K2′S ZEN OF WINE (MY KUNG-FU IS STRONG)

Today has been one of those strange days that you are never really sure how to take. You just go through it like you’re watching a movie or you’re playing a video game, and while you have time and energy vested in what is going on around you, you are ambivalent as to any of the consequences.

I hate to get into all the “Phenomenology” of things on what is a gorgeous day like today (at least here in the Cincinnati area), but this is where I live today – swimming in the Zen vomit of some nefarious New Age guru. The unofficial kickoff of summer begins this weekend, with backyards afire with flaming charcoal brickettes and charring carcasses of varying species emanating glorious scents of intermingling spices and bug sprays, all while backyard daredevils light bags of cheap fireworks, and drink cases of beer and cases of wine and cases of spirits (which is all good for business here), all to commemorate our fallen heroes of wars past and present.

I don’t mean to sound glib, it’s just that I’ve been particularly perplexed by some of the things going on. In reading one of Wine Enthusiast writer Steve Heimoff’s blog posts the other day, his discussion of wine scores turned into a firestorm of comments both in support and in dissent of the “100-point” scale. Those who have read me for a while are aware of my own level of disdain for wine scores, but I’ve gotten to a point where I am not really so concerned about them; after all, it’s just wine.

Yet it is funny to me how the critics who use the system are continually forced to defend them. As more and more people begin to understand wine – its infinite supply of variety, the stylistic differences, countries of origin, winemaking techniques – the state of wine is far different than it was 30 years ago, or even 20 or 10 years ago. With the Internet, the deluge of wine bloggers, wine magazines, wine-related TV shows, innovative restaurant wine lists, at-home wine tastings, in-store wine tastings, it is truly a more informed, more adventurous consumer landscape.

My little regional blog reviews wines – I am actually getting samples sent to me now, along with all the ones I taste each week as part of my job as a retail wine buyer – yet I balk at the thought of using the 100-points scale, simply because I think quantifying an experience is like running in circles; you don’t go anywhere.

I respect Mr. Heimoff immensely, even if I have fired off a few volatile comments his way over the years. He is one of the most honest wine writers out there, along with Charlie Olken of Connoisseur’s Guide, and David Schildknect of the Wine Advocate, and he isn’t afraid to speak his mind, as evident in this post. I find it interesting though that the mention of varieties such as Chenin Blanc and Albarino wouldn’t merit high scores in their grading scales for varying reasons, and the rationale all gets murky to me.

I’ve decided to go my own way with reviewing wines, make it as informative and as entertaining as I can, speaking with my voice and my experience. If the critics think I’m a hack, screw ‘em. I don’t blog or review wines for money, prominence or prestige – I do it because it is a natural extension of a job I love doing each and every day. It is a way for me to communicate why I brought a wine into the store, or why I think a customer is going to love it. It is a way for me to make manifest the two things I love doing in life, together – wine and writing. I am not in it for accolades, or extra income. I just do it because I love to do it.

This is my kung-fu, and it is strong.