A couple of days ago I started reading (nay, poring over) the Decanter supplement, with this year’s best in shows etc (husband: “You’re ogling these wines the way some women ogle pictures of Johnny Depp”). Some of the tasting notes struck me as being, well… a little fanciful. Here are a couple examples:
“… the classic quasi-visceral appeal of a great Pomerol”
“… but maturity is unlikely to subdue the wine’s diagnostic purity…”
And current favourite:
“…limpid and open, with high-optic flavours… and some stony sobriety lurking below”.
Now, I’m not a stranger to the magic of words - I even take a leaf out of Humpty Dumpty’s book sometimes, and make them mean what I want them to mean. But seriously? “high-optic flavour”?? Do they simply mean “focused”? And “quasi-visceral”?? - it either is or isn’t visceral! Is this just an exercise in verbosity?
At times I wonder if the world of wine writers is littered with failed poets.
Does anyone else come across a note that, well… struck a false note…?