7 responses to “Agreeing with Jefford….again”

1. 

   Jeremy Pringle

   November 11, 2009 at 6:58 am

   Yep, it's a good and thought provoking text which explore areas that need to be explored. I'm not sure I agree with everything he says (that may be impossible for me 😉 but he's clearly done a good job at framing a few debates.

   Reply
2. 

   Chris Plummer

   November 11, 2009 at 8:13 am

   Yes, he's a smart man Andrew.

   I too agree with you re semillon/riesling, as I've found the growing diversity of both styles present in Australia to be a real highlight to me lately, especially riesling (which I know you love AG 😉

   I must completely agree with Jefford about the potential diversity and style variation which will doubtlessly bless coming generations of Australian wine drinkers and enthusiasts – just look at Australia – it's huge, as is the spread of our wine regions! It's just about time the rest of the world realised this – we must be one of the most incorrectly stereotyped and categorised wine producing countries in the world.

   Thanks again AG,
   Chris P

   Reply
3. 

   Jeremy Pringle

   November 11, 2009 at 9:11 am

   I wouldn't go as far as to label him a "smart man" in all ways, but he is contributing some worthwhile thoughts on difficult matters here. I like the idea of not limiting one's self to writing about good wines, but feel there is a lot of caveats that need to be considered when "savaging" a wine.

   It is food for thought.

   Reply
4. 

   Andrew Graham

   November 11, 2009 at 10:29 am

   I'll send up Jefford's 'The New France' JP. It is, in my opinion, one of the most enlightening wine books ever. The problem with Jefford has always been his views about Australian wine, which have been both negative and particularly wide of the mark. But after a year here those views are far more accurate and I actually agree with much of his sentiments.

   I only hope now that he gathers all this is and writes a book that celebrates Australian terroir rather than ripping into a perceived lack of it.

   Reply
5. 

   Jeremy Pringle

   November 11, 2009 at 10:57 pm

   Thanks Andrew. I think I got off on the wrong foot with him (so to speak) over those misplaced sentiments on Australian wine. But he does seem to be getting a more accurate picture very rapidly during his stay here.

   As you say, let's hope he communicates the experience in a book or some publication. The more I read him these days, the more time I have for him.

   Reply
6. 

   Edward

   November 12, 2009 at 10:07 am

   Andrew,

   Off to dinner, so apologies for any typos and the point form of the comment. . .

   I agree to some extent with Jefford, hard not to he writes so well. Still I find my self wanting to disagree. . .

   To reinforce something he mentioned – The biggest problem for Aussie wine overseas will be the strong Aussie dollar compared to the euro, pound and the USD. This will benefit Spain / France and Italy.

   As to acidity. He has made this point repeatedly, I am still not entirely convinced that dropping total acidity by 0.5 – 1g per litre will suddenly mean critics around the world will start singing the praise of Australian wine. Additionally he have given an average – presumably skewed by the lakes of commodity wine produced in warm climates, and as such I am not sure how useful the number is, though it does add value to his argument.

   It would seem his other prescription is terroir and promoting this. This favours the small producer, who will only ever be able to make small volumes, and the only way they will get to market (overseas) is if they come to the attention of a critic or if a supermarket chain takes a fancy to them. He mentions that it would be almost impossible for a critic to be self funded, hence justifying the need for producers to seek to influence critics!

   Reply
7. 

   Andrew Graham

   November 12, 2009 at 11:07 am

   Thanks for weighing in Edward (and no spelling or grammar mistakes by my reckoning). I, like Jeremy, think it is very healthy to not totally agree with anybody 🙂

   I think we are on the same wavelength with regards to the role of critics though. Small wineries and big wineries both need good reviews. Small simply for the exposure and big to reinforce brand reputations. But wine critics need to be balanced too – championing the small is fine when you have a targeted audience, but for broad (national) appeal you also need to consider the big.

   It's all a balancing act this wine reviewing caper, compounded by both the need for objectivity as well as the desire to express your (subjective) opinions on what tastes good, all wrapped up in a form that is both entertaining accurate and informative. Not to mention the constant challenge of avoiding self indulgent wine wankerism….

   Reply