"Have a look at the banner at the top of his site advertising the “Grand World Tour”. He is about to swoop in, like a vinous-breasted eagle, to a venue near you headlining at events called ‘Gala Hedonist’s Dinner’, ‘Up Close and Personal’ (oh hello) and ‘Masterclass’. These wine events aren’t for the faint hearted – the food will be rich, the wines rare and expensive and the prices high. Good on those (or me, maybe, possibly if I can squeeze the expense past my scrutinising wife) who have the good fortune to attend".
Venerated by his followers across
the world, he is the omnipresent, all-powerful Godfather of the industry. His
large, stuttering frame towers over it like a monument, his influence
undiminished and his status rarely challenged since he made his mark in 1982.
In spite of his elevated position, he hasn’t historically sought a high profile
even if he’s had one. He has slowly and discreetly built his status (and
undoubted financial success) on the back of painstaking independence, commitment
and attention to detail. Mario Puzo (the author of that masterpiece The
Godfather) would have appreciated Parker’s stature and influence.
Some
say that Parker pioneered the whole wine-critic industry. That he was
responsible for raising the public’s interest in wine and putting many
producers on the map, and he certainly has a point of view which interests wine
lovers the world over. He is also a man who clearly loves wine and the people
who make it. This passion comes across in spades and a reason why I have respect
for him and affection for his site.
But
he is also a figure who polarizes opinion. There are many who dislike his
influence, tasting notes and scores, and who feel they have a damaging effect
on the industry.
Have
a read of his recently published article on January 18th when he explodes into
a stream of pent-up vitriol against the “perpetration of myths, half-truths,
innuendoes and at times outright falsehoods”. The article is the literary
equivalent of an inebriated wino after a long day's tasting, ‘wind-milling’ with both arms against all
those who have challenged and offended his way of thinking over the last 35
years. By the way, I do think it is odd that he boasts about his “35 years of
wine-tasting experience” when he is 66 years old (i.e. 53% of his life). What
was he doing for the other 31 years? I am 46 and have been drinking wine for
about 30 of those (i.e. 65%), starting with Blue Nun back in the 80’s when I was
growing up in Bath, UK. Does that make me a greater expert than him? Yes, I
believe it does…
As
this article and some of his tasting notes illustrate, he is often criticized
for the absoluteness of his opinions and his unwavering self-confidence which
have an undue effect on how people make wine. I hear that some of the ovine
Bordelais producers fawn obsequiously (allegedly) before the Parker brand when
he or one of his entourage comes into town, such is their subjugation to his
eponymous business. This is clearly not Parker’s fault but one of the
unintended consequences of his success.
His
(unintended) influence on wine prices can be significant and there are
(allegedly) growers who alter the flavor of their wines to win better scores
(destemming, cold maceration, over-extraction, excessive oak) and therefore
gain higher prices. Some believe that Parker has a habit for marking styles of
certain wines higher than others (e.g. big ripe, oaked Rhones compared to a
lighter style of Loire red).
The
term “Parkerisation” of wines has been coined which is a term to describe how
wines have been stylized to suit Parker’s palate which creates very polished, standardised
flavours across the world, weakening a wine’s identity and place of origin. Some
feel that he has turned a symbol of individuality, community and culture into
an insipid, bland, homogenized, homeless product.
I
am sure that some myths about Parker are embellished. I am also sure that he
never set out to achieve this or fame or fortune. He set out to transform the
whole wine critic approach because he felt critics were biased and benefiting
from the largesse of the industry.
It
was Parker who started writing extensively about wine without an interest in selling
it and he created the 100-point scale which is now used widely by may critics.
He took the contrary view about Bordeaux’s 1982 vintage which he rated highly
and he proved to be correct.
His
and his team’s output is prolific. They produce an issue every 2 months which
consists of 2500+ wine reviews and tasting notes from wines right across the
world. Their notes are extensive as is his knowledge of the regions and
growers. This accumulation of knowledge must mean that Parker’s site has to be
the most extensive database on earth.
That
his site and information source are impressive is not in doubt. What I do
question is the ability of his team to carry on the mantle and influence which Parker
has built and exerted over 30 years. Like any business (particularly
knowledge-based ones) or family with a dominant figurehead, transition to a new
leader will be very difficult and fraught with risk. Parker is a product of his
time and when he goes, then his brand can’t possibly retain its exalted status
and influence, can it? I don’t think people place nearly as much importance to
the opinions of his colleagues’ notes (this is based on anecdotal evidence
rather than anything scientific) and this could reduce further as he grows
older and his influence in the business wanes. It would take 30 years and the
repeat of a unique (by definition, not possible) set of circumstances for
another wine critic to achieve what Parker has achieved. I don’t think it isn’t
going to happen.
Parker
has recently sold part of his business to external investors and brought on
some new reviewers, presumably with a view to scale the business, reduce the
reliance on Parker and make some money for themselves. Call me a cynic but
having worked at the hard edge of business for nearly 25 years, that is what
investors will want, whatever they say now.
It
remains to be seen how successful this strategy will be, and whether people
will keep re-subscribing as Parker’s contribution reduces, or whether they will
have to change the business model. What the site does have it a huge database
of old vintages tasted and written about by Parker, and these will always be of
interest to a serious wine lover. At $99 pa, it is pretty good value.
Have a look at the banner at the top of his site advertising the “Grand World Tour”. He is about to swoop in, like a vinous-breasted eagle, to a venue near you headlining at events called ‘Gala Hedonist’s Dinner’, ‘Up Close and Personal’ (oh hello) and ‘Masterclass’. These wine events aren’t for the faint hearted – the food will be rich, the wines rare and expensive and the prices high. Good on those (or me, maybe, possibly if I can squeeze the expense past my scrutinising wife) who have the good fortune to attend.
Two things strike me from reading their website:
Two things strike me from reading their website:
1.
These have the finger prints of Parker’s new investors all
over them. Extending the ‘Parker brand’ and maximizing revenue will be right at
the forefront of their minds.
2.
Parker must have a seriously strong constitution, able to
withstand enormous quantities of rich food and fine wine. Each stage reads like
a month-long, continuous bachelor party. He will need a serious detox after
this tour.
The
irony of Parker is that while he set out to stop the largesse of the industry
by being the independent ‘voice of the consumer’, he has inadvertently had some
opposite effects. He has become such a powerful critic his high scores raise prices,
making the producers more money. This is turn makes them unaffordable to the
majority of the very consumers Parker set out to protect in the first place.
He
clearly didn’t set out to achieve this and he guards his independence and
principles fiercely but it is what the economists would call an ‘unintended
consequence’. Nothing in life is simple is it?
Whilst
many complain about his influence, I still very much enjoy his website and
reading about some of the greatest wines the world has ever known. I love his
passion and communication and writing style because he makes me want to taste
the wines and visit the growers. Conversely to JancisRobinson.com, I do spend a
lot of time surfing his web site.
In
addition to his database, his site offers daily wine news (via a link to
winebusiness.com), weekly wine buys, best buys and wine education. The also
uses video to communicate its knowledge although this is still fairly
unsophisticated and not at the level of jamessuckling.com.
His
tasting notes do use some flowery language but they are clear and easy to read.
Like Molesworth, even if the writer is guilty of over writing, they are easy on
the ear. Here is an example of Beaucastel’s Chateauneuf du Pape Roussanne
Vieilles Vignes, 2009:
It
is a staggering wine of extraordinary complexity and richness. Aromas of rose
petals, exotic fruits such as mango and nectarine intermixed with peach
marmalade, honeysuckle and crushed pineapple emerge from this full-bodied white
along with good acidity and lavish amounts of fruit and glycerin. It offers a
nearly out of body wine tasting experience.
Here
are my scores for Robert and robertparker.com:
Robert
Parker and erobertparker.com
|
Generalist
web site suitable for the trade, expert amateur and enthusiastic amateur.
|
Criteria
|
Score
|
Comments
|
Web
site look, functionality and ease of use: up to 15 points
|
13
|
Very impressive. It has some
useful distinct features such as bulletin boards, results of public tastings
and restaurant reviews.
|
Ability
to inform the consumer (keep them up to date on news and events): up to 15
points
|
13
|
The site linked to winebusiness.com
to provide this information on a regular basis.
|
Ability
to educate the consumer (provide depth and breadth of content): up to 15
points
|
13
|
The site has excellent depth and
breadth of content. It is right up there with the best sites although its use
of video is quite weak. Not quite as strong as WS or Jancis for breadth. Due
to the limited time I have read them, I am also not yet convinced by the
quality of the new critics who have joined Parker recently.
|
Ability
to entertain the consumer (so the information and education is easy
to
assimilate and enjoy): up to 15 points
|
12
|
This site is more about educating
and informing than entertaining although Parker’s writing style is excellent
and easy to read. It uses all the media (articles, blogs, videos) in a simple
way so is capable of communicating effectively. It could improve a lot on its
use of videos – quite limited and not very slick.
|
Quality
of tasting notes: up to 15 points
|
14
|
Parker writes very eloquently and
has incredible knowledge.
|
Overall
impression: ability to communicate with target audience, using both online
and print media: up to 25 points
|
23
|
It is a very impressive site and
source of information.
|
Total
|
88
|
A grade
|
