Share this:

Regular readers may recall the first indictment and trial carried out by the Wine Tribunal: Lettie Teague, wine writer for the Wall Street Journal and Food & Wine magazine. Her crime: writing too many wine columns from the perspective of wealthy, snobby, full-of-themselves wine collectors.

Let the record show that the court showed mercy and simply admonished her after taking in consideration her overall body of work. However, certain individuals detailed in her writings were found guilty and sentenced to summary execution with a Champagne saber.

(As a side note, Lettie responded to all this with grace and good humor.)

The Wine Tribunal was created to indict, prosecute and pass judgment on individuals and organizations that foster messages about wine appreciation as something intended for rich, type A white men. The Tribunal holds sacred the belief that wine is a simple, hedonistic, joyful part of life. A certain degree of wine “geekness” is excused, but elitist attitudes will be prosecuted to the greatest extent the laws of parody allow.

Before I announce the second indictment, let me provide you with the background of the Tribunal itself. The Tribunal consists of four highly experienced wine lovers who were hypnotized by a past-life medium and whose lives were traced back to royal subjects that frequently drank with the Knights of the Round Table.

The Tribunal may nominate persons to be put on trial, but I alone am Judge and executioner. Testimony from the indicted party is not allowed, as what’s actually published is the sole basis of prosecution. I may waiver between Old Testament severity and tender mercy, but generally speaking, my proclivity is to find the defendant guilty in advance of the hearing.

This is certainly the case for Marvin R. Shanken, publisher of the Wine Spectator magazine. His crimes are too numerous to list, so for purposes of brevity, only the most recent transgression is being considered in this trial.

The photograph on the cover of the current May 31, 2010 Wine Spectator is a $3,500.00+ bottle of wine, specifically 2005 Romanee-Conti by Domaine Romanee-Conti (DRC for short.). No fewer than 18 pages are devoted to this producer whose wines range from $300.00 to $3,500.00 a bottle upon release. Additionally this is Wine Spectator’s second major story covering this Domaine’s wines in the last year.

There is nothing wrong with writing about rare and expensive wines. The crime here is that this “mass circulation” publication consistently highlights wines that are unaffordable and unobtainable to all but a miniscule number of wine fanatics. It is this disproportionate editorial slant that violates the values established by the Tribunal.

The words in the May 31 issue that specifically raised the ire of the Tribunal were the following: “We think you’ll find this report instructive and inspiring. It may even encourage you to splurge on a bottle of DRC! (There are plenty of worse ways to spend a few hundred dollars.)”

Worse ways to spend a few hundred dollars...? Let’s contemplate this…

O.K. Marvin, if ten subscribers cancel their subscription to your magazine… let’s see that’s $49.95 times ten… yes! -- $499.95! Great! -- Now they can all chip in and buy one bottle of wine and each one can drink 2.6 ounces of DRC with a few bucks leftover for bread and cheese. Sounds like a plan I can endorse!

Given this economy, for the nation’s leading wine publication to heavily promote wines at this price point is an unforgivable offense. Champagne saber ready: Off with his head! Off with his head!

Readers of the Wine Spectator often write them letters addressing this very subject. The standard reply is that the magazine covers the entire spectrum of wine. They love to point out the “best buys, best values and top wines under $20.00” reviews they publish. – Hey emperor Shanken thanks for letting me eat cake!

What drives Marvin to such elitism? My theory is that he’s deeply jealous of acclaimed serious wine writers such as Robert Parker, Stephen Tanzer, Allen Meadows and the upcoming John Gilman. For a mass-market publication covering all things wine-related, you rarely if ever, see their names in Wine Spectator print.

Marvin utilizes editorial flashiness to compensate for questionable commercially influenced content. If that sentence isn’t clear, let me re-state it: Winery and importer advertising dollars appear to seep into the magazine’s editorial decisions, in stark contrast to the advertisement-free, subscription only, wine writers mentioned above.

Marvin, before the Champagne sword swoops down on your thick hairy neck, it will first chop up all those expensive cigars you so brazenly chomp on. Also, you may want to pull out a gift bottle of a DRC wine to pair with your last meal.

And dear reader, I have tasted numerous DRC wines over the years including those from top vintages such as 1985 and 1990. And yes they do rank at, or near the top of the finest Burgundies ever produced -- but are they worth their astronomical pricing? In a word: No. There are plenty of better ways to spend a few hundred dollars.