Another VinePair list that reads like a laundry list of every obscure wine a 22-year-old sommelier who's been to too many natural wine tastings wants to peddle to their Instagram followers. Just because
you've had a few bottles of sherry and orange wine, doesn't mean the rest of us are interested in your curated selection of boutique wines that will leave average consumers will be unsatisfied and confused.
And please, spare me the discovery narrative. VinePair's been trying to shoehorn weird grapes into our lives for years, only to have them fall flat when people actually try them out and realize they're just...fine or not great. Gamay from the Jura? Really? That's not discovery, that's a desperate attempt to cling to relevance in an industry where the only real trend is people finally realizing that Pinot Grigio and Chardonnay isn't so bad after all.
To anyone who actually enjoys wine but doesn't fit into VinePair's narrow definition of wine geek, this list is a waste of time. To everyone else, it's just a reminder that there are some things you're better off not trying.
With due respect, I disagree with Walker's blanket assessment of VinePair as a hive of insta-natty-too-cool hipsterdom.
I myself am a regular featured contributor, mainly for wine, and I'm a get-off-my-lawn classicist when it comes to pretentious obscurity competitions and flawed philosophically dogmatic wines, as are almost all of my colleagues. Perhaps it may feel like they are pushing a cool-kids narrative RELATIVE to the old guard publications who are still very formal and buttoned up, for better and for worse. But VP is certainly not fringe or radical. It's perhaps the most accurate reflection of the current state of the market.
I would also point out that this list has MANY unobscure and classic stalwarts, both new and old guard: Burgess, Arnot-Roberts, Lafleur-Gazin, Wiemer, Failla, LMR, Pax, Raffault, Red Car, Louis Martini, Von Buhl, Ravines, Whitehall Lane, Januik, and more. If the wine industry continues to stick to the old formula of highly allocated legends and and unattainable prices for the masses on these lists, it will continue to turn off potential wine lovers and shrivel.
The wine world is so vast now, and we should be celebrating those doing extraordinary work in underrepresented regions at reasonable prices. Millennials and Zs don't see the world like boomers, and this novelty interests them. And it's not just novelty for its own sake. The many wines that I've had on this list are all clean and excellent. And frankly, the list truly isn't very obscure at all. A few unknowns to me peppered in, sure, but nothing remotely outlandish or controversial.
I do understand where your frustration is coming from, as I have it as well regarding many too-cool, obnoxious, pretentious trends. But while VinePair is certainly more refreshingly in tune with the current cultural zeitgeist, it is not of that extremist ilk whatsoever. You'd be amazed how relatively curmudgeonly me and many of my VP contributing colleagues can be. And we strongly believe in clean wines (whatever their categorical label or philosophy). I would ask that you read a bit more of VP's feature content, culture pieces, and industry analyses, and not judge the publication by its somewhat clickbait-y headlines and social media posts, which are a means to an end in the current media environment.
Defender's of VinePair always quick to tout their "refreshingly in tune" vibe. But beneath the surface, they're just a watered-down version of every other wine publication out there.
Their list of discovery wines is a joke - Burgess and Wiemer are household names among wine enthusiasts. And don't even get me started on Louis Martini. It's time to stop pretending like you're discovering new winemakers when you're just rehashing the same old stuff.
The real issue with VinePair isn't that they're too extreme - it's that they're too boring. They're more concerned with sounding cool than actually delivering high-quality content. And their readers deserve better.
So, JS, instead of defending VinePair's honor, how about you take a hard look at the reality of the content they produce? Maybe then you'll see why so many people are underwhelmed by their refreshingly in tune vibe.
“nor could there be since there is nothing of importance to measure in the transmission of sensory input from the mouth and nose to the brain that could tell us anything about the quality of a wine.”
Solid conjecture, but reading “Neuroenology”by Gordon Shepard would slightly dispute this on more technical grounds. Worth the read.
Yeah, both published right around the same time, though I think Goode has more philosophy and psychology inclinations, whereas Shepard just dives hard into the science.
Another VinePair list that reads like a laundry list of every obscure wine a 22-year-old sommelier who's been to too many natural wine tastings wants to peddle to their Instagram followers. Just because
you've had a few bottles of sherry and orange wine, doesn't mean the rest of us are interested in your curated selection of boutique wines that will leave average consumers will be unsatisfied and confused.
And please, spare me the discovery narrative. VinePair's been trying to shoehorn weird grapes into our lives for years, only to have them fall flat when people actually try them out and realize they're just...fine or not great. Gamay from the Jura? Really? That's not discovery, that's a desperate attempt to cling to relevance in an industry where the only real trend is people finally realizing that Pinot Grigio and Chardonnay isn't so bad after all.
To anyone who actually enjoys wine but doesn't fit into VinePair's narrow definition of wine geek, this list is a waste of time. To everyone else, it's just a reminder that there are some things you're better off not trying.
With due respect, I disagree with Walker's blanket assessment of VinePair as a hive of insta-natty-too-cool hipsterdom.
I myself am a regular featured contributor, mainly for wine, and I'm a get-off-my-lawn classicist when it comes to pretentious obscurity competitions and flawed philosophically dogmatic wines, as are almost all of my colleagues. Perhaps it may feel like they are pushing a cool-kids narrative RELATIVE to the old guard publications who are still very formal and buttoned up, for better and for worse. But VP is certainly not fringe or radical. It's perhaps the most accurate reflection of the current state of the market.
I would also point out that this list has MANY unobscure and classic stalwarts, both new and old guard: Burgess, Arnot-Roberts, Lafleur-Gazin, Wiemer, Failla, LMR, Pax, Raffault, Red Car, Louis Martini, Von Buhl, Ravines, Whitehall Lane, Januik, and more. If the wine industry continues to stick to the old formula of highly allocated legends and and unattainable prices for the masses on these lists, it will continue to turn off potential wine lovers and shrivel.
The wine world is so vast now, and we should be celebrating those doing extraordinary work in underrepresented regions at reasonable prices. Millennials and Zs don't see the world like boomers, and this novelty interests them. And it's not just novelty for its own sake. The many wines that I've had on this list are all clean and excellent. And frankly, the list truly isn't very obscure at all. A few unknowns to me peppered in, sure, but nothing remotely outlandish or controversial.
I do understand where your frustration is coming from, as I have it as well regarding many too-cool, obnoxious, pretentious trends. But while VinePair is certainly more refreshingly in tune with the current cultural zeitgeist, it is not of that extremist ilk whatsoever. You'd be amazed how relatively curmudgeonly me and many of my VP contributing colleagues can be. And we strongly believe in clean wines (whatever their categorical label or philosophy). I would ask that you read a bit more of VP's feature content, culture pieces, and industry analyses, and not judge the publication by its somewhat clickbait-y headlines and social media posts, which are a means to an end in the current media environment.
Defender's of VinePair always quick to tout their "refreshingly in tune" vibe. But beneath the surface, they're just a watered-down version of every other wine publication out there.
Their list of discovery wines is a joke - Burgess and Wiemer are household names among wine enthusiasts. And don't even get me started on Louis Martini. It's time to stop pretending like you're discovering new winemakers when you're just rehashing the same old stuff.
The real issue with VinePair isn't that they're too extreme - it's that they're too boring. They're more concerned with sounding cool than actually delivering high-quality content. And their readers deserve better.
So, JS, instead of defending VinePair's honor, how about you take a hard look at the reality of the content they produce? Maybe then you'll see why so many people are underwhelmed by their refreshingly in tune vibe.
“nor could there be since there is nothing of importance to measure in the transmission of sensory input from the mouth and nose to the brain that could tell us anything about the quality of a wine.”
Solid conjecture, but reading “Neuroenology”by Gordon Shepard would slightly dispute this on more technical grounds. Worth the read.
I prefer I Taste Red: The Science of Tasting Wine by Jamie Goode
Yeah, both published right around the same time, though I think Goode has more philosophy and psychology inclinations, whereas Shepard just dives hard into the science.