Tue 4 Mar 2008
It’s no surprise that the current issue of Wine Spectator (March 31, 2008) is devoted to the spectacular vintage of 2005 in Bordeaux, which the magazine ranks with such legendary years as 2000, 1990, 1989, 1982 and 1961. It’s no surprise that eight of the top chateaux from Bordeaux’s renowned growing regions merited perfect 100-point scores, with many others in the mid and high 90s. Nor is it a surprise that prices for properties with glittering reputations and impeccable appeal are horrendous. Look at the figures that WS quotes: Ausone $2,000 a bottle; L’Evangile, $260 a bottle (the bargain of this group); Haut-Brion rouge, $930; Haut-Brion blanc $510; Lafleur, $2,000; Leoville Las Cases, $315; Margaux, $1,080; Latour, $1,110; Lafite Rothschild $850; Cheval Blanc $945 and so on. Chateau Petrus comes in at $4,975 a bottle, but before you unlimber your credit card to spring for one of those babies, remember that about $4,224.75 pays for water, while $750.25 pays for the stuff that makes wine, you know, wine. I’m just sayin’.
No, the surprise lies here, in this description, by James Suckling, WS’s longtime Bordeaux correspondent, of Chateau Caronne- Ste.-Gemme 2005, a $17 Cru Bourgeois wine from Haut Medoc. This is listed under the “Smart Buys” segment of the magazine’s 
“Buying Guide” section. Here’s what Suckling says about the wine, scoring it 91: “Offers raisin and dried fruit, with very ripe fruit aromas and coffee and oak undertones. Full-bodied, with velvety tannins and a long finish. This is pumped up, but I like the flamboyant character.”
“Raisins”! “Pumped up”! “Flamboyant”! What’s scary about these notices concerning Bordeaux 2005 isn’t really the prices — let the plutocrats and robber barons sort that out in their clubhouses and playgrounds — but that the Bordeaux critic for WS tasted a red wine from Bordeaux, described it in a fashion that makes it sound like a hot-climate zinfandel from Lodi, and liked it. Somewhere in there is a hint of the beginning of the end.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
I have tasted a couple 2005s in the $10-$15 range. They were pretty good. I’m glad to hear that though, as it makes me feel better about keeping my money in my wallet. If France wants to sell raisins and oak, they can sell them to someone else.
March 4th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
JS, who has won the hearts of Italy, must be winning the hearts of Aquitaine with descriptions like this.
Let’s face it, it’s the sort of language that his Faithful Public likes and expects to hear. It’s good for the Suckster. It’s good for business.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Frederick,
In my often skewed view of the world here is how I see what’s happening in the wine world.
You know when you step into a Starbucks (which I’ve done only twice in my life, for good) and you not only have to choose from 6,000 coffee concoctions, you also have to select a size that is fit for a large and ravenous gourmand. The idea behind it all is that, if coffee is good, then coffeee with everything on it must be better, and if that’s good that one should consume ten times as much of it.
That’s what’s happening in the wine world. Wine is sooooo good we ought to pile it on and make it even better. Let’s add more fruit–hell, let’s dry the fruit, people like that–and let’s add more alcohol, more wood, more “flavor.” The more the better!
Humans exposed to more and more become desensitized and so, they seek more on top of more and more.
I’ll bet that those of us happy with pure, lively, simple wines also like plain bagels with a little cream cheese…certainly no raisins!
March 5th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Fred, you once again made my day. I read the WS, and thought, ok, I’m glad I stopped buying Bordeaux almost entirely in 04 cause if I wanted a zinfandel, I’d buy it!
Like Thomas, I want my bagels chewy, not pumped full of air, and no raisins, whipped fantastias of strawberry cream cheese, or microwaved eggs, thank you very much.
We are in a very bad place in this world because more is seen as better. I would love to have a drinking plan that included only wines that were enough–not more, not new, not improved, not pumped up. Just exactly right.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Doc, I love that terminology — wines that were enough, just exactly right. those phrases should be trumpeted to the skies.
March 6th, 2008 at 9:26 am
From my perspective, global raisin-ization aside, Terry nails the the most irksome, specific problem that your piece points out. Think what you will of the culture of points in the Wine Spectacle in general, think what you will of Laube. To me, Suckling is the biggest criminal on the WS payroll. He’s already done more damage to the possibility of interesting wine coming out of Tuscany than any other critic. He’s making slower inroads but having the same effect in Piemonte and elsewhere.
I think his influence may still lag behind the Advocate in Bordeaux, but it’s reviews like this one that really demonstrate that the guy is the epitome of the anti-palate. A viable translation of the review you quoted: “This wine sucks but I like it. 91 points.”
March 6th, 2008 at 10:44 am
“This wine sucks but I like it. 91 points.”
The perfect perspective of a critic.
Many years ago, the American theater critic, John Simon, panned a Liza Minelli show mainly because he doesn’t like her nose. That was the day I realized that critics are relatively useless…
March 7th, 2008 at 10:32 am
I guess the Russian, Chinese and Indian markets are inflating the prices…if you like to drink well and don’t spend a fortune seek for Italy, I still think we has the best quality/price ratio.
LOL
Sponsored by the Italian Commerce Chamber
Buona Bevuta a Tutti
www.de-vino.com
www.de-vino.blogspot.com
March 15th, 2008 at 2:14 am
And I thought 2000 was bad. This is stupid, for lack of a better word
No, it’s not the Asian market (the US spend more dollars on wine than any Asian country). It’s essentially the same thing as the speculation in the oil market. The chateaux set the price that they do because they’re hedging against their neighbors and betting they’ll get buyers (duh, of course they will). The brokers then buy-in because they can’t stand the thought of their clients being the ones left out of the so-called best vintage ever (they also don’t want to risk losing money or their job when they don’t buy-in at the right time and so have to get the wine later down the line at an even higher price to save their skins). Ah, group think…
I stopped buying Bordeaux. I’ll wait until they come around in another 10 years to stock up.
By the way, FK, I have some catching up to do here!
March 15th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
You do, Miss K., we’ve missed you …
March 16th, 2008 at 12:02 am
Sometimes I wonder where the time goes!
The more attention WS et. al. lavishes on big wines that we don’t like anyways, and the more the general public gravitates towards them, the more good wine will be left for the rest of us. Call me greedy, but I’m okay with that
April 7th, 2008 at 1:55 am
Greetings!
Wonderful ideas presented here! Has anyone who posted here actually tried the Caronne-Ste. Gemme 2005?
I am certainly no fan of most major critics, their palettes, or their adjectives, similes, and metaphors.
But I’ve tried this wine, and liked it. The pre-arrival cost was $14 (in California), and for a “2005 Bordeaux”, hey.
Warm regards and best wishes to all!
April 22nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Hey…haven’t stopped by the blog in a while, and I’m glad you’re still putting out provocative posts!
I’ve only had the 2003 of this wine, but it was not particularly over-ripe or raisined (if anything, rather lean and tannic). Others have had the 2005 and actually liked it. So…I’m hoping.thinking this review may be critic overstatement? I hope.