cuminalle (sp?) is pretty good from time to time and the Rose Pourpre can also be nice. There's the old "different cuvee" story here, though, so it's not easy.
 
originally posted by mlawton:
We did buy one bottle of his "cuvee" (available to buy, but not to taste - odd) one year.
I noticed that, too.

I think the consensus was that upon tasting it, we now knew what a Helen Turley Cote Rotie would taste like.
A friend drank it. He didn't give me a very specific note but I think he would have mentioned it had he thought that. Oh, well.
 
Recently saw a pair of 2004 Texier Condrieu at auction and curiosity grabbed me by the jugular. Good thing it was a pair because the first was completely oxidized and, had it been a solo, would have led me to pontificate, with the wisdom of a brown belt, that perhaps this baby doesn't have the phenolic structure to age. But then there was number two, and it was quite fine. Discreet florals, light minerality, delicate palate, of course a little lacking in the acidity department, but quite the lovely slender tipple, especially with food. Perhaps a hint of oxidation, but no Little Feat, presuming this saw scant SO2 at bottling.
 
Back
Top