367594 Sun Feb 04 14:17:11 -0800 2007 14 33 Food Media and News 0 2259147 Ordered it on a whim. Has anyone read it? Sun Feb 04 14:17:11 -0800 2007 13030 free sample addict aka Tracy L 1 2259283 Yes, I read it last year. It's interesting and in a way a bit scary, in that it made me aware of how just one person can influence an entire industry. Sun Feb 04 15:27:53 -0800 2007 2259147 12213 jillp 1 2259342 No. I first became aware of his huge influence when I read an excellent article years ago in the Atlantic Monthly by William Langewiesche. Here's a reprint. http://www.erobertparker.com/info/milliondollarnose.asp Please let us know if you like the book. Sun Feb 04 16:05:37 -0800 2007 2259147 61426 grocerytrekker 2 2259731 Was going to mention that article in the AM. Great read. Besides his biases and the power he wields (even the French took notice), the thing I remember the most was a reference about being a glutton and his Dad and Mom were soda drinkers. Sun Feb 04 19:14:49 -0800 2007 2259342 27275 ML8000 2 2291100 Thank you so much for the link. I really enjoyed the article, it was very informative. It was really timely as well because I am getting ready to purchase a bottle of wine to contribute for a wine tasting party on Saturday. I promise to report back after reading the book. Wed Feb 14 00:18:56 -0800 2007 2259342 13030 free sample addict aka Tracy L 3 2378857 You are welcome! Here's a new Slate article which might be worth reading. "Who's To Blame for Expensive Wine? The trouble with Robert Parker's point system. By Mike Steinberger" http://www.slate.com/id/2161442/fr/flyout (Also check out this little item about bizarre wine language at the bottom of that article.) "Jabberwiney - A professor of viticulture puts a stopper on wine hooey. By Jon Cohen" http://www.slate.com/id/73250/ Mon Mar 12 16:53:20 -0700 2007 2291100 61426 grocerytrekker 4 2379404 The slate article is full of misinformation and they apparently presented the IWC information out of context. According to the bulletin board discussions at Parker's website, da Capo is not being produced in 2004 because this vintage is not good enough (note: the da Capo is produced only in excellent vintages), and not because of Parker's hype. As for the rest of the Slate article, blaming Parker's points for the escalation of wine prices in general is, IMHO, absurd. Mon Mar 12 19:33:42 -0700 2007 2378857 73124 syoung 5 2379899 Errors aside, I don't think they're blaming Parker but they certainly pointed out the irony of his 100 pt system "contributing" to the market frenzy and the realities that it brings. What I got was that the points made collecting easier for the average rich status seeker and investor. I also got that the some "traditional" vintners didn't dig this because it inflated values, reality. Reminds me of baseball stats (which consume many fans) and the way Rolling Stone use to rate albums...as guides/stats have value but as a complete appreciation they lack art, soul and touch. Mon Mar 12 23:13:56 -0700 2007 2379404 27275 ML8000 6 2382201 The situation is complex and (therefore) poorly handled in some pop writing. Impact of Parker's ratings (with data and interviews) was examined last decade by independent wine writer John Winthrop Haeger (who later wrote the history of Pinot Noir in North America): "Wine magnum force," Los Angeles Magazine, November 1998. I have the article, which also was online (not currently, for some reason). Sample: "Tales of score-blinded consumers are everywhere in the wine business these days ... Observes [Steven Bialek, owner Los Angeles Wine Company], 'There are a lot of sheep out there who live and die by the numbers.' " Even before he himself went online on the private Prodigy service, wine consumers discussed Parker's ratings publicly on the Internet and raised concerns seen in the Slate article. The limitations of a single number for a wine rating were already well known from past experiments. Experienced wine enthusiasts and makers didn't (and don't) all take them seriously -- unless concerned with market-price impact. But Parker is fundamentally a wine critic like others before and since. Like many other experts, he explicitly recommends that people learn wine for themselves and never rely just on a numerical rating. (Doing so, I'll add, can delay that learning, as people focus on the number and not their own taste.) If consumers ignore this advice, who is responsible? Tue Mar 13 14:41:30 -0700 2007 2379899 69634 eatzalot 1 2259364 The documentary Mondovino focuses quite a bit on Parker. Sun Feb 04 16:19:14 -0800 2007 2259147 11369 Robert Lauriston 1 2259782 There are reviews on amazon.com and elsewhere. Sun Feb 04 19:32:09 -0800 2007 2259147 69634 eatzalot 1 2381127 I am just finishing it now and really enjoyed it. Echo the comment on how scary his influence has been. Tue Mar 13 11:00:17 -0700 2007 2259147 43893 C. Hamster 1 2385204 Lawrence Osborne's "The Accidental Connisseur" is also worth checking out. I read it right before seeing Mondovino and it covers similar topics. Wed Mar 14 12:02:31 -0700 2007 2259147 32121 pws 1 2386181 I read the book this summer and found it very interesting and well-written. Wed Mar 14 15:46:57 -0700 2007 2259147 72401 jnstarla 2 2388289 Ditto Thu Mar 15 09:08:54 -0700 2007 2386181 14367 The Dive