Drinkhacker Reads – 02.20.2013 – Are Wine Reviews Stupid?
When not covering the hacking of the United States government by a secret Chinese state organization or Burger King’s Twitter page, The Atlantic has been quite busy as of late covering the spirits industry. Today we find the magazine explaining to us why we can’t tell the difference between cheap and expensive wines, and providing a giant map on where in world one can find beer brands owned by InBev and Miller. Perhaps it was all the heat from the Maker’s Mark ballyhoo that got one of our favorite magazines all riled up, but it’s good to see it going for the gusto this week, and it’s only Wednesday! [The Atlantic]
In trade news, Shanken News Daily has released its impact report of the top 100 global brands and their recent growth (or lack thereof). While eight of the top 10 reported positive growth, two trended downward. Which spirits juggernauts experienced a decline? Click through to find out. [Shanken News Daily]
NPR reports on an English distillery, appropriately christened The London Distillery, and its efforts to give England a spot on the international whiskey map. [NPR]
The National Post sends a dispatch from the great white north reviewing a few whiskies designed to be “entry level” drams for Canadians who have yet to fully master the spirit, but who do know the complete lyrics to “Tom Sawyer” and “Closer To The Heart.” O, Canada! [National Post]
And finally, those folks residing in Kalamazoo are destined for a real treat: one of the best cinema houses in the nation is heading your way with a franchise. The Alamo Drafthouse announced plans to open a brand new ten-screen cinema there, slated for arrival in early summer. Imagine a jaunt over to Founders, or Arcadia, or Dark Horse, followed by a pint at Bell’s and finishing up with a movie with seat-side, first-rate service. Sounds like the beginnings of a great summer up in Western Michigan. [Alamo Drafthouse]
Great first link.
“Expectation, as it turns out, is just as important as raw sensation.”
I agree and I say this with no malice but I guess this is why as an avid beer/spirit/cocktail drinker; the annual Drinkhacker Cheat Sheet has been essential to my wine enjoyment over the past couple of years. Now excuse me while I allow my 2007 California Cabernet to open up.
I just read a review of champagne in “The Wall St. Journal”. I came away not wanting to taste the champagnes as much as I wanted to tell the writer to cut the ridiculous adjective selections as applied to wine. “Nervy tension” and “saline quality” were used to describe what the reviewer thought were excellent wines. Good grief, NEITHER of these phrases mean a thing to anyone wishing to know how the wines tasted. I wonder if the writer would buy a Filet Mignon so described. What in the name of all that is good happened to sweet, tart, tastes like pears, etc.? Not only are the “foofy” phrases useless, they shoot another arrow into the heart of wine lovers, as the words convery the (IMO, wrong) opinion of wine lovers as foofy, dreamy, loons best stayed away from. This same writer tasted TOBACCO of all things in a wine being tasted, and said writer was PRAISING the wine!! I can assure you, if you’ve tasted tobacco itself (not in a cigarette or a cigar) you would NEVER want this taste in a wine, or in anything else that you don’t put fire to. Please buy a dicitonary, if you must, but cut the fey descriptions of wines, and give the rest of us who reside on earth a break.