An icon a day: Lafite 1982
Château Lafite 1982 Pauillac, Bordeaux
Considering that we have here a combination of perhaps Bordeaux's top property and a truly great vintage, you'd expect great things of this wine. To be honest, it is a bit disappointing, although it's certainly a good drink. The nose is warm and spicy with some evolved meaty, earthy notes. The palate is earthy and intense with lovely spiciness: soft, concentrated, meaty and spicy. Nice density here, but it lacks real focus and purity. Just a disappointing bottle? 92/100 (tasted at The Sampler)
Labels: Bordeaux
posted by Jamie @ 5:44 PM
23 comments
links to this post
23 Comments:
Sorry, I have had to delete some comments. They weren't relevant to the thread and they were, basically, quite mean. I hate to have to do this, but at some point there's a line that has been crossed, and I'm not going to allow the comments facility on my own blog to be used by people posting without using their names to have a dig at me. I'm a bit sad that I've clearly created some enemies out there, and I'd be happy to discuss any issues if people were to (a) use their full, real names so they are accountable for their comments, and (b) show just a little courtesy in their approach. Sermon over!
"Quite mean"?
Jamie, if you really consider yourself to be a journalist, I suggest you develop a thick skin pretty damn quickly.
These attempts to try and control the uncontrollable are misguided in the extreme.
You should check out the columnists on the nationals and see the criticism they get - they don't run off crying and delete half of the comments.
There was no crying. And I didn't delete half the comments. I deleted them all. And in their entirety.
It's up to others to decide whether I'm a journalist or not. I see myself as an enthusiast who drinks a lot of wine, and writes about it.
And what's more, far from being uncontrollable, comments on this blog are really, really easy to delete. I just deleted three, in about 8 seconds. Wham!
Good Jamie, I just hope that eventually you will insist on a real names policy although I appreciate this may be difficult to enforce.
Is it feasible for you to at least insist that each poster be registered with their name and email address even though you may still allow them to post anonymously?
It is possible to use a real names policy - I think Linden's site supports it.
An interesting point as to whether Jamie's operating here as a "journalist". I'm not sure, but would like to think that a blog is a little bit more personal and that readers should be a little more polite (even if the actual points they wish to make are controversial). On the other hand, people in glasshouses, etc....
I suspect, though, that it would be showing high ethical standards to say who paid for the tasting (not just this one).
Mmmm. Tricky.
On the top of the blog, on the right-hand side, it says:
The web log of wine journalist Jamie Goode.
Jamie, just deleting threads because they criticise you is absolutely pathetic, and shows you up as desperately insecure.
Jamie's blog - Jamie's call. What's with the need to be offensive on a very helpful wine blog? It really is possible to disagree without being insulting. John V. Bp.
I'm happy to allow critical threads here - in fact, I welcome them, because you can often learn from peoples' criticism, even when it is meant spitefully. For example, I have learned that readers would like more disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. That's valuable to know. But the people who convinced me were courteously critical. They showed that it's possible to make a point, using their real name, without being deliberately mean and offensive.
Anon, your post, where you say that deleting threads is 'pathetic' and shows me up as 'deeply insecure' has gone beyond the bounds of courtesy. It's plain rude, and quite insulting. I'm sure you realize this. In future, I'll delete posts like this because they ruin the whole tone of the conversation here. I'm sure you could make your point more politely.
Just because you choose to share your views does not entitle idiots to be disrespectful or discourteous.
You are absolutely right to decide whether or not to allow trolls into your home. If they have an interesting point of view then we all gain - if they just want to vent then cut them down.
The purpose of comments on a blog is to expand the discussion, not reduce it to a series of "fxxx you's".
Don't worry Jamie - there are a lot of deeply jealous anonymous idiots out there.
Yes, you're right, my fellow Anonymous.
That's the only reason we criticise Jamie, just because we're jealous.
Wise up.
Perhaps the abusive anonymous comments were from Eric de Rothschild?
anything about wine today?
Bravo Jamie! I think you have put up with a lot of unnecessarily spiteful comments from sundry anonymous contributors and frankly it was making reading your blog quite uncomfortable.
"Wise up" - hmmmm...clearly a person of low intelligence......how sad....a failed blogger?
Nice attempt to sidestep the point I made, well done.
How about dealing with the point? Do you think people only ever criticise Jamie because they're jealous?
Anonymous - you clearly wants to have the last word, but I'm baffled as to why you waste your time here? Is it out of some notion of public service?
To be frank, you sound suspiciously like the sort of person who goes to restaurants and complains that the food's crap - and such small portions.
Confused...
Jamies blog is great but deleting comments that are not pure spam is the wrong policy for many reasons. Nothing like an Internet drama, it actually generates traffic, think about Jamie.
And yes disallow anonymous postings.
Jamie's blog is great but deleting comments that are not pure spam is the wrong policy for many reasons. Nothing like an Internet drama, it's like acidity in wine, keeps it alive.
Not sure about the last analogy. The preceding hoo-ha is more like volatile acidity or even vinegar. The quality of debate disappears up its fundament like a kind of dismal graffiti.
What might have interesting is a discussion about the relative price of some of these icon wines. Lafite, from recollection,is a couple of grand (and the rest)per bottle which is a lot of wonga if you are not experiencing fanfarades and celestial choirs. Although the original Greek notion of icon means an image, the current meaning i.e. an object of uncritical devotion is pretty ridiculous when applied to wine which has, by definition, its ups and downs. Icon has subsequently come to mean a commodity so sought after and expensive (having been Parkerised) that it becomes a brand in itself.
My only problem with a real names policy is that there is absolutely no way I will ever remember the bloody thing. WP is easy, as the brower saves your login - Google account doesn't do this. Basically, for me that means I don't post, as I can't be bothered with the lost password business.
Mark T (WP)
Mbt shoesare selected, buy Mbt sport black and Mbt Chapa, you will save 84%
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home