I really like reading about wine, and I enjoy reading Robert Parker's work. Inevitably, he has become so famous that he frequently comes under attack. An interesting article by Eric Asimov has appeared in the New York Times describing the controversy surrounding Parker. (You may need to register with the NYT to see the text of the article, but registration is free.)
The oddest part of the article is the comment that Hugh Johnson, who is also a very influential wine critic, has apparently compared Robert Parker to George W Bush:
In Mr. Parker's view, the attacks have gone beyond the bounds of civility. "Hugh Johnson compared me to George Bush," he said, almost in wonder. "I'm a great admirer of Hugh, but he really lowered himself significantly to write that. I'm not a dictator of taste, and I'm not an emperor of wine, either.
I love the implied commentary that comparison to the President of the United States is "beyond the bounds of civility." The fact that Parker seems to consider this to be the most hurtful insult of all only raises my respect for this very fair and objective critic of wine. As for Hugh Johnson, whatever you think of Parker, isn't any comparison to Mr. Bush going a little too far?
2 comments:
Good observation Moyey, and how funny!
ash
Bush IS a four letter word. Mr. Parker's restraint is quite admirable. Ric
Post a Comment