skip to main |
skip to sidebar
When you annoy people in the name of comedy, you get letters. Slinging unwanted barbs at people can be dangerous work, ask any porcupine. But it ain't satire unless you ruffle some feathers, and HoseMaster of Wine has ruffled more feathers than Big Bird masturbating. I thought I might share some of those angry epistles with my loyal readers.
After I referred to Mr. Jess Jackson as "Huckleberry" a few times I received this note:
Dear Mr. Hosemaster,
I'm going to hunt you down and beat you like a Fred Furth voodoo doll. Your implication that I have lost my grip on reality is libelous, insulting and I own thirty wineries. None of which are currently making any money, Sweetcheeks, and I resent the fact that you say they are. Just where do you get off saying that Murphy-Goode wines taste like the grapes want revenge? I bought a perfectly nice blogger, Hardy Burgundy, or some stupid fucking name like that, and look at all the good that's done me. I can't even race the mule. I love mule races. No money in them, not like owning thoroughbreds like Verite, but it's fun to watch those big stupid animals like Hardy Breakfast run in circles. But, hey, don't try to confuse me, I'm here to make a point. I own thirty wineries. Thirty. Calling me Huckleberry rolls off me like integrity rolls of Marvin Shanken, another mule I own, and a good one. I'll buy every blogger alive, don't think I won't. I got the money right here in my pants next to where I keep my keys to the thirty (THIRTY) wineries I own. Which don't make money no matter what you say in your stupid blog. Hey, don't I own you as well as that Hardy Handshake fucker? I need to ask my wife. She must be around here somewhere. She's not in my pants. Hell, she's probably at one of the thirty wineries I own and you don't, Hosemaster of Shit.
Sincerely, Huck
I've taken a disproportionate amount of cheap shots at Alder Yarrow whose blog Vinography wins Best Wine Blog every year, which says more about wine blogging than anything I could say. (Sheesh, there I go writing like Alder, who punctuates like an orangutan.)
Ron,
While I very much appreciate your background in wine, your rise from lowly comedy writer to sommelier, the passion you've shown for the bounty of the grapes, the wit and eloquence with which you skewer wines, the wine business, wine bloggers and people with deformities, mostly of the mammary persuasion, your mission to redefine wine blogging, an admirable mission, a Sonoma Mission, if you'll pardon my attempts at your trademarked humor, by making me a personal target leaves me ill at ease.
I came to the wine business late in life, some would say so late I missed that ferry, and the one after it. But I've been posting religiously and frequently about wine for five years. I want to thank, first of all, my wife, whose patience and understanding have been astonishing given that writing about wine is not my main occupation! I know, I know, it's hard to believe! Wine is not my main career. How could it be? That would be like a brain surgeon operating with hand tools. Or like a tennis player with no balls. Or like Kevin Costner. My blog is among the most widely read and admired, especially by wineries who know I learned my lesson from my mother who used to always say, as mothers do, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. And if you say something nice, expect free stuff." Aren't Moms always right?
I am ill at ease because I can't think of anything nice to say to you. You're mean. You make my tummy all woozy. When your blog comes up in my Google Alerts, oh, God, don't you love Google Alerts?, I get all sweaty and I want to go downstairs and talk to my wife, only she's not there, she's just out with her girlfriends, she'll be home before I'm done posting Vinography and I'll once again be able to guess what wine she's been drinking from her breath and the stains on her dress, and people still say I can't taste blind. Then I read your mean remarks and it just makes me wish I'd never gotten into the wine business. Just stop. Go after that BiggerThanYourHead guy, he's the real doo-doo head. Sorry, Mom.
Sincerely, Alder
And I couldn't believe it when this note showed up in my email.
Dear Mr. Washman,
As publisher of Wine Spectator I take offense when you call it, "a lifestyle publication for those dweebs who sorely need to get a life and get a style." We take great pride in our reader demographics, which skew towards the upwardly mobile, the active, and those who read at a fourth grade level. So, basically, people who run for City Council. Compare that with your readers who wouldn't know a Rolex from a Timex, a Cuban cigar from a horse turd, or a bottle of Hardy Rodenstock Jefferson Bordeaux from a fake. I knew it was a fake all along, by the way, I just didn't say anything. See Thomas Matthews' article on "The Billionaire's Vinegar" in the next issue of Wine Spectator--OK, OK, we have timeliness issues, but we're working on it. It runs right after the article about Jess Jackson's search for a Social Media Director at Murphy-Goode and the piece about William Foley buying Michael Jackson's remains.
And I don't much appreciate the potshots at my weight. "Marvin is so big that last year the tent for the Napa Valley auction was one of his old pair of underpants." "Marvin was a big hero at Sebastiani Winery when he noticed a leaking foudre and quickly secured it with his belt." And, "After Marvin's last visit to Cuba to pick up cigars, 79 people used him to illegally sail to Florida." What is your stupid blog, The Marvin Shanken Roast? (ED. NOTE--which would be enough to feed the city of Florence.) Get off my back, Hosepunk, or I'll sick Laube, Kramer, Steiman, and Suckling on you. Worse than that, I'll give you a lifetime subscription to Wine Enthusiast. See how you like that.
Sincerely,
Marvelous Marv Shanken
And those are just three out of the gigantic pile of hate mail the ol' Hosemaster receives! You should read the one I got from Robert Mondavi, postmarked Hell! Maybe next time...
The number of articles and studies done on wine and health is astronomical. I've always sort of wondered about this fascination for proving that wine benefits us. We know that it doesn't. We know that we drink too much and then graciously act as case studies for crash test dummies. We know that it harms our kidneys and livers and makes us sleep with people we'd otherwise touch only with oven mitts. We know that it kills millions of brain cells, and, worse, as a corollary, creates hundreds of wine blogs. Yet, being human, we insist that it's good for us. In moderation, as though anyone practices moderation. Moderation is like birth control--it's for other people. People who don't want to be on "Maury." We rig endless clinical studies so that the results say wine is good for us. We know the studies are bogus, but we believe them anyway. Like we believe wine publications that accept advertising are objective. Like we believe wineries when they say they don't filter. Like we believe "organic" on Safeway produce.
But the studies about drinking wine continue. Here are some of the latest findings.
In a recent study, drinking wine was shown to eliminate halitosis. An astute observer noticed that Alder Yarrow had the freshest breath despite unmitigated and frequent buttkissing. This lead to the study. A similar study concluded that wine not only relieved halitosis, it also removed women's mustaches. That study was done on walruses.
When fed a steady stream of expensive Napa Valley Cabernets, mice overestimated the size of their penises by a factor of three. Mice fed Shenandoah Vally Zinfandel started a boys choir.
In a test done on Rhesus monkeys it was discovered that the primates fell into two categories according to the amount of wine consumed. The monkeys who drank less wine were more likely to be aggressive and warlike. The monkeys who drank steadily and moderately were more likely to be the Rhesus Peaces.
People who consumed moderate to heavy amounts of wine were shown to be far more immune to Swine Flu even though they slept with far more pigs. Many became Swine Connoisseurs.
A large and comprehensive study showed that people who drank a lot of wine on a daily basis usually died peacefully in their sleep. Not like the other people in the car.
Another study showed that there is a significant correlation between moderate consumption of wine and the belief in ones ability to speak foreign languages. After three glasses of wine white people often believe they can speak Ebonics.
Moderate consumption of wine has been shown to lower your risk of catching fly balls. This is good news for the flies.
Oh, I could go on. But, really, all this academic hooey trying to prove wine is part of a healthy lifestyle is stupid and basically wrong. Drinking wine doesn't improve your health, it improves your attitude about your health. Just look at the people you know who drink a lot of wine, who drink if for a living or as a hobby, they're all sallow, bloodshot-eyed, out of shape people several teeth short of a full grimace. This is the picture of health? Who cares? Not one of us drinks wine for his health, not one of us. We drink it because it tastes good, and because it gets us drunk. Saying you drink wine as part of a healthy lifestyle is like saying you read Playboy for the interviews. Like saying you had a vasectomy to lose a little weight. Like saying you eat panty shields for the fiber.
Wineries, the wine industry, promote wine drinking as part of a healthy diet. Oh brother, who buys that crap? Didn't they used to sell cigarettes the same way? Look where that got the tobacco companies. Beer gets it right. It's fun to get drunk! Gorgeous babes are drawn to drinkers. Drinking is democratic--anyone can do it and look stupid. Time for wineries to get on that bandwagon.
It's time once again for my collection of wine wisdom culled from countless wine blogs. I learn so much as I surf the Net reading all the many and wise bloggers. Much of this will seem trivial, perhaps useless, but, in fact, much of what is really interesting about wine is trivial. Of course, in a real sense, everything about wine is trivial. What passes for debate on wine blogs is truly just the mindless yammering of asylum inmates convinced that their delusions are reality and that convincing others of that is paramount. In fact, if you read the comments section of blogs in the voice of, say, Shepard Smith, or some other professional psychopath, they actually start to make sense in a pathetic way. And it's a fun party game! Not my stable of commentators, of course, I'm talking about other blogs. If I have any commentators left. Anyhow, more wine wisdom from the blogosphere.
Not every wine region in France is subject to Appellation laws. In a few places you are required to marry your sister or first cousin as designated by the Appalachian rules. This is true in Burgundy.In Italy, winemakers often determine if grapes are ready to be harvested by throwing them against the wall to see if they stick.Native yeast prefer to be known as Fungi Americans.
Pinot Noir is distantly related to Liberace.
Many traditional French fishermen age their catch in expensive barrels but have to be careful they don't get a rash from the poisson oak. When finished the barrels are then sold to Sterling.
The most difficult part of the M.S. exam is the obstacle course. Most candidates are unable to climb Larry Stone Right without pitons.
Taste is 70% smell, 30% body odor.
Organic vineyards are allowed to use tiny roach motels for phylloxera.
The person who makes wine is a vintner, the person who makes barrels is a cooper, the person who makes numbers up about wine is an idiot.
"Chateauneuf-du-Pape" means "new home of David Ortiz."
Sancerre is a highly effective douche. Pouilly-Fume is great for destroying ant nests.
Walla Walla is best known for beriberi, tsetse flies and Russ Meyer starlets. Walla Walla is Native American for "Nice gazongas." Left, natives of Walla WallsMuch like the brandy for Port, all Oregon Pinot Noir is the same and is aged for a year in the Spruce Goose.
Wines that are unfiltered are a greater risk for cancer.
Scientists have proven that grapes can feel pain, especially when planted in the Malibu mountains.
In the 1855 Classification of Bordeaux there were actually Eight Growths, but two Growths were surgically removed and the other turned out just to be gas. Chateau Pavie is that Eighth Growth.
Robert Parker is still dead, but is planning a new book on the wines of Purgatory. They're a lot like Madeira.
All the Champagne bottles aging in caves in France laid end to end would nearly encircle Marvin Shanken.
An Homage to Tom WarkEvery now and then I come across a wine blog that has a totally amazing and wonderful voice. I may not agree with everything she says, she has a way of talking too much and about things she doesn't understand, like the pressure I've been under lately, but Millie Ennial of WineWiped has a voice, loud and screechy, but a voice. I think she represents the best intentions of wine bloggers, she writes with passion and sincerity and knows enough to edit it out.
When did you begin blogging and why?
I began in late 1996. There weren't any blogs then, at least not on the Internet, so I wrote copious wine tasting notes on a roll of toilet tissue, a la Jack Kerouac. That's where my blog name comes from, WineWiped. Sadly my old blogs were destroyed in a food poisoning accident. I started to blog because I have something interesting to say about wine. And I say it over and over.
In two sentences, describe the focus of your blog.
Obtaining free wine. Obtaining free wine.
What sets your blog apart from the pack?
I have no interest in learning about wine, just writing about wine. I don't believe you have to know a lot about wine to be a wine blogger, that's just the same tired old elitism that's ruined the wine business for decades. I mean, really, when you want to learn about wine, about what wine to choose, are you going to listen to the same old guys who've been writing about wine for thirty years or are you going to ride the wave of democratization and listen to a gal who really loves the stuff. Oh, and I love kitties.
How would you characterize the growth in readership since you began your blog?
It's grown a lot since the Charmin days. Is this where I lie about how many hits my blog gets every month? 25,000. Many of them incarcerated.
Do you accept samples for review?
Wine, food, urine...whatever. What kind of moron doesn't accept samples? But I never promise a good review. Why, that wouldn't be ethical! But like all wine bloggers, I can promise a profoundly inexperienced and ignorant review, and that works out best for everyone. I don't really have the background or experience to have tasted widely, and my Charmin notes are somewhere in a septic tank, where they belong, so I just wing it. And I love wine. Rarely met one I didn't like. But don't worry, if one comes along I don't like I sure as hell won't tell anyone. Again, simple blogger ethics.
What kind of wine rating/review system do you use, and why?
I use the one-ply, two-ply and Ultra-Soft system because I think it expresses how most people feel about wine. A one-ply wine is fine but a little rough. Two-ply is very satisfying, putting it between your cheeks is memorable. And Ultra-Soft, well, those are wines you want to take extra time with, wines that make you flush with joy.
How do you fit the maintenance of your wine blog into your daily schedule?
I don't edit, I don't spellcheck, I don't fact check, I rarely read my comments and I don't think very long or hard about what I write. So it's easy.
Have you utilized any particular techniques to successfully market your blog?
Every post has a provocative title so that it pops up in search engines more often. This month I've posted, "Naked Cheerleaders," "Latest Celebrity Sex Tape," and "Grannies with Trannies." The last one got the coveted Ultra-Soft rating.
In your view, how, if at all, is wine blogging different than traditional wine writing for print?
Wine blogging is more better.
Which other wine blogs do you read regularly?
The list is almost too long! OK, I read Vinography for the pretty photos and because Alder knows how to get free handouts better than a legless Indian beggar. And I always check in on 1WineDude because he never uses any big words. And I love to read the blog over at Mutineer Magazine because it takes me back to when I was in grammar school and the unpopular kids had their own newspaper. BiggerThanYourHead is a must read, I'd say, particularly if you have a sleep disorder or feel a strong desire to experience waterboarding. I used to read HoseMaster of Wine, but he's become so bitter, like the finish of a one-ply wine, that I don't think anyone thinks he's funny any more.
Do you believe wine blogs have made any marked impact on the wine industry or wine culture?
I believe the entire future of the wine industry depends upon us. Print media is dead--will someone please bury Heimoff after you wipe that stupid smile off his face? Now that Parker is dead, and that secret, held tightly by Squires and Schildknecht and all the other wine Munchkins at The Wine Advocate, is finally getting out, people are going to go online before they make their wine purchases and read the recommendations of lonely bloggers before they go to Trader Joe's and spend their six bucks. Those wineries charging fifty bucks and more for their wines better wise up and start getting those samples out to bloggers! We are the wine culture. We are the voice of the consumer. We know the truth about wine writing--no one can dispute your opinion about taste so don't sweat the details.
Vacation: Paris or the Caribbean?
Are you hitting on me?
Pet: Dog or cat?
Isn't this a little personal, Tom?
Airplane reading: New Yorker or People?
Do these lines work in whiskey bars?
Car: Prius or BMW?
For God's sake, Tom, stop with the stupid questions! I'm not going to sleep with you.
Chablis or California Chardonnay?
I love the way you asked that. That sort of smoky, peaty tone in your voice...
Describe what you would have at your last meal.
Oh, that's so romantic, no one has ever asked me that before. I'd really like it if you were at my last meal. I'll be the appetizer if you'll be the entree.
What is Heaven like?
Oh, God, it's a lot like where your hand is right now.
If you could invite 4 people dead or alive to your fantasy dinner party, who would they be and who would bring the wine?
Shut up and kiss me, Fermentation Boy. I want you to eat my sugar while I create alcohol and finally release all the CO2 I've been saving for someone just like you.
What advice would you give to someone considering starting a wine blog?
Do it! Do it, Tom! Do it, do it, do it, do it...done already?
I am bone weary of all the endless talk on wine blogs about the place of Social Media in the wine business. I'm talking to you, Heimoff. Endless carping about how wineries need to use Social Media, find a way to incorporate Social Media into their marketing plans, must utilize Social Media or risk losing their future customers to wineries that do use Social Media. Well, for those of you still wondering what purpose Social Media plays in the wine biz, I'll tell you--Social Media exists solely to reinforce its own importance. It don't mean crap. Is it just me, or whenever you hear Social Media do you think of what they used to call Social Diseases--syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, chlamydia? Wineries can't wait to get screwed and catch Twitterrhea, Scarfacebook, and Bloggerballs.
The Social Media effect is simply making folks stupider and lonelier and less well-informed. But, hell, wineries pay marketing people a lot of money to try and achieve the same thing. Marketing is about manipulation, just like text messaging. Marketing is about creating a fictitious face for the winery, a Hardy Wallace, just like Facebook is about creating a fictitious persona. Marketing is about simple and dull statements that reach the lowest common denominator just like Twitter. After all, stupid, lonely people spend money, mostly to make themselves feel better, why not convince them to buy your overpriced Sta. Rita Hills Pinot Noir by taking advantage of that? Tweeters actually want to believe several hundred people give a crap about what they're doing, despite massive evidence to the contrary. Folks on Facebook believe they have 216 friends, which dilutes the meaning of friendship down to the equivalent of Soave Bolla. Text messaging, while requiring great thumbs, makes a mockery of communication, substituting its own little lingo for what we think of as language, and mimics actual relationships with inanity and empty thoughts.
But boy oh boy, the folks who are addicted to Social Media are convinced it will change the wine world--democratize it! What an insipid and jejune opinion. And it's mostly held by the folks that either earn a living directing Social Media, or those that do it instead of actually living. When every winery in California, to stay local, is on Twitter, what possible meaning does that have? Do consumers pick the best Tweeter? (I don't know, but with all this attention barking of lonely humans, it shouldn't be Tweeter, it should be Woofer.) You buy wine because the hired Social Media consultant is a better Tweeter? You feel connected to him because he subscribes to your stupid Tweets about your recent bowel movement or what your cute kitty has done lately to Mommy's hidden sex toys?
Wineries, and lots of other folks, believe Social Media will be the next big movement in the wine biz because they really want to believe it, and every time they turn on their computers they read another stupid opinion that says it will be the next big influence on wine buying. And they want to believe it because they can't sell their overpriced wines at the moment. Wine inventories are bulging like Fred Franzia's eyes staring at grape surpluses. Restaurants aren't buying high end wines, the Las Vegas market has dried up like the Australian wine country, wine shops are just shopping for deals and wines under $15, and wineries really want to think that if they cleverly Tweet, start a Facebook page, kiss bloggers' butts, the cases will go flying out of the warehouse. They believe this right into bankruptcy.
Wine and the wine business are about personal relationships, and always have been. Wines come with a story, for the most part, and the more compelling the story, the more you feel connected to the wine or winery, or to the merchant you trust, or the critic you've come to trust (a tip of my Hose to Puff Daddy), the more likely you are to respond to them. Social Media Stooges think you can establish this kind of relationship through blogging or Tweeting or texting, but, really, even the people who use Facebook know that those 216 people aren't really their friends, they aren't really people they can trust. Most of them are former friends they don't really want to even know any more, or people more important than they are, people they hope will make them seem more interesting. And even Tweeters know no one gives a shit about their Tweets unless it's a link to the latest Hollywood celebrity sex video (seen the Jonas Brothers menage a talentless?). Texting is only about what you have to say, not what others think. So how will this democratization sell wine? About as well as it's selling universal health care.
I'm sure the four people who read this will disagree wholeheartedly. Look at Gary Vaynerchuk! Why he's a celebrity! Like that's praiseworthy. He's an idiot about wine. Great at Social Media, an idiot about wine, and he makes the rest of us look like the Marquis Chimps. But all the folks that will disagree have something to lose by agreeing, either self-esteem or a job. When it comes to the wine business, Social Media is a disease that serves only to reinforce its own
importance, like cancer.
The best wines will endure, the best wines will sell, have no problem selling, with or without Social Media. And folks will not turn to bloggers and Tweeters and Facebookers for wine advice. Unless they have already established their credentials in the same old ways they've always established them--talent, experience, integrity, taste. Do any of those words remind you of bloggers?
