Michel Rolland is back in the news today as Eric Asimov proflies the flying winemaker in his New York Times column. There were a few standout quotes:
I mention Clos du Val and Corison, two Napa Valley producers whose wines adhere to a less upfront, more austere style, and Mr. Rolland is strikingly dismissive.
“Are they as successful in the marketplace? No,� he said, warming to the subject. “Wine is done for what? The public! Wine is a business. They want to make wine to sell wine. In the U.S. they are honest enough to tell you they want good ratings. They don’t want loser wines.�
Sucks to be Clos du Val this morning. Not too often your wine is branded a capital-L loser in the New York Times.
Though it might make for a good slogan for Capozzi Winery: “No Loser Wines!” (with apologies to Ravenswood).
Dr. Vino also wrote a couple posts on Michel a week or so ago that are well worth a read. For instance, Dr. Vino weighs in on whether Rolland imparts a monolithic style upon the wines he produces. After tasting a sizeable cross section of Rolland’s wines Dr Vino concludes
the wines I tasted were different across regions and across vintages.
Bottom line: as much as some might want to cast him as the devil, and as prickly as he can be, it is fairly obvious that Michle Rolland knows what he’s doing in the winery.
I don’t like seeing either Clos du Val or Corison bashed. I’ve enjoyed wines from both and aren’t these companies selling alot of wine?
JW,
Of course, they are selling tons of wine and I’ve also enjoyed both.
I guess my advice would be to consider the source. If Michle Rolland is bashing your wine, well, then the people who are your target audience will be pretty happy.
If someone I disagree with dumps on a wine I’m *more* likely to try it. Hopefully that will be the case with these two producers.
Thanks for the comment!