FauxPolitik

Friday, December 20, 2002

The Wine Spec-Slate-or: Slate has an occasional wine column, but I've never seen Wine Spectator mentioned in their "in other magazines" roundup. This week it was. The feature story in WS (top 100 wines of the year) got another mention soon after when wine columnist Mike Steinberger hammered WS's choice of the E. Guigal Chateauneuf as wine of the year. An odd coincidence, or was Slate teeing one up for Steinberger? For those of us who like to drink wine (and not cavort in the adjective pool) WS made a good choice, and Guigal is a solid wine (I've had their dandy entry-level Cotes-du-Rhone). On the bang-for-the-buck meter, this probably is the wine of the year. Moreover, wine is a game of diminishing returns. As you move higher and higher on the price scale (assuming you pick wines worth their price), the increase in quality becomes comparatively small. I can remember trying the Opus One for the first time, and trying a great, pricey Brunello di Montalcino. Great wines, and I was delighted to drink them with the generous owners of the bottles. But worth the premium over a Columbia Crest? No.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home