OMG! WSJ Hires Teague

originally posted by Steven Spielmann:
V

Imagine a community of students of painting who had some access to most of the history of the subject, but only the very wealthy ones could ever look at say Titian, Rembrandt, Caravaggio, Monet, Picasso, and Pollock. Now, there is a hell of a lot of good painting outside these folks; plenty of people who were rich enough to afford the special museum where they were exhibited wouldn't really get the benefit of what they were looking at, and plenty of people who weren't but really paid attention to the works that were more commonly available would develop a keen critical sense. But there's no doubt that the latter would be missing something even so, and that more in the latter group would rise to a higher level of critical understanding if they had access to the omitted masters.
Click to expand...
If this happened (or happened again, as Claude points out), art criticism would be denied the ability to tell stories of development and response based on received works (or if you prefer objectively great works). Since artists tell themselves these stories when they make art, there would be some loss in comprehension no doubt (except to the extent that artists could no longer tell themselves those stories because they didn't have access either). And art criticism would of necessity look different. I don't know whether it would look better or worse, though.

With regard to Claude's response, Steven might argue accurately that when access to art was limited in that way, the only art critics came from the class of the people who had access. And that might also happen--and again it would be again--to wine appreciation.
 
With visual art, you don't have to destroy something in order to consume it, which for me, arguably makes wine that much more beautiful and singular. So, I'm not sure this comparison works.

I am 24 years old. I have enjoyed what I consider to be some really excellent wine, which has not been terribly expensive. When I think about the most memorable bottles I've drank, not all of them have been super expensive. '96 Borgogno Barolo Classico Riserva. '03 Bea Rosso di Sangrantino. Chateaux Musar Rouge '99. LdH Gravonia '99. Senorio P. Pecina Grand Riserva '98. Nino Negri Sforzato '01. Mastrobernadino Radici '98. Mas Den Gil Clos Fonta '01. Chidaine Montlouis '07. De la Souch Jurancon Sec '07. Witmann Kabinett '06.

None of these I paid more than $110 for, retail or restaurant. But, if you'll notice, there are some regions that are definitely missing off here. I've tasted Burgungy, Champagne, Bordeaux on other people's dimes that clues me into what everyone raves about, but my experience with these wines is so limited. The first time I had Pol Roger '00. The first time I had LaFarge Volnay. Pretty mind blowing. But when I go out or when I'm in a wine store, I don't want to be competing with a whole bunch of people with black Amexes.

I drink wine for pleasure and for my own edification. But I cannot bring myself to pay the sorts of prices that it requires to drink these excellent wines from these regions. I'm sure many of you have very strong opinions on this wine, but I was lucky enough to try some Ducru-Beaucaillou from a decent vintage in the '90s. Now, this wine is good. It's very good. But I would never pay 400 dollars for it, especially when I can drink Mas Den Gil Clos Fonta Priorat, that while it has a different flavor profile, goes pound-for-pound with the Ducru in terms of intensity, structure, size, and complexity and is a quarter of the price. Which of those is a better value proposition? As someone with limited means who wants to drink good wine, I will pick the Priorat every time.

So that leaves me with a quandary on certain regions. Burgundy never seems a good value proposition, because I have to pay so goddamn much for it to be as good as some of the more obscure wines that I really enjoy. Same goes for Bordeaux, Champagne, North Rhone (less so, but still), cult new world anything. I wind up having pretty deep tasting experience in certain (relatively obscure) areas, but a total dearth in others.

Anyway, I don't think there's a solution to this, unless Burgundy, Champagne, and Bordeaux magically double their production, or we enter some sort of communist global economy, and other such impractical realities.
 
originally posted by Morgan Harris:
I drink wine for pleasure and for my own edification. But I cannot bring myself to pay the sorts of prices that it requires to drink these excellent wines from these regions. I'm sure many of you have very strong opinions on this wine, but I was lucky enough to try some Ducru-Beaucaillou from a decent vintage in the '90s. Now, this wine is good. It's very good. But I would never pay 400 dollars for it, especially when I can drink Mas Den Gil Clos Fonta Priorat, that while it has a different flavor profile, goes pound-for-pound with the Ducru in terms of intensity, structure, size, and complexity and is a quarter of the price. Which of those is a better value proposition? As someone with limited means who wants to drink good wine, I will pick the Priorat every time.
Click to expand...

Gross. But I drank Peter Michael when I was 24, so who am I to judge?

So that leaves me with a quandary on certain regions. Burgundy never seems a good value proposition, because I have to pay so goddamn much for it to be as good as some of the more obscure wines that I really enjoy. Same goes for Bordeaux, Champagne, North Rhone (less so, but still), cult new world anything. I wind up having pretty deep tasting experience in certain (relatively obscure) areas, but a total dearth in others.
Click to expand...

OK, you just said you'd pay $100 ($400/4 = $100) for Priorat. Don't do that.

Burgundy is a great value proposition, don't buy into that canard. It just requires a bit of study beforehand. Actually, I find because there is such a high level of grape growing and winemaking in Burgundy, it is one of the most solid regions I can think of. It is intellectually lazy to think this way and as someone getting into wine, you should avoid anything that gives you a scent of laziness.

Try a Fourrier for $50, if you don't like it, Burgundty may not be your thing (and there is nothing wrong with that.

Crush advertises this in a half-bottle as well.

Great Champagne for ~$100 from Vilmart, either Creation or Coeur.

Great Northern Rhne syrah for $30.

Bordeaux is a bit tougher, but see what Jamie has at Chambers. I saw 1998 Roc de Combes there for $50 which can be good on the rich but not ultra-spoofed side of things.

Anyway, I don't think there's a solution to this, unless Burgundy, Champagne, and Bordeaux magically double their production, or we enter some sort of communist global economy, and other such impractical realities.
Click to expand...

High prices for left bank Bordeaux have very little to do with scarcity. They are another part of the asset bubble. Champagne is a bubble that is more likely to pop. Burgundy will move due to the currency and that the buyers who bid up 2005 have disappeared at least until 2009 and maybe for good.
 
I pretty much started getting into wine seriously only very recently, but I find you can access all the various categories of wines without breaking the bank. I manage to find Premier Crus from good Burgundy producers between $30-50 by buying the less lauded vintages and waiting for close-outs (though I guess with the current run-up, I might have to start settling for Village).

Similarly, there are bargains to be had for Nebbiolos (see syrah thread), champagne (entry-level cuvees for Pierre Peters, Gimmonet, Clouet, Chartogne-Taillet, Egly-Ouriet), Rhone, etc.. all under $100 and many under $50.

And if I want to get the best producers of less lauded but equally delicious areas, I can, by buying Lapierre, Huet, Foreau, Pepiere, Luneau-Papin, Baudry, COS, etc..

Will I ever drink Romanee-Conti or Giacosa? No. Do I want to? Yes. But I'm liking what I can have, and I don't let the fact that I won't be able to drink the best wines from the prestige categories discourage me.

N.B. And thank [insert your deity or world-spirit here] for Bordeaux and Cult Cabs. They help soak up a lot of money that could be inflating burgundy and barolo instead.
 
Fuck, I agree with VLM again.

But are these Spain-shit-smoothie drinking newbies polluting our bored? Where's the welcome party?
 
Gosh, Mas d'en Gil's Clos Font goes for $100 in the States? And you consider that affordable?

I have long thought that (Bordeaux 1ers Crus and such Chinese crazes aside) you have a big, big problem over there with the three-tier system and the prices it imposes upon you.

Clos Font is $45 in Barcelona. And it's not just because it's made in Spain - prices are rather stable throughout the European Union. (The wine I make sells for the same price in Spain, Sweden or Germany.)
 
originally posted by VS:
Gosh, Mas d'en Gil's Clos Font goes for $100 in the States? And you consider that affordable?

I have long thought that (Bordeaux 1ers Crus and such Chinese crazes aside) you have a big, big problem over there with the three-tier system and the prices it imposes upon you.

Clos Font is $45 in Barcelona. And it's not just because it's made in Spain - prices are rather stable throughout the European Union. (The wine I make sells for the same price in Spain, Sweden or Germany.)
Click to expand...
Price fixer.

Chinese have little to do with the three tier system.
 
originally posted by Morgan Harris:

None of these I paid more than $110 for, retail or restaurant. But, if you'll notice, there are some regions that are definitely missing off here. I've tasted Burgungy, Champagne, Bordeaux on other people's dimes that clues me into what everyone raves about, but my experience with these wines is so limited. The first time I had Pol Roger '00. The first time I had LaFarge Volnay. Pretty mind blowing. But when I go out or when I'm in a wine store, I don't want to be competing with a whole bunch of people with black Amexes.
Click to expand...

$110 will buy you a potentially spectacular bottle in any region of the world. Some just take more time and education than others. And, around here most of the Lafarge Volnay 1ers can limbo that mark as can just about all my favorite Champs. And if you're mind was blown by the Pol Roger...
 
Well, Yixin, I've never exported a single case to HK, so it must be the beastly grey market taking advantage of famous names! ;-) Ditto for Finland, where I sent a few cases just once, four or five years ago, so I really have no idea what they're selling. Probably those old cases of purple wine, which no one will buy...
 
Li Ka Shing's (richest man in HK) wine outfit (Watsons Wines) had your wines a few years ago, Victor, so likely through an agent. I see your wines nowadays in the smaller shops and brokers' lists.

Watsons still carries Telmo Rodriguez's wines.
 
I'm sensing some hostility towards Priorat. And Newbies. The bottle was $90 restaurant price, so probably $50-$55 retail. It was just an example of a situation. I've only bought this wine once for my own personal consumption, but sold it to a fair amount of people. Anyway, that's besides the point.

I'm at a point financially where I'm drinking (all retail prices) $10-$20 dollar bottles for my everyday (the nights when I'm not working) drinking, $20-$50 for a once-every-two-weeks date night type bottle and $50-$100 as a once or twice a year occasion. Two of the bottles that I enjoyed most recently were Descombes and Lapierre Morgon, which I purchased basically at the recommendation of this board. Both were right around $20 and incredibly enjoyable.

The LaFarge Volnay and Pol Roger I tried because some Captains from a four star restaurant in NYC came in, dropped $500 on three bottles and were kind enough to let me taste.

VLM, thank you for your recommendations and I'll be sure to check out that stuff at Chambers Street. I need to take a pilgrimage because I rarely find myself that far downtown. I agree with your assessment of price bubbles, and so, I guess you're suggesting that I should wait until they pop? I will also try to avoid lazyness. Duly noted.

Anyway, if anyone else wants to tell me what I should be drinking/where I should be purchasing wine as to not appear a philistine, please DM me.
 
Pol Roger? Gross.

I agree with VLM. There is something to be said for drinking the greats (or so called greats). I'm still figuring it out, but at some point you start to see the underrated stuff for what it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top