In the past few years, I have noticed that wine scores seem to be creeping up, with many more that are 97 points and over, and several 2009 Bordeaux that have been given 100 point scores. Really? Is there really that much perfection? And do these opinions really matter?
I use scores strictly as a guide and prefer some critics and publications over others, somewhat based on whether a critic’s taste in wine is similar to mine. I find that if a critic generally prefers wines that are vastly different from my own preference, I tend to have less interest in that person’s opinion. Likewise, I am becoming more leery of critics who casually hand out too many high scores. I feel that too much perfection is just not realistic. Everything has flaws, and that is a good thing. Perfection should be elusive. That’s why it is perfection! Winemaking is a challenge and a science unto itself. If merit is rewarded too nonchalantly, can that not lead to complacency?
This being said, I take a critic or publication more seriously when he or she is a bit stingy with scoring wines tasted. And, just because a critic says something is fantastic, it may not be to me or to you. Wine is very personal. What one person likes, another may hate. There are great wines out there in every price range, region and grape that are worth trying. Some are better than others. Some days are better than others. Some life experiences are better than others. But isn’t that the way life is?
Until next time, à votre santé!
©2012 by Christine Humphrey