Cellar goodies

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Goddamitt, I lost sleep last night ruminating about this thread!

Classic, to me, means Alsace, Loire, and Germany/Austria for whites, Burgundy for both, and Bordeaux, Northern Rhone, CdP, Piedmont, Tuscany and Rioja for reds. One may quibble about this one or that one, but I think that's basically it. I just don't see southern Italian wines as classic, though they have tradition. They and many other places (Jura, Loire reds, the rest of the southern Rhone, etc.) are capable of making sensational wines, wines I love dearly, but they are not what I would call classic, i.e., what your average Joe/Juan/Jos/Josef/Jean recognizes as such.
Click to expand...

Does your average Joe/Juan know shit about wine? I'd say not.

While I more than likely share the same aesthetic (except grenache is for morons and Philology Professors) I don't really think this has anything to do with the science of grape growing.

So how does one know the exact moment when sugar is no longer being made through photosynthesis and has started to lose water?

I vote for "they do not have the right grapes in the right places." Or a more extreme version, such as "no right grapes have been found so far for such places." They can make less balanced wines with longer hang times or more balanced wines with shorter hang times, but they cannot make balanced wines with long hang times.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows that long cool growing seasons with lots of light and rain at the right times are best and it's what everyone wants. Peter Cargasacchi picked his vineyard site for specific reasons having to do with temperature, exposure, soil (drainage, not mineral composition, but they are related), and sunlight (and he thinks terroir as we see it is vodoo, it's all micro-climate to him).

I agree with the right grapes in the right places. But if you take certain grapes like cabernet sauvignon and syrah, they can grow almost anywhere and produce wine with recognizable traits of the variety.
 
originally posted by VLM:So how does one know the exact moment when sugar is no longer being made through photosynthesis and has started to lose water?
Click to expand...

You have to use this device:
Van_der_Graaff_generator.jpg
Van der Graaf Generator
 
"While I more than likely share the same aesthetic (except grenache is for morons and Philology Professors) I don't really think this has anything to do with the science of grape growing."

I assume for you mentioning both morons and philology professors is redundant. When, by the way, was the last time you ran into a philology professor? I don't think there have been any for 50 years.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Goddamitt, I lost sleep last night ruminating about this thread!

Classic, to me, means Alsace, Loire, and Germany/Austria for whites, Burgundy for both, and Bordeaux, Northern Rhone, CdP, Piedmont, Tuscany and Rioja for reds. One may quibble about this one or that one, but I think that's basically it..
Click to expand...

Why do France and Italy get regional breakdowns but Germany and Austria get a pass for the entire country?!

What about Tokaji? What about Shirazi/Persia?

I don't know how precise one can really be with terms like 'classic'?
 
I don't know how precise one can really be with terms like 'classic'?
Click to expand...
"One" can be precise; two or more, not so much.
And doesn't Oswaldo say "classic to me" on at least one occasion?
Best, Jim
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
"While I more than likely share the same aesthetic (except grenache is for morons and Philology Professors) I don't really think this has anything to do with the science of grape growing."

I assume for you mentioning both morons and philology professors is redundant. When, by the way, was the last time you ran into a philology professor? I don't think there have been any for 50 years.
Click to expand...

Is it called comp lit now?

[grin][emoticon]
 
originally posted by Florida Jim:
I don't know how precise one can really be with terms like 'classic'?
Click to expand...
"One" can be precise; two or more, not so much.
And doesn't Oswaldo say "classic to me" on at least one occasion?
Best, Jim
Click to expand...

He's a fucking newbie.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
When, by the way, was the last time you ran into a philology professor? I don't think there have been any for 50 years.
Click to expand...
Actually, googling reveals that there still are a few such things around. I'm surprised that you didn't realize that Columbia University has a Department of French and Romance Philology.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
When, by the way, was the last time you ran into a philology professor? I don't think there have been any for 50 years.
Click to expand...
Actually, googling reveals that there still are a few such things around. I'm surprised that you didn't realize that Columbia University has a Department of French and Romance Philology.
Click to expand...

A quick look at the faculty there will show you, however, that with the exception of a couple of philosophers and people working in language pedagogy, they are all literary critics, historican and (gasp) theorists (which is what I suppose the monkey meant). Philology is almost as dead as natural theology among biologists. Even Tolkein, who did do philology, made his rep among medievalists for "Beowulf and the Critics," I believe.

VLM,

Any scholar of literature (philologist or other)who uses emoticons has his degree rescinded.
 
Prof., I have no idea what you are on about now. Philology is alive and well. It is the study of a particular language (or group of closely related languages) in order to describe how that language functions. It is different from linguistics in that linguistics studies all languages and means to describe how language works on a more abstract level. So anyone who studies and makes dictionaries and grammars of any particular language is a philologist.
 
Philology is almost as dead as natural theology among biologists.
Click to expand...

Otto's right. It's particularly healthy in religious studies (especially Buddhist Studies, which is essentially a philological specialty). Many philologists happily work in exile there.

I know none who drink grenache.
 
originally posted by Otto Nieminen:
Prof., I have no idea what you are on about now. Philology is alive and well. It is the study of a particular language (or group of closely related languages) in order to describe how that language functions. It is different from linguistics in that linguistics studies all languages and means to describe how language works on a more abstract level. So anyone who studies and makes dictionaries and grammars of any particular language is a philologist.
Click to expand...

Philology, as a branch of literary studies, regardless of what the dictionaries may say, referred to those who studied sources, etymologies and linguistic elements of literature. It opposed literary critics, who argued that only either evaluating or analyzing works of literature responded to what its purpose was (philologists thought that that was a subjective procedure and thus would have mostly been monkeyish about what we now think of as literary studies). Journals and departments with the name philology in the title did not refer to the activities of grammarians, etc. With regard to literature, the field is so dead that, except for Claude, no one even knows to what I am referring. Largely, for better or worse--and this I know from my wife, who is an Acquisitions Editor for languages and linguistics--writers of grammar textbooks and dictionaries call themselves linguists and are here found in departments of linguistics.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
Philology, as a branch of literary studies, regardless of what the dictionaries may say, referred to those who studied sources, etymologies and linguistic elements of literature. It opposed literary critics, who argued that only either evaluating or analyzing works of literature responded to what its purpose was (philologists thought that that was a subjective procedure and thus would have mostly been monkeyish about what we now think of as literary studies). Journals and departments with the name philology in the title did not refer to the activities of grammarians, etc. With regard to literature, the field is so dead that, except for Claude, no one even knows to what I am referring. Largely, for better or worse--and this I know from my wife, who is an Acquisitions Editor for languages and linguistics--writers of grammar textbooks and dictionaries call themselves linguists and are here found in departments of linguistics.
Click to expand...

Does your wife drink?
Best, Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top