Comments on: Dear Ezio Rivella and Thomas Matthews, please give me a call…

By: Vinograf » Neposedné hrabičky 43/08

Vinograf » Neposedné hrabičky 43/08 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:03:29 +0000

[...] o Fuligniho Brunellu, ve kterém vinař obdivuje rustikálnost a osobitost Sangiovese. Na blogu Do Bianchi se navíc objevil post, který se snaží vysvětlit, houfně opakované názory protistran (tak [...]

By: Francesco

Francesco — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:16:45 +0000

It doesn’t apply better than in this case: in vino (disputandum) veritas.

Il cavalier Rivella tradito da troppa foga.

By: Thomas Matthews

Thomas Matthews — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:12:55 +0000

I think Ezio Rivella has earned the right to his opinions, whether or not I agree or disagree.

I personally would prefer that Brunello remain 100 percent Sangiovese, as there are other DOC’s for blends. But Wine Spectator believes that the Brunello producers should set their own rules for their wines.

We also believe that it is unwise and ultimately futile to try to regulate wine style. While tradition has its virtues, science, art and taste all evolve, and wine evolves with them.

Thomas Matthews

By: vocativo

vocativo — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:11:31 +0000

I know another man in Italy who is used to say that the quotation is out of context… or that his words are misunderstood… Anyway, nothing to be upset or amazed. “Omnia (im)munda (im)mundi”…

By: Franco Ziliani

Franco Ziliani — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:44:05 +0000

Mr. Matthews, do you agree that is upsetting that the past A.D. of the greater Brunello di Montalcino winery, Banfi, don’t think that Sangiovese grapes is not enough and needs some other grapes to produce a great Brunello? Eric Asimov quote was absolutely correct. Re Mr. Suckling taste and preferences about Brunello is a very long and not so simple discourse… We have the demonstration by the two Brunello 100/100, according to Mr. Suckling ideas, of course!

By: Thomas Matthews

Thomas Matthews — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:32:58 +0000

Jeremy Parzen, PhD.,

Neither Ezio nor I said the quote was incorrect.

However, the implication given by Eric’s use of it (though not so much here in this blog), was Ezio somehow knew that Wine Spectator does not believe a wine made purely of Sangiovese can ever be “perfect”. That is clearly not the case; James Suckling has given 100-point ratings to two Brunellos, which, we believe, are 100 percent Sangiovese, and Suckling is on record as arguing for the inherent quality and great potential of the grape.

What Ezio’s statement seems to mean is that HE does not believe Sangiovese by itself can make a perfect wine, which is why he is arguing for the right to blend other varieties in Brunello. But that is Ezio’s opinion about Sangiovese, not Wine Spectator’s, and to bring Wine Spectator into the argument is to take Ezio’s statement out of context.

Thomas Matthews