Christian Miller (CMM)
Christian Miller
Foraging through old magazine piles to throw into the recycling bin, I ran across an article in Food & Wine July 08 about "Wines Sommeliers Love to Hate". My work as a market researcher had shown me the extent to which the tastes of trade gatekeepers and wine consumers diverge. But I wasn't prepared for some of these gems:
A wine director for the French Laundry: "the wines of Chile don't fit with Thomas Keller's cooking." Those of you with extensive experience with Chilean wines, ponder that sentence. Is this even possible? What properties of Chilean wines stretch across all their wines, from high acid peppery Leyda Valley Syrah to heady aromatic Casablanca Sauv Blanc to vegetal but soft Carmenere to Rolland-style Bordelaise Maipo blends, that make them ALL incompatible?
The wine director for Cru: "Vernaccia is an entire appellation that should be flushed down the toilet. Those wines just taste like paint thinner." Really? All of them?
A prominent NYC sommelier: "If I hear one more sommelier tell me what an epiphany they had when they first tasted Gruner...They think they're being cool..but they're not." I can share the irritation at Gruner's hipness, but given that it has so many different expressions from tangy greenness to Burgundian smoky-earthy qualities, it seems like a hard grape to hate on generically.
Even the recommendations of wines they like to replace the "bad" ones seem pretty specious - Zierfandler is touted has having an "awesome sense of place." How could one know what somewhereness is as interpreted through Zierfandler, which is only really in one place to begin with?
Are these attitudes unusual? Quoted out of context? Jaded palates desperate for anything different? Random and unrepresentative nonsense?
A wine director for the French Laundry: "the wines of Chile don't fit with Thomas Keller's cooking." Those of you with extensive experience with Chilean wines, ponder that sentence. Is this even possible? What properties of Chilean wines stretch across all their wines, from high acid peppery Leyda Valley Syrah to heady aromatic Casablanca Sauv Blanc to vegetal but soft Carmenere to Rolland-style Bordelaise Maipo blends, that make them ALL incompatible?
The wine director for Cru: "Vernaccia is an entire appellation that should be flushed down the toilet. Those wines just taste like paint thinner." Really? All of them?
A prominent NYC sommelier: "If I hear one more sommelier tell me what an epiphany they had when they first tasted Gruner...They think they're being cool..but they're not." I can share the irritation at Gruner's hipness, but given that it has so many different expressions from tangy greenness to Burgundian smoky-earthy qualities, it seems like a hard grape to hate on generically.
Even the recommendations of wines they like to replace the "bad" ones seem pretty specious - Zierfandler is touted has having an "awesome sense of place." How could one know what somewhereness is as interpreted through Zierfandler, which is only really in one place to begin with?
Are these attitudes unusual? Quoted out of context? Jaded palates desperate for anything different? Random and unrepresentative nonsense?