I read with interest this morning the controversy surrounding The New York Times writer Eric Asimov’s review of a restaurant in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, called Isa: http://nyti.ms/s0n7Vl.
Eric’s piece, in my opinion, was as cleverly written as ever, and very positive on the whole. It made me want to check out the funky restaurant. However, apparently the owners of Isa didn’t appreciate their eatery’s one star rating, and even thought it criticized Brooklyn dining at large. So, as the English say, they took the piss out of Eric with humorous entries on their menu in his homage: http://bit.ly/uGDoVA.
It’s all fair game in my book. It’s amusing too, although slightly provincial New York City.
However, one of the points to me of this tiny dispute between critic and subject is one I have to deal with as well as a wine critic: Good reviews – whether restaurants or wines – just aren’t good enough anymore, particularly for the subjects themselves.
I can’t tell you how many times I get disappointed responses when I rate a wine 90 points. I hear all the time that if I don’t give a wine 95 points or more, then it doesn’t matter. Just recently, a wine merchant told me that “I can only move something from the shelves with a 98, 99 or 100-point rating.”
Of course, this doesn’t change the way I rate wines. I have my method, and I will keep to it. But it shows that notion of ratings inflation seems the highest among those being rated, regardless if they are winery, restaurant, or just about anything else.
I remember tasting at Sloan winery in Napa Valley this year, and the owner was shocked when I rated one of his Cabernets 94 points, if I remember correctly. He later told me that my rating didn’t make sense because it was a 100-point wine.
Oh well. Sometimes outstanding ratings, or even good ones, just aren’t enough any more.
People tend to forget that a 90 point rating is still outstanding. If every wine received a 95 point score, then there would be no credibility. Also, I've been known to rate wines myself and over the years have learned a lot from you, however, if I'm drinking a '90 Latour, my mind isn't racing with the score, it's embedded with pure pleasure.
Anytime a vintner or winemaker are miffed as to why their coveted cult-wine did not receive 100pts, they should continue to strive for the best and not assume that everything they touch is golden. Anyone that critiques a wine needs to keep it real and the wineries, chateaux, bodegas, etc; need to be grateful that the playing field is fair. Of course, a fair portion just see it as business and not that much of a passion, with them wanting the high rating to just sell more wine at astronomical prices.
Unfortunately many people just assume they will like the 95 point wine better than the 90 point wine. That is where wineries (and wine stores) have a problem because the owner then says to the winemaker "make it better". So should the winemaker make wines the critics like or wines that reflect his style and location. I vote for the latter.
It would be interesting to get half a dozen well know wine critics and a dozen winemakers in the same room tasting (blind) those winemakers wines. Have each person rate the wine and see how it comes out.
Reminds me of a recent article about another outer borough restaurant getting in a spat with a NYC reviewer: http://gqm.ag/ncasGF
Have you had any wineries refuse to to let you taste their wines (on site) because of previous scores they think are too low?
James, I really am sorry, but I do ot understand why critics, and I mean all critics, can't drop the whole points thing once and for all. your verbal descriptions should be the letter of persuasion. Points just encourage speculation on the part of vendors and producers (sometimes) and extreme anal-retentiveness on the part of underconfident purchases. It drives me mad. I mean Pésus from Rinbeira del Duero is an 100 point wine, technically perfect put frankly joyless to drink.
A fabulous 90 point Morgon from Jean Foilloard will never equal a 2000 Latour, but that does not make it a lesser wine.
Points just encourage people to hide behind their lack of knowledge, confidence, and sadly, curiosity. It really is a travesty. If you really wanted to be original and set this site apart - you could offer no scores, just words.