* * * * *
Posts
Share This Gerry Dawes's Spain Post
In 2019, again ranked in the Top 50 Gastronomy Blogs and Websites for Gastronomists & Gastronomes in 2019 by Feedspot. "The Best Gastronomy blogs selected from thousands of Food blogs, Culture blogs and Food Science. We’ve carefully selected these websites because they are actively working to educate, inspire, and empower their readers with . . . high-quality information. (Last Updated Oct 23, 2019)
Over 1,150,000 views since inception, 16,000+ views in January 2020.
36. Gerry Dawes's Spain: An Insider's Guide to Spanish Food, Wine, Culture and Travel gerrydawesspain.com
"My good friend Gerry Dawes, the unbridled Spanish food and wine enthusiast cum expert whose writing, photography, and countless crisscrossings of the peninsula have done the most to introduce Americans—and especially American food professionals—to my country's culinary life. . .” - - Chef-restaurateur-humanitarian José Andrés, Nobel Peace Prize Nominee and Oscar Presenter 2019; Chef-partner of Mercado Little Spain at Hudson Yards, New York 2019
Gerry Dawes at Marisquería Rafa in Madrid.
Photo by John Sconzo, Docsconz: Musings on Food & Life
Custom-designed
Wine, Food, Cultural and Photographic Tours of Spain Organized and Led by Gerry Dawes and Spanish Itinerary Planning
Photo by John Sconzo, Docsconz: Musings on Food & Life
Custom-designed
Wine, Food, Cultural and Photographic Tours of Spain Organized and Led by Gerry Dawes and Spanish Itinerary Planning
12/08/2011
Ryan Opaz, Catavino: "Pancho (Campo) has consistently brought the shadow of scandal, something that no innocent man has ever had to deal with as much as he has. Spain has put a lot of money in Pancho’s pocket, and what’s amazing is not Pancho’s ability to extract it, so much as Spain’s willingness to let it go!"
* * * * *
I do believe he corrupted the ethics of the Wine Advocate, a magazine that I have held a lot of respect for, and for this I think Pancho should get a firm wag of the finger, but he did nothing illegal. Between you and I, I think that the order of importance of things in Pancho’s life goes something like this: Pancho, Family, Money, Ferraris, Skiing, Jet Skiing and Wine. But that is not a crime. Wine pays the bills so the rest can be enjoyed.
On Robert Parker and . . ."today your points at times corrupt the industry.
Engage. I love what you did for the wine industry. You changed it, but today your points at times corrupt the industry. You are smart enough to see this, even though you claim that people give your points too much credit. It might be that you haven’t given them enough yourself. Speak honestly about the trouble points have created in the wine industry. We are not going to get rid of them, they are part of the wine industry love them or not, but help us to work through our addiction to them. Teach us to use this force wisely. We don’t need a Ralph Nader of wine anymore, what we need is a wine lover who shares our passion and their knowledge. That should be you. You should help us to be better as an industry.
12/07/2011
"(Robert M.) Parker is God’s fool for associating with and trusting in some of the people that he has over the years." - Poster Bill Klapp on Mike Steinberger's Wine Diarist
* * * * *
"That, too, is now a dead horse in my view, because the Wine Advocate has paid the price, and will continue to pay the price, for its ethical foibles as Bob Parker continues to shoot himself in the foot in a highly public manner, with his weapon of choice being his mouth, and his ammunition being myopia and self-righteousness. When the relevant facts are all out, I am convinced that we will learn that Parker, even more than Miller, has once again been had by a hustler, Pancho Campo.
Parker is God’s fool for associating with and trusting in some of the people that he has over the years: Rodenstock, Royal Wine’s “sexy boys”, Oliveros and Sokolin, Hanna Agostini and now Campo. Then there are his professional and administrative missteps and shortcomings: the Faiveley lawsuit and the incompetence of his Burgundy work, and the hiring of Rovani, Thomases and Miller. Time and again, I come back to a pithy few sentences from William Langewiesche’s 2000 Atlantic Monthly article, “The Million-Dollar Nose”, which, in what I see as the supreme irony, is an integral part of Parker’s biography on his website:
“Parker’s…mother, who handles the office mail, has a different approach. She is said to be tough and unimpressed. One afternoon Parker, in a self-pitying mood, mentioned to her that for years he had received only letters of complaint. She fixed him with a stare and said, “That’s because they’re the only ones I’ve let you see.” Her instincts were probably good. Parker seems to have trouble distinguishing friends from sycophants, and he sets too much store by the compliments he receives.”-- Poster Bill Klapp Dec. 7, 2011 on Mike Steinberger's The Wine Diarist (click on this link to read the rest of Klapp's excellent response to a post by David Schildknecht of The Wine Advocate).
David Schildknecht of The Wine Advocate's Statement On The Resignation of TWA Spanish Wine Critic Jay Miller Raises More Questions Than it Answers
* * * * *
David Schildknect, The Wine Advocate.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2008 / gerrydawes@aol.com
As you can see, David Schildknecht, with whom I have been acquainted for a number of years, gave me his permission to use the statements that he also sent to a few other bloggers. Now that I have had time to study Schildknecht's points, here are my thoughts (posted after each of his points). I emphasize that this is not an exhange, rather my answering Schildknecht contentions.
David Schildknecht to me (in red), my replies are in black bold:
David Schildknecht: "Gerry, feel free to post on your site the following, which I had already sent to a few other folks - but I copy it (here) just in case anybody else is interested in the latest salacious gossip / prosaic updates re The Wine Advocate and/or wishes to say that they read it here first! (I realize that a story conjuring the scrambling of the Wine Advocate staff to address a precipitant departure by Jay would make better copy ... sorry, but it just isn't so.)"
Gerry Dawes: First off, many thanks, David, for taking the trouble to give me answers and I am sorry if I gave the impression (in my answer to your first e-mail to me) that I thought you were not telling the truth. I am very sure--several mutual friends vouch for your veracity and integrity--that you are telling me the truth based on the information that you have. However, given that the statements as you know them are truthful, this raises some more serious questions, at least in my mind.
David Schildknecht: "When Bob Parker discussed with me in January the plan for Antonio Galloni to assume responsibility for covering the Cote d'Or and Chablis, he informed me that Jay (Miller) had decided to retire at the end of this year and asked me to mull over the inevitable need that would arise for someone new to cover the Pacific Northwest. On August 4, I formally accepted the latter assignment. Realizing that the conclusion would be drawn in the press that we had scrambled to react to circumstances on short notice, I wanted to let you know - at the risk of arousing new suspicions on your parts about my veracity! that this was not the case."
Gerry Dawes: So Parker, Galloni, Miller and you all knew that he was going to retire at the end of this year, as early as January (and later you say Neil Martin knew by November 4th, perhaps earlier)?
Does that give anyone more than me pause for thought? You are essentially saying that at least Parker, Miller, Galoni and you knew that Miller was going to retire at the end of the year and still Parker put Jay in Pancho Campo's hands to manage his visits to Spain this year?! Then I guess a fair question is when did Pancho Campo know that Jay Miller was going to hang it up at the end of the year?
Let me posit a few scenarios here:
1) Neither Robert Parker nor Jay Miller let Pancho Campo know that he (Miller) was going to retire and let Campo go ahead and book events for which he charged high fees and paid Miller for delivering "catas magistrales," which by the reports of many eyewitnesses [attendees]) published accounts on-line were inept and uninformative on Miller's part. (Several attendees were scandalized and disbelieving of performances, according to published on-line reports from both Navarra and Valencia. One called his Valencia tasting performance “a joke.” ).
2) Parker or Jay let Pancho Campo know that Miller was retiring and no one told Campo's potential clients, including wineries, promotional arms for Spanish wineries and regulatory councils, right up until just three days after his final visit.
3) Miller told Pancho and both decided to keep it quiet, knowing full well that the organizations and wineries in question thought that they were investing in positive publicity and access to Miller and The Wine Advocate and that would reflect long-term on their prospects for selling wines from some very depressed wine regions. Mind you, in the opinion of many, the clients in question are getting what they deserve because they obviously thought they were "paying for play." Some opinions on the internet boards concerning these visits thought the rates that Campo was charging were well worth it because of what a positive review from Miller could do for their regions and wineries in the U.S. and in China!!
4) Miller kept the news of his retirement quiet it so he could cash in with Campo before he retired? And Jay Miller knew he was getting some of the best paydays of his life as he was going out the door.
In retrospect, because of the frantic now-or-never approach Campo took with the Madrid D.O., including the offer of a half price discount if they would book Miller in right away, saying something like "another opportunity may never come again, certainly not until at least 2014," it appears that Campo probably knew that Jay was quitting after that trip, which is why he set up these questionable encounters in Valencia, Murcia and Malaga and attempted to do so in Madrid (the two of them finally did a seminar for "free" after the international internet controversy broke out.
And, now according to your testimony, we now know that Robert Parker knew since January that Jay Miller was retiring, yet he let him go ahead cashing in and let Campo solicit or attempt to solicit substantial payments from several denominaciones of origen in Spain under, dare I say, less than transparent pretenses.
David Schildknecht: “I realize too, that Bob's having written that "[a]fter several months of consideration, Big Jay ... has decided to return to wine consulting" might well be interpreted as referring to recent deliberations. Nevertheless, they were not at all recent.”
Gerry Dawes: For that reason, they are all the more damning, because Robert Parker let this situation go on and let Jay Miller cash in one last time in Valencia (even with an ever-growing shitstorm swirling) knowing that Miller was retiring just three days later.
Not only that, he issued a post on his website threatened to sue those spreading “a reckless and malicious disregard for the truth and clearly aimed at damaging Miller, Campo, and TWA.” (This threat was copied and published on elmundvino.com and on Jim’s Loire by British journalist Jim Budd.)
David Schildknecht: “An e-mail record confirming the upshot of my January conversations with Bob does not exist until my August 4 acceptance of new responsibilities, in which I refer to those January conversations.”
Gerry Dawes: Though I believe you and others believe you, a judge in a court of law would not find that admissible as proof that those January conversations took place, but if you say that you knew that early, like I said, that is even more damning, in my opinion.
David Schildknecht: “In that August 4 communication, Bob officially asks me to declare my intentions about covering Oregon and Washington after "Jay['s] retiring the end of 2011 (not announced)" The first sentence in my reply reads "You mentioned this to me in January on the phone, so I am at least psychologically prepared!" Neal's assumption of Spanish coverage is not mentioned in that e-mail but is implicit in the exchange, as he was formally asked at this same time to take on that assignment. I am sure that Neal's records - if not from August, then from very soon thereafter - will confirm this.”
Gerry Dawes: While again I believe what you are saying, your belief that Neil Martin (Jay Miller’s announced replacement) knew he was taking on the Spanish coverage is not a given, it is conjecture. Again, if Martin did know this by Aug. 4, he too kept silent during the Campo-Miller-Murciagate shitstorm. In any case, Campo and Miller were allowed to proceed and take money from the Valencia D.O. under what many might call shady pretenses.
I am sure that many inquiring minds will want to know that with Miller “retiring” under such a cloud, will Robert Parker and The Wine Advocate still publish Jay Miller’s tasting notes and ratings for these last trips in Spain that have drawn so much fire? And, if those notes are not going to be published, will the Valencia, Málaga and Madrid D.O.s feel they have been deceived?
David Schildknecht: On November 4, Bob e-mailed me and Neal together to let us know on what day (December 5) he would be posting his bi-monthly run-down of the new issue's contents and simultaneously making the announcement about staff changes and our new assignments.
Gerry Dawes: So, you both you and Neil Martin knew by November 4th and even though their was full-blown brouhaha going on on such blogs as those of Jim Budd in England and Dr. Vino and Mike Steinberger’s Wine Diarist in the U.S., both of you still kept silent and didn't raise concerns with Parker about Jay Miller and Pancho Campo as they went on to the D.O. Valencia on December 1, charging them 35,000 Euros.
David, do you think that D.O. Valencia would have paid Pancho Campo’s Wine Academy of Spain 35,000 Euros unless he delivered Jay Miller of The Wine Advocate to taste and rate their wines and with the hope that he would work miracles for them?
And what kind of people would take a hefty payment from D.O. Valencia under such a cloud and knowing full well that Jay Miller was announcing his retirement a few days later?Some would say that such actions smack of the actions of snake oil salesmen of yesteryear.
I am not the only one asking these questions.
As English wine writer Jim Budd commented of Tyler Colman’s Dr. Vino blog this morning, Dec. 6: “The $64,000 (or rather euro) question is will Miller be writing up for the Wine Advocate his recent visits to a number of Spanish wine regions, in particular Murcia and Valencia who paid a total of 64,000€ for Miller to visit, assess and rate their wines.
If, as it appears, Miller's retirement was long planned and if these visits are not to be written up* in TWA have not the Murcia, Valencia, Madrid and Malaga D. O.s been seriously misled at best?”
__________________________________________________________________________
About Gerry Dawes
Gerry Dawes was awarded Spain's prestigious Premio Nacional de Gastronomía (National Gastronomy Award) in 2003. He writes and speaks frequently on Spanish wine and gastronomy and leads gastronomy, wine and cultural tours to Spain. He was a finalist for the 2001 James Beard Foundation's Journalism Award for Best Magazine Writing on Wine, won The Cava Institute's First Prize for Journalism for his article on cava in 2004, was awarded the CineGourLand “Cinéfilos y Gourmets” (Cinephiles & Gourmets) prize in 2009 in Getxo (Vizcaya) and received the 2009 Association of Food Journalists Second Prize for Best Food Feature in a Magazine for his Food Arts article, a retrospective piece about Catalan star chef, Ferran Adrià.
". . .That we were the first to introduce American readers to Ferran Adrià in 1997 and have ever since continued to bring you a blow-by-blow narrative of Spain's riveting ferment is chiefly due to our Spanish correspondent, Gerry "Mr. Spain" Dawes, the messianic wine and food journalist raised in Southern Illinois and possessor of a self-accumulated doctorate in the Spanish table. Gerry once again brings us up to the very minute. . ." - - Michael & Ariane Batterberry, Editor-in-Chief/Publisher and Founding Editor/Publisher, Food Arts.
Pilot for a proposed reality television series on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
(Filmed in Valencia and Alicante provinces, La Comunidad Valenciana.)
(Filmed in Valencia and Alicante provinces, La Comunidad Valenciana.)
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com.
Ryan Opaz of Catavino to Pancho Campo: "You just helped us all see how dirty it makes us feel."
* * * * *
Ryan and Gabriela Opaz outside the Celler de la Boqueria wine shop.
Photo: Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
"Spain’s addiction to points helped create the mess that is the “Jay and Pancho Affair”. They are just guilty as the person who brings the “point giver” in exchange for money, or the point giver who naively thinks he’s not involved.
Pancho, you’re helping the industry. We know the industry is full of “Languedoc Pinot Noir” and “La Mancha flavored Riojas.”
Many a critic as been paid to write a favorable article and I’m sure you’re not the first to try sell the opportunity for points to a region.
You just helped us all see how dirty it makes us feel. You’re helping the industry to realize, or I would hope, that this whole imbalance of power that is given to the “point wielders” is wrong. Thank you.
Read the rest of Ryan Opaz's blog post here.
12/06/2011
My hat is off to you Mr. Pancho Campo. Andrés Arévalo, a Spanish Poster on elmundovino.com Takes Pancho Campo to Task About the So-called Murciagate-Valenciagate-Madridgate Scandal Concerning Robert M. Parker's The Wine Advocate and its Spanish Wine Reviewer, Jay Miller
* * * * *
(Note: As has been reported on many blogs and in newspapers, Jay Miller resigned on Dec. 4, 2011. This resignation came just 3 days after Miller appeared at a conference in Valencia for which the Valencia regulatory and the wineries involved all believed that a visit and tasting by Mr. Miller would lead to favorable reviews in The Wine Advocate. As an inside source in Valencia told me that the events of the past few days, "The tension at the regulatory council has to very high.")
My hat is off to you Mr. Pancho Campo
Esteemed Pancho (Campo),
The truth is that I take my hat off to you. You are a true businessman. A few days ago in Murcia (you put on) a Master (Wine) Class, today in Valencia (Dec. 1), tomorrow in Madrid for agricultural cooperatives (I have been invited). You're taking advantage that you are the one who organizes the agenda of (Robert M. Parker, Jr.’s The Wine Advocate’s) Jay Miller. And the truth is, if Jay Miller accepts, and the D.O.s (wine region regulatory councils) (agree to ) pay, all is legal and nobody can say anything.
You are making Sr. Miller sweat his shirt, despite the fact that one would think that having you arrange (his trips in Spain) was supposed to have made his life easier.
Spain is in bankruptcy, and the wine D.O.s are all tight with budget cuts as (is the case) all over Spain, but the wineries are desperate to sell their wines And no one doubts the influence of TWA (The Wine Advocate) in the USA. But don’t you think you are abusing (things) a little? Honestly you think that they (the D.O.s) would pay you to give a conference if it were not (because you were delivering) Jay Miller?
And what has been published about (your dealings) with D.O. Madrid, I don’t know if it is a lie and it was a mistake like the people of Murcia of ASEVIN (supposedly made), but it was you signing on from Tuscany and pulling the strings (behind the scenes of the controversial e-mails soliciting funds for the appearance of Jay Miller) from your iPhone.
But the most surprising of all, and that is where I take off my hat to you Mr. Campo, is that wine journalists from Spain have not investigated any of this. How do you do that? Nobody (from the Spanish wine press) says anything. It was a blogger from the United Kingdom and an English Associated Press journalist it seems (who broke the story). Where are (Spanish wine journalists) the Peñins, Proensas, Delgados, and de La Sernas (he has at least investigated/published something) and other Spanish wine journalists?
About much less important things than the Madrid incident, rivers of ink have been written. By things much smaller than the Madrid has written rivers of ink. (Your) Pressure (on the Madrid regulatory council); claiming that they were letting an opportunity pass, that you asked for 40,000 Euros, but would take 20,0000 Euros; that he (Jay Miller) would not be returning to Spain until 2014, but thanks to the putting on a conference and paying (his visit) could be pushed forward and every thing could be arranged. Where has this been seen in Spain? Has anyone investigated if this (modus operandi) has been done the same way in other Spanish regions and with other regulatory councils? Have others (regions) been left without a visit by Mr. Miller because they would not pay Sr. Campo’s toll? Is the scandal bigger than anything ever been seen in the wine industry in Spain?. We do not deserve that.
In the end, I don’t know why I am writing all of this. Regards, Andrés Arévalo - - elmundovino.com
In an even more pungent post on Dec. 4 (after the resignation of Jay Miller), Andrés Arévalo takes Pancho Campo to task again. If you read Spanish, you can read the second post by going to the elmundovino.com Foro link. As soon as I get time, I will translate the second post from Arévalo and post it here.
You are making Sr. Miller sweat his shirt, despite the fact that one would think that having you arrange (his trips in Spain) was supposed to have made his life easier.
Spain is in bankruptcy, and the wine D.O.s are all tight with budget cuts as (is the case) all over Spain, but the wineries are desperate to sell their wines And no one doubts the influence of TWA (The Wine Advocate) in the USA. But don’t you think you are abusing (things) a little? Honestly you think that they (the D.O.s) would pay you to give a conference if it were not (because you were delivering) Jay Miller?
And what has been published about (your dealings) with D.O. Madrid, I don’t know if it is a lie and it was a mistake like the people of Murcia of ASEVIN (supposedly made), but it was you signing on from Tuscany and pulling the strings (behind the scenes of the controversial e-mails soliciting funds for the appearance of Jay Miller) from your iPhone.
But the most surprising of all, and that is where I take off my hat to you Mr. Campo, is that wine journalists from Spain have not investigated any of this. How do you do that? Nobody (from the Spanish wine press) says anything. It was a blogger from the United Kingdom and an English Associated Press journalist it seems (who broke the story). Where are (Spanish wine journalists) the Peñins, Proensas, Delgados, and de La Sernas (he has at least investigated/published something) and other Spanish wine journalists?
About much less important things than the Madrid incident, rivers of ink have been written. By things much smaller than the Madrid has written rivers of ink. (Your) Pressure (on the Madrid regulatory council); claiming that they were letting an opportunity pass, that you asked for 40,000 Euros, but would take 20,0000 Euros; that he (Jay Miller) would not be returning to Spain until 2014, but thanks to the putting on a conference and paying (his visit) could be pushed forward and every thing could be arranged. Where has this been seen in Spain? Has anyone investigated if this (modus operandi) has been done the same way in other Spanish regions and with other regulatory councils? Have others (regions) been left without a visit by Mr. Miller because they would not pay Sr. Campo’s toll? Is the scandal bigger than anything ever been seen in the wine industry in Spain?. We do not deserve that.
In the end, I don’t know why I am writing all of this. Regards, Andrés Arévalo - - elmundovino.com
In an even more pungent post on Dec. 4 (after the resignation of Jay Miller), Andrés Arévalo takes Pancho Campo to task again. If you read Spanish, you can read the second post by going to the elmundovino.com Foro link. As soon as I get time, I will translate the second post from Arévalo and post it here.
Robert M. Parker Jr.'s Ethical Standards
* * * * *
Robert M. Parker Jr.'s Ethical Standards
(Copied from www.erobertparker.com)
(The highlighting, underlining and emphasis on certain passages I found interesting were done by me.)
THE ROLE OF ROBERT M. PARKER, JR. and OUR WINE CRITIC ETHICS and STANDARDS
“A man must serve his time to every trade save censure – critics all are ready made.” Thus wrote Lord Byron.
MY STANDARDS
It has been said often enough that anyone with a pen, notebook, and a few bottles of wine can become a wine critic. And that is exactly the way I started when, in late summer 1978, I sent out a complimentary issue of what was then called the Baltimore/Washington Wine Advocate.
There were two principal forces that shaped my view of a wine critic's responsibilities. I was then, and remain today, significantly influenced by the independent philosophy of consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Moreover, I was marked by the indelible impression left by my law school professors, who in the post Watergate era pounded into their students' heads a broad definition of conflict of interest. These two forces have governed the purpose and soul of my newsletter, The Wine Advocate, and of my books.
In short, the role of the critic is to render judgments that are reliable. They should be based on extensive experience and on a trained sensibility for whatever is being reviewed. In practical terms, this means every one of us should be blessed with the following attributes:
Independence: For me only, it is imperative to pay my own way. Even more important is to refuse all advertising – from any source. This guarantees total independence. The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com are 100% subscriber funded and supported. We do not permit any advertising. With respect to gratuitous hospitality in the form of airline tickets, hotel rooms, guest houses, etc., I have never accepted these either abroad or in this country. And what about wine samples? I purchase more than 60% of the wines I taste, and though I do receive unsolicited samples at no cost, I do not feel it is unethical to accept samples that I did not request. Irrefutably, the target audience is the wine consumer, not the wine trade. While it is important to maintain a professional relationship with the trade, I believe the independent stance required of a consumer advocate often, not surprisingly, results in an adversarial relationship with the wine trade. It can be no other way. In order to pursue this independence effectively, it is imperative that I keep a distance from the trade. While this may be misinterpreted as aloofness, such independence guarantees hard hitting, candid, and uninfluenced commentary.
THE OTHER WINE ADVOCATE / EROBERTPARKER.COM WINE CRITICS
As for the independent writers I have hired to cover certain areas, they are held to high but less stringent and demanding standards only with respect to accepting educational travel and hospitality to emerging wine regions, which is permitted. The same standards of tasting free of external influence as well as unbiased reviews I have followed for 30+ years are expected from all independent wine critics working on assignments for The Wine Advocate or eRobertParker.com.
All writers hired as independent contractors must certify that they maintain rigid standards of independence and integrity, writing about what is in the bottle, free of external pressure. All tastings, other than expressly noted, are done either stateside in peer groups, or in author-organized tastings in the country where the wines are produced. They are done under both blind and non-blind conditions, at specific domaines, at centralized locations, and on occasion, with importers. I routinely purchase and taste some of their highly rated wines to verify and monitor their reviews for accuracy.
Hospitality and Entertainment Standards: This is the most difficult area for me, or any wine critic, to establish black and white rules. Aside from contact with our wives and children, we are immersed in an environment where essentially all of our contact is with people in the wine world. Much of the joy of drinking or tasting wine is amplified and/or enhanced by contact or additional time spent with the person who produced it. I have kept the wine trade at arm’s length over the last three plus decades, and I realize that as rigorously high as my own particular standards are, it is neither possible nor realistic to expect such standards with the independent wine critics who work for me. However, I do expect independent reviews that are not influenced by a taster’s professional admiration or respect (or in some cases, lack thereof) for the people making the wine. I, along with all of the people who work for me, have a great interest in the world’s finest wine producers as well as food, and it would be not only unrealistic, but impossible to ask them to turn down every invitation where a professional tasting is accompanied with a meal. Nor do I police social contact with members of the wine trade. Yet, if I have any belief, no matter how slight, that professional relationships or social interactions have influenced the outcome of a review, either positively or negatively, the contract with any independent wine writer will be immediately terminated.
On rare occasions, I have accepted invitations to lunch with a producer, but I have never had any problem criticizing that producer if his wines are not up to standard. I demand the same conduct of the independent wine critics who work for The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com. I also expect them, as I have done for 30+ years, not to solicit or accept free hotel accommodations or hospitality not directly related to their professional endeavors. There are occasions where several of the independent writers have been in the rural countryside of an emerging wine region (i.e., in Israel, Greece, Portugal, Chile, Argentina) where there are no hotels, and the only way of visiting these areas and getting a night’s sleep is to stay at the producer’s guest house or residence. This may also happen in the future in such emerging wine regions as Eastern Europe, China, or India. This is acceptable, but only for a first-time visit. The first and foremost priority is to write independent, unbiased, non-partisan reviews, and we all realize that is our primary responsibility to our subscribers.
I expect the writers to learn about the regions they cover from first-hand observation, but I demand they have access to all wines, not just one particular sub-segment category or region. Moreover, I require full disclosure of such hospitality they receive in the articles that emanate from these trips.
With respect to historic wine regions, The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com will continue to cover all of the independent writers’ reasonable travel expenses related to their reviews.
Courage: Courage manifests itself in what I call the “democratic tasting.” Judgments ought to be made solely on the basis of the product in the bottle, not the pedigree, the price, the rarity, or one's like or dislike of the producer. The wine critic who is totally candid may be considered dangerous by the trade, but an uncensored, independent point of view is of paramount importance to the consumer. A judgment of wine quality must be based on what is in the bottle – in vino veritas. This is wine criticism at its purest as well as most meaningful. In a tasting, a $10 bottle of petit château Pauillac should have as much of a chance as a $200 bottle of Lafite Rothschild or Latour. Overachievers should be spotted, praised, and their names highlighted and shared with the consuming public. Underachievers should be singled out for criticism and called to account for their mediocrities. Outspoken and irreverent commentary is unlikely to win many friends from wine commerce, but wine buyers are entitled to such information. When a critic bases his or her judgment on what others think, or on the wine's pedigree, price, or perceived potential, then wine criticism is nothing more than a sham.
Experience: It is essential to taste extensively across the field of play to identify the benchmark reference points and to learn winemaking standards throughout the world. This is the most time consuming and expensive aspect of wine criticism, as well as the most fulfilling for the critic; yet it is rarely practiced. Lamentably, what often transpires is that a tasting of 10 or 12 wines from a specific region or vintage will be held, and the writer then issues a definitive judgment on the vintage based on a microscopic proportion of the wines. This is irresponsible – indeed, and appalling. It is essential for a wine critic to taste as comprehensibly as is physically possible, which means tasting every significant wine produced in a region or vintage before reaching qualitative conclusions. Wine criticism, if it is ever to be regarded as a serious profession, must be a full time endeavor, not the habitat of part timers dabbling in a field that is so complex and requires an enormous time commitment. Wine and vintages, like everything in life, cannot be reduced to black-and-white answers. Our independent contractor wine critics are immersed in the wine field and also possess significant experience. Two of them even worked in the wine retail and wine importation business before accepting employment with The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com. One is among only a handful of women Masters of Wine.
It is also essential to establish memory reference points for the world's greatest wines. There is such a diversity of wine and multitude of styles that this may seem impossible. But tasting as many wines as one possibly can in each vintage, and from all of the classic wine regions, helps one memorize benchmark characteristics that form the basis for making comparative judgments between vintages, wine producers, and wine regions.
Individual Accountability: While I have never found anyone's wine tasting notes compelling reading, notes issued by consensus of a committee are the most insipid and often the most misleading. Judgments by committees tend to sum up a group's personal preferences. But how do they take into consideration the possibility that each individual may have reached his or her decision using totally different criteria? Did one judge adore the wine because of its typicity while another decried it for the same reason, or was the wine's individuality given greater merit? It is impossible to know. That is never in doubt when an individual authors a tasting critique.
Committees rarely recognize wines of great individuality. A look at the results of tasting competitions sadly reveals that well made mediocrities garner the top prizes, and thus blandness is elevated to the status of a virtue. Wines with great individuality and character never win a committee tasting because at least one taster will find something objectionable about the wine.
I have always sensed that individual tasters, because they are unable to hide behind the collective voice of a committee, hold themselves to a greater degree of accountability. The opinion of a reasonably informed and comprehensive individual taster, despite the taster's prejudices and predilections, is always a far better guide to the ultimate quality of the wine than the consensus of a committee. At least the reader knows where the individual stands, whereas with a committee, one is never quite sure. Every article and tasting note we issue is attributed specifically to the writer responsible.
Emphasis on Pleasure and Value: Too much wine writing focuses on glamour French regions such as Burgundy, Bordeaux, and on California Cabernet Sauvignon and Chardonnay. These are important, and they make up the backbone of most serious wine enthusiasts' cellars. But value and diversity in wine types must always be stressed. Wines that taste great young, such as Chenin Blanc, Dolcetto, Beaujolais, Côtes du Rhône, Merlot, and Zinfandel, are no less serious or compelling because they must be drunk within a few years rather than be cellared for a decade or more before consumption. Wine is, in the final analysis, a beverage of pleasure, and intelligent wine criticism should be a blend of both hedonistic and analytical schools of thought – to the exclusion of neither.
The Focus on Qualitative Issues: It is an inescapable fact that too many of the world's renowned growers/producers have intentionally permitted production levels to soar to such extraordinary heights that many wines' personalities, concentrations, and characters are in jeopardy. While there remain a handful of fanatics who continue, at some financial sacrifice, to reject significant proportions of their harvest to ensure that only the finest quality wine is sold under their name, they are dwindling in number. For much of the last decade production yields throughout the world have broken records with almost every new vintage. The results are wines that increasingly lack character, concentration, and staying power. The argument that more carefully and competently managed vineyards result in larger crops is nonsense.
In addition to high yields, advances in technology have provided the savoir faire to produce more correct wines, but the abuse of practices such as acidification and excessive fining and filtration have compromised the final product. These problems are rarely and inadequately addressed by the wine writing community. Wine prices have never been higher, but is the consumer always getting a better wine? The wine writer has the responsibility to give broad qualitative issues high priority.
Candor: No one argues with the incontestable fact that tasting is a subjective endeavor. The measure of an effective wine critic should be his or her timely and useful rendering of an intelligent laundry list of good examples of different styles of winemaking in various price categories. Articulating in an understandable fashion why the critic finds the wines enthralling or objectionable is manifestly important both to the reader and to the producer. The critic must always seek to educate and to provide meaningful guidelines, never failing to emphasize that there is no substitute for the consumer's palate, nor any better education than the reader's own tasting of the wine. The critic has the advantage of having access to the world's wine production and must try to minimize bias. Yet the critic should always share with readers the reasoning behind bad reviews. For example, I will never be able to overcome my dislike for vegetal tasting New World Cabernets, overtly herbaceous red Loire Valley wines, or excessively acidified New World whites.
My ultimate goal in writing about wines is to seek out the world's greatest wines and greatest wine values. But in the process of ferreting out those wines, I feel the critic should never shy away from criticizing those producers whose wines are found lacking. Given the fact that the consumer is the true taster of record, the “taste no evil” approach to wine writing serves no one but the wine trade. Constructive and competent criticism has proven that it can benefit producers as well as consumers, since it forces underachievers to improve the quality of their fare, and by lauding overachievers, it encourages them to maintain high standards to the benefit of all who enjoy and appreciate good wine.
-----
Correspondence intended for Mr. Parker should be addressed to him at The Wine Advocate, Inc., P.O. Box 311, Monkton, MD 21111. Email may be sent to wineadvocate@erobertparker.com.
“A man must serve his time to every trade save censure – critics all are ready made.” Thus wrote Lord Byron.
MY STANDARDS
It has been said often enough that anyone with a pen, notebook, and a few bottles of wine can become a wine critic. And that is exactly the way I started when, in late summer 1978, I sent out a complimentary issue of what was then called the Baltimore/Washington Wine Advocate.
There were two principal forces that shaped my view of a wine critic's responsibilities. I was then, and remain today, significantly influenced by the independent philosophy of consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Moreover, I was marked by the indelible impression left by my law school professors, who in the post Watergate era pounded into their students' heads a broad definition of conflict of interest. These two forces have governed the purpose and soul of my newsletter, The Wine Advocate, and of my books.
In short, the role of the critic is to render judgments that are reliable. They should be based on extensive experience and on a trained sensibility for whatever is being reviewed. In practical terms, this means every one of us should be blessed with the following attributes:
Independence: For me only, it is imperative to pay my own way. Even more important is to refuse all advertising – from any source. This guarantees total independence. The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com are 100% subscriber funded and supported. We do not permit any advertising. With respect to gratuitous hospitality in the form of airline tickets, hotel rooms, guest houses, etc., I have never accepted these either abroad or in this country. And what about wine samples? I purchase more than 60% of the wines I taste, and though I do receive unsolicited samples at no cost, I do not feel it is unethical to accept samples that I did not request. Irrefutably, the target audience is the wine consumer, not the wine trade. While it is important to maintain a professional relationship with the trade, I believe the independent stance required of a consumer advocate often, not surprisingly, results in an adversarial relationship with the wine trade. It can be no other way. In order to pursue this independence effectively, it is imperative that I keep a distance from the trade. While this may be misinterpreted as aloofness, such independence guarantees hard hitting, candid, and uninfluenced commentary.
THE OTHER WINE ADVOCATE / EROBERTPARKER.COM WINE CRITICS
As for the independent writers I have hired to cover certain areas, they are held to high but less stringent and demanding standards only with respect to accepting educational travel and hospitality to emerging wine regions, which is permitted. The same standards of tasting free of external influence as well as unbiased reviews I have followed for 30+ years are expected from all independent wine critics working on assignments for The Wine Advocate or eRobertParker.com.
All writers hired as independent contractors must certify that they maintain rigid standards of independence and integrity, writing about what is in the bottle, free of external pressure. All tastings, other than expressly noted, are done either stateside in peer groups, or in author-organized tastings in the country where the wines are produced. They are done under both blind and non-blind conditions, at specific domaines, at centralized locations, and on occasion, with importers. I routinely purchase and taste some of their highly rated wines to verify and monitor their reviews for accuracy.
Hospitality and Entertainment Standards: This is the most difficult area for me, or any wine critic, to establish black and white rules. Aside from contact with our wives and children, we are immersed in an environment where essentially all of our contact is with people in the wine world. Much of the joy of drinking or tasting wine is amplified and/or enhanced by contact or additional time spent with the person who produced it. I have kept the wine trade at arm’s length over the last three plus decades, and I realize that as rigorously high as my own particular standards are, it is neither possible nor realistic to expect such standards with the independent wine critics who work for me. However, I do expect independent reviews that are not influenced by a taster’s professional admiration or respect (or in some cases, lack thereof) for the people making the wine. I, along with all of the people who work for me, have a great interest in the world’s finest wine producers as well as food, and it would be not only unrealistic, but impossible to ask them to turn down every invitation where a professional tasting is accompanied with a meal. Nor do I police social contact with members of the wine trade. Yet, if I have any belief, no matter how slight, that professional relationships or social interactions have influenced the outcome of a review, either positively or negatively, the contract with any independent wine writer will be immediately terminated.
On rare occasions, I have accepted invitations to lunch with a producer, but I have never had any problem criticizing that producer if his wines are not up to standard. I demand the same conduct of the independent wine critics who work for The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com. I also expect them, as I have done for 30+ years, not to solicit or accept free hotel accommodations or hospitality not directly related to their professional endeavors. There are occasions where several of the independent writers have been in the rural countryside of an emerging wine region (i.e., in Israel, Greece, Portugal, Chile, Argentina) where there are no hotels, and the only way of visiting these areas and getting a night’s sleep is to stay at the producer’s guest house or residence. This may also happen in the future in such emerging wine regions as Eastern Europe, China, or India. This is acceptable, but only for a first-time visit. The first and foremost priority is to write independent, unbiased, non-partisan reviews, and we all realize that is our primary responsibility to our subscribers.
I expect the writers to learn about the regions they cover from first-hand observation, but I demand they have access to all wines, not just one particular sub-segment category or region. Moreover, I require full disclosure of such hospitality they receive in the articles that emanate from these trips.
With respect to historic wine regions, The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com will continue to cover all of the independent writers’ reasonable travel expenses related to their reviews.
Courage: Courage manifests itself in what I call the “democratic tasting.” Judgments ought to be made solely on the basis of the product in the bottle, not the pedigree, the price, the rarity, or one's like or dislike of the producer. The wine critic who is totally candid may be considered dangerous by the trade, but an uncensored, independent point of view is of paramount importance to the consumer. A judgment of wine quality must be based on what is in the bottle – in vino veritas. This is wine criticism at its purest as well as most meaningful. In a tasting, a $10 bottle of petit château Pauillac should have as much of a chance as a $200 bottle of Lafite Rothschild or Latour. Overachievers should be spotted, praised, and their names highlighted and shared with the consuming public. Underachievers should be singled out for criticism and called to account for their mediocrities. Outspoken and irreverent commentary is unlikely to win many friends from wine commerce, but wine buyers are entitled to such information. When a critic bases his or her judgment on what others think, or on the wine's pedigree, price, or perceived potential, then wine criticism is nothing more than a sham.
Experience: It is essential to taste extensively across the field of play to identify the benchmark reference points and to learn winemaking standards throughout the world. This is the most time consuming and expensive aspect of wine criticism, as well as the most fulfilling for the critic; yet it is rarely practiced. Lamentably, what often transpires is that a tasting of 10 or 12 wines from a specific region or vintage will be held, and the writer then issues a definitive judgment on the vintage based on a microscopic proportion of the wines. This is irresponsible – indeed, and appalling. It is essential for a wine critic to taste as comprehensibly as is physically possible, which means tasting every significant wine produced in a region or vintage before reaching qualitative conclusions. Wine criticism, if it is ever to be regarded as a serious profession, must be a full time endeavor, not the habitat of part timers dabbling in a field that is so complex and requires an enormous time commitment. Wine and vintages, like everything in life, cannot be reduced to black-and-white answers. Our independent contractor wine critics are immersed in the wine field and also possess significant experience. Two of them even worked in the wine retail and wine importation business before accepting employment with The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com. One is among only a handful of women Masters of Wine.
It is also essential to establish memory reference points for the world's greatest wines. There is such a diversity of wine and multitude of styles that this may seem impossible. But tasting as many wines as one possibly can in each vintage, and from all of the classic wine regions, helps one memorize benchmark characteristics that form the basis for making comparative judgments between vintages, wine producers, and wine regions.
Individual Accountability: While I have never found anyone's wine tasting notes compelling reading, notes issued by consensus of a committee are the most insipid and often the most misleading. Judgments by committees tend to sum up a group's personal preferences. But how do they take into consideration the possibility that each individual may have reached his or her decision using totally different criteria? Did one judge adore the wine because of its typicity while another decried it for the same reason, or was the wine's individuality given greater merit? It is impossible to know. That is never in doubt when an individual authors a tasting critique.
Committees rarely recognize wines of great individuality. A look at the results of tasting competitions sadly reveals that well made mediocrities garner the top prizes, and thus blandness is elevated to the status of a virtue. Wines with great individuality and character never win a committee tasting because at least one taster will find something objectionable about the wine.
I have always sensed that individual tasters, because they are unable to hide behind the collective voice of a committee, hold themselves to a greater degree of accountability. The opinion of a reasonably informed and comprehensive individual taster, despite the taster's prejudices and predilections, is always a far better guide to the ultimate quality of the wine than the consensus of a committee. At least the reader knows where the individual stands, whereas with a committee, one is never quite sure. Every article and tasting note we issue is attributed specifically to the writer responsible.
Emphasis on Pleasure and Value: Too much wine writing focuses on glamour French regions such as Burgundy, Bordeaux, and on California Cabernet Sauvignon and Chardonnay. These are important, and they make up the backbone of most serious wine enthusiasts' cellars. But value and diversity in wine types must always be stressed. Wines that taste great young, such as Chenin Blanc, Dolcetto, Beaujolais, Côtes du Rhône, Merlot, and Zinfandel, are no less serious or compelling because they must be drunk within a few years rather than be cellared for a decade or more before consumption. Wine is, in the final analysis, a beverage of pleasure, and intelligent wine criticism should be a blend of both hedonistic and analytical schools of thought – to the exclusion of neither.
The Focus on Qualitative Issues: It is an inescapable fact that too many of the world's renowned growers/producers have intentionally permitted production levels to soar to such extraordinary heights that many wines' personalities, concentrations, and characters are in jeopardy. While there remain a handful of fanatics who continue, at some financial sacrifice, to reject significant proportions of their harvest to ensure that only the finest quality wine is sold under their name, they are dwindling in number. For much of the last decade production yields throughout the world have broken records with almost every new vintage. The results are wines that increasingly lack character, concentration, and staying power. The argument that more carefully and competently managed vineyards result in larger crops is nonsense.
In addition to high yields, advances in technology have provided the savoir faire to produce more correct wines, but the abuse of practices such as acidification and excessive fining and filtration have compromised the final product. These problems are rarely and inadequately addressed by the wine writing community. Wine prices have never been higher, but is the consumer always getting a better wine? The wine writer has the responsibility to give broad qualitative issues high priority.
Candor: No one argues with the incontestable fact that tasting is a subjective endeavor. The measure of an effective wine critic should be his or her timely and useful rendering of an intelligent laundry list of good examples of different styles of winemaking in various price categories. Articulating in an understandable fashion why the critic finds the wines enthralling or objectionable is manifestly important both to the reader and to the producer. The critic must always seek to educate and to provide meaningful guidelines, never failing to emphasize that there is no substitute for the consumer's palate, nor any better education than the reader's own tasting of the wine. The critic has the advantage of having access to the world's wine production and must try to minimize bias. Yet the critic should always share with readers the reasoning behind bad reviews. For example, I will never be able to overcome my dislike for vegetal tasting New World Cabernets, overtly herbaceous red Loire Valley wines, or excessively acidified New World whites.
My ultimate goal in writing about wines is to seek out the world's greatest wines and greatest wine values. But in the process of ferreting out those wines, I feel the critic should never shy away from criticizing those producers whose wines are found lacking. Given the fact that the consumer is the true taster of record, the “taste no evil” approach to wine writing serves no one but the wine trade. Constructive and competent criticism has proven that it can benefit producers as well as consumers, since it forces underachievers to improve the quality of their fare, and by lauding overachievers, it encourages them to maintain high standards to the benefit of all who enjoy and appreciate good wine.
-----
Correspondence intended for Mr. Parker should be addressed to him at The Wine Advocate, Inc., P.O. Box 311, Monkton, MD 21111. Email may be sent to wineadvocate@erobertparker.com.
12/05/2011
Neal Martin, Jay Miller's replacement for reviewing Spanish wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s The Wine Advocate on his blog in 2006: "I know that winewriters are supposed to be interested in all viticultural regions, but I have never really got under the skin of Spanish wine."
* * * * *
"Spanish tasting at the Old Billingsgate market. I know that winewriters are supposed to be interested in all viticultural regions, but I have never really got under the skin of Spanish wine. This tasting does little to alleviate my apathy, terribly organized with stands seemingly randomly spread around the hall. An interesting Spanish New Wave showcase catches my eye and I head there, meet Alex Hunt who is busy writing philosophical articles for "The World of Fine Wine", which is currently only available to members of Mensa. I sample a dozen rather moribund Rioja's and then coerce him to take lunch with me. The event is redeemed by splendid Catalan cuisine, which Alex and I load up on twice. Who said there is no such thing as a free lunch?
I have a laugh at the deplorable relaunched "Wine & Spirit" magazine, before deciding that I really should leave and finish off some work back at HQ. I think I need to visit a few Bodegas to inspire my interest in Spanish wine." - - Neal Martin, Jay Miller's replacement for reviewing Spanish wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s The Wine Advocate, on his blog in 2006.
Robert M. Parker, Jr.: "Jay’s responsibilities in Spain and South America will be taken over by Neal Martin who has long had a serious interest in these three extremely significant wine producing countries, and David Schildnecht will pick up Jay's coverage of Oregon and Washington."
I have a laugh at the deplorable relaunched "Wine & Spirit" magazine, before deciding that I really should leave and finish off some work back at HQ. I think I need to visit a few Bodegas to inspire my interest in Spanish wine." - - Neal Martin, Jay Miller's replacement for reviewing Spanish wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s The Wine Advocate, on his blog in 2006.
Robert M. Parker, Jr.: "Jay’s responsibilities in Spain and South America will be taken over by Neal Martin who has long had a serious interest in these three extremely significant wine producing countries, and David Schildnecht will pick up Jay's coverage of Oregon and Washington."
Martin was appointed by Parker to take Miller's place after Miller stepped down in the face of the overwhelming controversy stirred up over his association with Chilean-Spanish empresario Pancho Campo, a former rock and tennis promoter in Dubai (where an outstanding charge of fraud in that country caused an Interpol warrant to be issued for his arrest.)
No Way!! Under Pressure Over the Mounting Pancho Campo Murciagate Scandal in Spain, Jay Miller Resigns as Critic for Spanish Wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.'s The Wine Advocate
* * * * *
Let me see if I got this straight: Jay Miller is leaving the Spain coverage for The Wine Advocate, right?
This after international con man Pancho Campo sold him to several denominaciones de origen as an expert (to taste their wines and give them marketing advice), which caused a shitstorm of criticism from international wine observers, critics and bloggers.
Wait, I am confused, the critic for Spanish wines for Ralph Nader crusader-esque Robert M. Parker, Jr. The Wine Advocate wine consumer protector was being paid for giving “marketing advice” to the foreign wine promotional agencies, regulatory boards and wineries that he was supposed to be covering as a wine journalist? No way!!!!
And he was sold as an expert wine commentator on how to sell wines in the United States by Pancho Campo and his Wine Academy of Spain? No way!!
And Robert M. Parker, Jr. just came out on his website a few days ago with barely veiled threats to sue malicious bloggers, presumably Jim Budd, Tyler Colman of Dr. Vino and Mike Steinberger of Wine Diarist, as well as me probably (but someone claiming to be Pancho Campo’s lawyer already threatened me in 2009). No Way!!
And the top wine writer in Spain, Pepe Peñin (the only one amongst the silent Spanish wine press), just came out to on elmundovino.com (also see http://www.gerrydawesspain.com/2011/12/spains-top-writer-jose-penin-on-pancho.html) to express his opinions about the impropriety of what Pancho Campo and Jay Miller were doing. No Way!!!
And Jay Miller is just withdrawing from The Wine Advocate to pursue other interests. No Way!!
Golly, gee, folks, the Spanish denominaciones of origen, Navarra and Valencia must be really pissed off about spending wads of money for what they must have thought was privileged access to Miller and now he is not going to write another word on Spanish wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.’s The Wine Advocate. No Way!!!
Oh, well, Miller lost his notes on his visit to Toro anyway, so the story goes, so he won’t have to worry about that report. No Way!!!!
I guess someone really got the message, but my message and (I presume the message from the rest of my fellow “low-rent” (de medio pelo) bloggers, as we have been called) is that if anyone thinks that the resignation of Miller is going to make the story of Robert M. Parker, Jr. and his very close association with Pancho Campo (of notorious Wanted-by-Interpol fame), who paid Parker very large sums of money to speak at WineFuture conferences and who allowed Campo to arrange Jay Miller's schedule and charge wineries and regional regulatory boards for Miller to appear is going away, guess again. No Way!!
Way!!!!!
See my Nov. 10, 2011 post for more background on the Parker-Miller-Campo affair:
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
Robert Parker in La Rioja for Pancho Campo's Controversial
WineFutures-Rioja Conference 2009. Photo by Rioja.com.
Wait, I am confused, the critic for Spanish wines for Ralph Nader crusader-esque Robert M. Parker, Jr. The Wine Advocate wine consumer protector was being paid for giving “marketing advice” to the foreign wine promotional agencies, regulatory boards and wineries that he was supposed to be covering as a wine journalist? No way!!!!
And he was sold as an expert wine commentator on how to sell wines in the United States by Pancho Campo and his Wine Academy of Spain? No way!!
And Robert M. Parker, Jr. just came out on his website a few days ago with barely veiled threats to sue malicious bloggers, presumably Jim Budd, Tyler Colman of Dr. Vino and Mike Steinberger of Wine Diarist, as well as me probably (but someone claiming to be Pancho Campo’s lawyer already threatened me in 2009). No Way!!
And the top wine writer in Spain, Pepe Peñin (the only one amongst the silent Spanish wine press), just came out to on elmundovino.com (also see http://www.gerrydawesspain.com/2011/12/spains-top-writer-jose-penin-on-pancho.html) to express his opinions about the impropriety of what Pancho Campo and Jay Miller were doing. No Way!!!
And Jay Miller is just withdrawing from The Wine Advocate to pursue other interests. No Way!!
Golly, gee, folks, the Spanish denominaciones of origen, Navarra and Valencia must be really pissed off about spending wads of money for what they must have thought was privileged access to Miller and now he is not going to write another word on Spanish wines for Robert M. Parker, Jr.’s The Wine Advocate. No Way!!!
Oh, well, Miller lost his notes on his visit to Toro anyway, so the story goes, so he won’t have to worry about that report. No Way!!!!
I guess someone really got the message, but my message and (I presume the message from the rest of my fellow “low-rent” (de medio pelo) bloggers, as we have been called) is that if anyone thinks that the resignation of Miller is going to make the story of Robert M. Parker, Jr. and his very close association with Pancho Campo (of notorious Wanted-by-Interpol fame), who paid Parker very large sums of money to speak at WineFuture conferences and who allowed Campo to arrange Jay Miller's schedule and charge wineries and regional regulatory boards for Miller to appear is going away, guess again. No Way!!
Way!!!!!
See my Nov. 10, 2011 post for more background on the Parker-Miller-Campo affair:
____________________________________________________________________________________
About Gerry Dawes
Gerry Dawes was awarded Spain's prestigious Premio Nacional de Gastronomía (National Gastronomy Award) in 2003. He writes and speaks frequently on Spanish wine and gastronomy and leads gastronomy, wine and cultural tours to Spain. He was a finalist for the 2001 James Beard Foundation's Journalism Award for Best Magazine Writing on Wine, won The Cava Institute's First Prize for Journalism for his article on cava in 2004, was awarded the CineGourLand “Cinéfilos y Gourmets” (Cinephiles & Gourmets) prize in 2009 in Getxo (Vizcaya) and received the 2009 Association of Food Journalists Second Prize for Best Food Feature in a Magazine for his Food Arts article, a retrospective piece about Catalan star chef, Ferran Adrià.
In December, 2009, Dawes was awarded the Food Arts Silver Spoon Award in a profile written by José Andrés, The James Beard Foundation's Outstanding Chef (2011).
Trailer for a proposed reality television series
on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
12/02/2011
Huffington Post, Kirsten Dixon: "Dawes described the Boqueria, a famed public food market in Barcelona, with such vivid and passionate detail, I knew I had to go."
* * * * *
Exploring Barcelona's Famous Boqueria Market
by Kirsten Dixon, The Huffington Post
Photos by Kirsten Dixon & Gerry Dawes
"Inspiration for travel sometimes begins with a casual recommendation from a friend or an overheard conversation. It can be the smallest moments that lead us to our biggest journeys. Such was the beginnings of my trip to the Mercat de Sant Josep de la Boqueria in Barcelona, Spain.
I happened to attend a workshop on Spanish cuisine led by culinary expert Gerry Dawes at the Culinary Institute of America in St. Helena. Dawes described the Boqueria, a famed public food market in Barcelona, with such vivid and passionate detail, I knew I had to go. The market has been in the same location since the 12th century.
Dawes particularly praised one bar within the Boqueria called Pinotxo (pronounced pee-no-cho), a 14-stool food stall just to right of the entrance of the market. The present proprietor of the 100-year old establishment, Juanito Bayen, serves Catalan cuisine from a sliver of a kitchen workspace and he doesn't offer a printed menu."
About Gerry Dawes
Gerry Dawes was awarded Spain's prestigious Premio Nacional de Gastronomía (National Gastronomy Award) in 2003. He writes and speaks frequently on Spanish wine and gastronomy and leads gastronomy, wine and cultural tours to Spain. He was a finalist for the 2001 James Beard Foundation's Journalism Award for Best Magazine Writing on Wine, won The Cava Institute's First Prize for Journalism for his article on cava in 2004, was awarded the CineGourLand “Cinéfilos y Gourmets” (Cinephiles & Gourmets) prize in 2009 in Getxo (Vizcaya) and received the 2009 Association of Food Journalists Second Prize for Best Food Feature in a Magazine for his Food Arts article, a retrospective piece about Catalan star chef, Ferran Adrià.
Dawes was awarded the Food Arts Silver Spoon Award in a profile written by José Andrés, The James Beard Foundation's Outstanding Chef in America 2011
". . .That we were the first to introduce American readers to Ferran Adrià in 1997 and have ever since continued to bring you a blow-by-blow narrative of Spain's riveting ferment is chiefly due to our Spanish correspondent, Gerry "Mr. Spain" Dawes, the messianic wine and food journalist raised in Southern Illinois and possessor of a self-accumulated doctorate in the Spanish table. Gerry once again brings us up to the very minute. . ." - - Michael & Ariane Batterberry, Editor-in-Chief/Publisher and Founding Editor/Publisher, Food Arts
Trailer for a reality television series on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
From Kosolo on Wine, The Hades of Parker ". . . the very moment Parker (Robert Parker, Publisher of The Wine Advocate) released this statement Murciagate became not only a scandal but a Greek tragedy in its purest form
* * * * *
"If you are like me and find it interesting to follow the twists and turns of the so-called Murciagate I can assure you, we’re not alone. What I find most interesting, even above the essential question whether the abuse of status has been systematic or just a wrongdoing of a single person (or the evidence shown at Jim’s Loire a forgery) is not what most makes me tick. The incidents are not the most important thing for me, neither the people involved. For some reason it’s the story itself. The way it unfolds. While sipping my coffee this morning I realized that the very moment Parker released this statement Murciagate became not only a scandal but a Greek tragedy in its purest form.
The story of Murciagate has some archaic appeal to it, no doubt. As people we are drawn to stories and myths with such vigor. They work within the structures of culture interwoven in the texture so seamless that we don’t know whether we act in these structures or these structures more in us.
Let’s see what the good old Aristotle has to say about tragedy and read these real life events as a text. A tragedy obviously needs a plot but who’s the protagonist of this story? One might easily be inclined to think it was Mr. Pancho Campo, because he is undeniably in the core of events now unfolding. That, how ever, would be a mistake. Although Mr. Campo’s agency has been most vital for the plot to build up he’s not the protagonist of the story. In fact, the role of the villain falls on Mr. Campo.
Mr. Jay Miller isn’t the character either though it’s claimed Mr. Campo did the accused deeds in his name. In fact in this text, he’s only a vessel for the villain used to for many purposes. At the same time Mr. Miller might be seen as the false hero according to Vladimir Propp and a catalyst for a tragedy potentially of epic-scale.
The protagonist of the story is in fact Robert Parker himself. He was pulled in reluctant without a choice, drawn in from a distant location, just the way the protagonist should be. This is not the only thing that makes Parker a great main character, because as Aristotle put it:
“ The protagonist should be renowned and prosperous, so his change of fortune can be from good to bad.”
The protagonist’s has to conduct a hamartia, a tragic error of epic scale; a wrong doing which he carries out either by ignorance or mistake. If the protagonist is malign, sinister or evil, the play isn’t a true tragedy like this one. This part of the tragedy becomes self evident when you read Parker’s latest response on the evidence provided at Jim’s Loire.
“The change should come about as the result, not of vice, but of some great error or frailty in a character. That is hamartia.”
Read the rest of this compelling post: The Hades of Parker, Kosolo on Wines
Who pays wine critics? The Pancho Campo, MW - Jay Miller - The Wine Advocate - Robert M. Parker, Jr. Controversy in Spain Commentary by Tim Atkins, MW
* * * * *
"The campaigning journalist George Monbiot stirred up a considerable amount of debate among hacks recently when he decided to publish a registry of his financial interests on his website. There in black and white, Monbiot declares how much he’s paid by The Guardian, his publisher and his lodgers, as well as his total gross and net incomes.
Why the brave move? Monbiot believes that “journalists should live by the standards they demand of others, among which are accountability and transparency. One of the most important questions in public life, which is asked less often than it should be, is “who pays?”
Should wine journalists do the same thing? In the light of recent revelations in Spain, covered in depth by Jim Budd on his website, that producers in Murcia and Jumilla were being asked by their own inter-professional association to make a substantial contribution to fund a visit, tastings and a seminar by Jay Miller of the Wine Advocate, it’s a hot topic.
Michel Bettane, one of France’s leading wine writers, has responded with outrage to the subject of user pays tastings, although there is no suggestion that Miller himself was being paid to assess wines, merely to speak at a conference. “Producers who pay critics are idiotic,” he said. “If 'critics' accept compensation for tasting wines, then I don’t believe them to be true critics. Corruption exists quite obviously in the wine world today."
Read the rest of Tim Atkins article here: Who pays wine critics?
11/28/2011
Tom Perry, Inside Rioja. Interview with Gerry Dawes: “The 1947 Bosconia is the best red wine I have ever drunk.”
* * * * *
November 14, 2011 
Gerry Dawes with Maura Villanueva, the owner of El Lagar, Logroño, La Rioja.
Photo by Casimiro Somalo.
After several attempts I’ve finally gotten my interview with good friend, eating, drinking and bullfighting buddy Gerry Dawes, who I’ve said many times is one of the two guys with the most comprehensive knowledge of Rioja.
Here are my questions and his answers, which I have copied verbatim. Hold on to your hats. This is vintage Gerry, once again pulling no punches.
When did you first taste a Rioja? Do you remember what brand and vintage it was? What were your impressions?
Back in the late 1960s, like everyone else who visited (or in my case lived in) Spain, I drank Federico Paternina Banda Azul. Rioja wines were Spain’s best red wines and I developed a taste for them over a period of several years. I thought many Rioja were great. Marqués de Riscal was a bit of a luxury and so was Cune Imperial and Cune Viña Real, but once in awhile I got to drink them. I still remember finding Cune Imperial Gran Reserva 1959 on the shelf of a Costa del Sol shop for 225 pesetas a bottle when I lived in Mijas overlooking the Costa del Sol. I grabbed all three bottles.
READ THE REST OF THE INTERVIEW HERE: INSIDE RIOJA
11/21/2011
Tapas Hopping in New York: Nov. 1 Tertulia Tapas Bar, Salinas, Bar Basque, El Quinto Pino; Nov. 19 Tertulia
* * * * *
Chef Seamus Mullen's paella de mariscos and whole grilled fish cooking on
his specially designed Spanish fire pit and parilla at Tertulia Restaurant, New York.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
(Slide show of photos taken at Tertulia, Nov. 19, 2011. Double click on the images to see a larger version.)
New York Anthony Chiellino Tapas Tour Nov 1 2011 Tertulia - Salinas - Bar Basque - El Quinto Pino
(Slide show of photos on a tapas tour that began at Tertulia. Double click on the images to see a larger version.)
About Gerry Dawes
Gerry Dawes was awarded Spain's prestigious Premio Nacional de Gastronomía (National Gastronomy Award) in 2003. He writes and speaks frequently on Spanish wine and gastronomy and leads gastronomy, wine and cultural tours to Spain. He was a finalist for the 2001 James Beard Foundation's Journalism Award for Best Magazine Writing on Wine, won The Cava Institute's First Prize for Journalism for his article on cava in 2004, was awarded the CineGourLand “Cinéfilos y Gourmets” (Cinephiles & Gourmets) prize in 2009 in Getxo (Vizcaya) and received the 2009 Association of Food Journalists Second Prize for Best Food Feature in a Magazine for his Food Arts article, a retrospective piece about Catalan star chef, Ferran Adrià.
In December, 2009, Dawes was awarded the Food Arts Silver Spoon Award in a profile written by José Andrés.
Trailer for a proposed reality television series
on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
11/12/2011
Fideuà and Fideuà Negra (pasta from Valencia province, cooked like paella).
* * * * *
Fideuà (pasta from Valencia province, cooked like paella), Casa Emilio, Gandía (Valencia).
The dish is said to have been created in 1930 on a boat by a young fisherman/cook from Gandía.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
Fideuà negra (black pasta in Catalan) is a riff on paella negra or arrós negre (rice made black by squid ink). It is usually served with aioli.
Fideuà negra, colored and flavored with squid ink, at Restaurante Nemesio in Madrid.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
Chef Terrance Brennan's fideuà negra with squid ink, shrimp and alioli, Picholine, NYC, May, 2011.
Photograph by Gerry Dawes©2011. Contact gerrydawes@aol.com.
Fideuà slide show
(Double click on images to enlarge.)
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
Fideuà negra, colored and flavored with squid ink, at Restaurante Nemesio in Madrid.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
My fideuà negra with squid and bay scallops with lime-cilantro aioli on the side.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
And here are a couple of other versions of arrós negre and fideuà negra from restaurantes around Spain (Casa Nemesio, Madrid; Azahar, Valencia; Can Majó, Barcelona) and an excellent modern stylized version of fideuà negra from Terrance Brennan's Picholine in New York.
Chef Terrance Brennan's fideuà negra with squid ink, shrimp and alioli, Picholine, NYC, May, 2011.
Photograph by Gerry Dawes©2011. Contact gerrydawes@aol.com.
Fideuà slide show
(Double click on images to enlarge.)
___________________________________________________________________________
About Gerry Dawes
About Gerry Dawes
Gerry Dawes was awarded Spain's prestigious Premio Nacional de Gastronomía (National Gastronomy Award) in 2003. He writes and speaks frequently on Spanish wine and gastronomy and leads gastronomy, wine and cultural tours to Spain. He was a finalist for the 2001 James Beard Foundation's Journalism Award for Best Magazine Writing on Wine, won The Cava Institute's First Prize for Journalism for his article on cava in 2004, was awarded the CineGourLand “Cinéfilos y Gourmets” (Cinephiles & Gourmets) prize in 2009 in Getxo (Vizcaya) and received the 2009 Association of Food Journalists Second Prize for Best Food Feature in a Magazine for his Food Arts article, a retrospective piece about Catalan star chef, Ferran Adrià.
In 2009, Dawes was awarded the Food Arts Silver Spoon Award in a profile written by star chef José Andrés.
". . .That we were the first to introduce American readers to Ferran Adrià in 1997 and have ever since continued to bring you a blow-by-blow narrative of Spain's riveting ferment is chiefly due to our Spanish correspondent, Gerry "Mr. Spain" Dawes, the messianic wine and food journalist raised in Southern Illinois and possessor of a self-accumulated doctorate in the Spanish table. Gerry once again brings us up to the very minute. . ." - - Michael & Ariane Batterberry, Editor-in-Chief/Publisher and Founding Editor/Publisher, Food Arts, October 2009.
Trailer for a proposed reality television series on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
11/11/2011
Tertulia Chef Seamus Mullen Buchering a Small Pig and Making a Rolled Pork Loin, New York Nov 1, 2011
* * * * *
Chef-owner Seamus Mullen of Tertulia restaurant, NYC, butchering a small pig.
Photo by Gerry Dawes©2011 / gerrydawes@aol.com.
Slide show of Seamus Mullen butchering a small pig and making a pork roll dish at Tertulia, NYC.
(Double click for a larger image of the slide show.)
______________________________________________________________________________
About Gerry Dawes
". . .That we were the first to introduce American readers to Ferran Adrià in 1997 and have ever since continued to bring you a blow-by-blow narrative of Spain's riveting ferment is chiefly due to our Spanish correspondent, Gerry "Mr. Spain" Dawes, the messianic wine and food journalist raised in Southern Illinois and possessor of a self-accumulated doctorate in the Spanish table. Gerry once again brings us up to the very minute. . ." - - Michael & Ariane Batterberry, Editor-in-Chief/Publisher and Founding Editor/Publisher, Food Arts.
Trailer for a proposed reality television series on wine, gastronomy, culture and travel in Spain.
Experience Spain With Gerry Dawes: Customized Culinary, Wine & Cultural Trips to Spain & Travel Consulting on Spain
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
Gerry Dawes can be reached at gerrydawes@aol.com; Alternate e-mail (use only if your e-mail to AOL is rejected): gerrydawes@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
