The world of wine writing and wine-speak is filled with much gobbly-gook, much of which would make a Cyril Ramaphosa address to the Disenfranchised Nguni Farmers Veterans Association sound positively scintillating. But I’d rate the vapid, meaningless nature of the feedback sessions from judges who have just judged a specific wine competition as right at the top, slightly behind the copiously worded essays on suggested food and wine pairings.
The occurrence is thus: there is a wine competition where wines are assessed by a panel of experts. Scores are given, debating is done. And somewhere on the horizon lies an awards function or ceremony where the winning wines and their makers are handed trophies, gongs and pats on the back. Which is all good and well.
However, between said judging of the wines and the announcing of the results, PRs and the organisers of these celebratory vinous events deem it relevant to communicate the “judges’ findings and impressions” on the reams of wines that were subjected to the panels’ judicious and acute sensorial faculties.
This is tricky terrain for the respective judges to navigate, as judging is unsighted. Meaning judges don’t know which parcels of earth the wines that were judged originated from. They have not a clue as to the vinous techniques involved. And in many instances, not even the vintages are divulged before their skill is unleashed on the rows of liquid-bearing glasses before them.
Yet, due to the organisers’ wish for gravitas and communication air-time, opinions have to be delivered in the form of a communique sent out onto the world which is, hopefully, struggling to contain its excitement in discovering the results of said competition.
Thus, the meaningless commentary comes in when press releases and social media posts are sent out into the world.
“Judges were impressed by the extraordinary display of quality and nuance in this year’s line-up, a lot of accurate fruit forwardness being present, with the right degree of intuitive restraint assisting winemakers in maximising optimal ripeness to a degree of unconvoluted clarity and charm.”
“Overall, wines of deep and meaningful complexity underscoring the fact that the cultivar and its makers are both in a good space, and were right to enter the competition, and they should continue doing so next year. Lees contact and rigorous commitment to cellar hygiene has delivered extraordinary results in pursuing wines presenting flavour, structure and finesse in an overall display of excellence.”
“Judging this line-up shows winemakers are definitely understanding the grape variety better than ever, thus employing thoughtful cellar-techniques to honour their terroir, which is the key to winemaking relevance, something producers not only understand, but show true commitment to, something that can only bold well for the future and when they enter next year.”
(To be repeated when asked to comment after next year’s judging.)
The gushing generalised diatribes of these “judges’ findings” always causes one to wonder how on earth there are to be winners, lesser winners and losers by the time the results roll around. It is akin to announcing to the world that Cape Town is a city exclusively inhabited by warm-hearted, generous and embracing people, and then having to discover two mates were mugged while hiking on Table Mountain.
I mean, what would one truly expect the judges to say when prodded for comment by the organisers in search of publicity and desire to increase the number of entrants for the next year?
“Yes, some nice wines, but Christ, there were some so full of alcohol and over-ripeness I needed mouth-to-mouth resuscitation after the first flight.”
“Obviously, some wines are created more equal than others, and man, it sure showed in the line-up. Unlike the pay-cheque for judging, it was all pretty inconsistent.”
The Trophy Wine Show at least has its judges facing the audience of journalists and winemakers in person, which generally leads to greater detail from the assembled panel, as well as allowing the audience to raise questions should vacuous comments and answers arise.
Generally, though, judges feedback PR puff is something competitions can do without. Jump straight to results, as this is all that counts.
Enjoyed this article?
Subscribe and never miss a post again.
Oh, to be an influencer………….vacuousness personified! Thank you Emile for your rather eloquent hand on the tiller. Lest plebeians, like myself, get beyond our circle of competence.