David Williams reports on a UK Wine and Philosophy
conference in Harpers-wine.com -
http://www.harpers-wine.com/newsitem...ewsID=1667&i=1 -
he quotes philosopher Roger Scruton, who among other things
says

‘Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been
dragged from
hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.’ Australians have
generally not, therefore,
‘built into their wine “le gout de terroir”’, choosing
instead to make wines at 14.5%
alcohol, and to brand them for sale in ‘the moron market’.

I've read (and made) some generalisations in my time but...

Martin

Sounds about right to me.

Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce

University of Walamaloo Philosophy Department

Australian Wines are all ego. NZ wines have personality.


"Martin Field" wrote in message
...
David Williams reports on a UK Wine and Philosophy conference in
Harpers-wine.com -
http://www.harpers-wine.com/newsitem...ewsID=1667&i=1 - he quotes
philosopher Roger Scruton, who among other things says

‘Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been dragged from
hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.’ Australians have generally not,
therefore,
‘built into their wine “le gout de terroir”’, choosing instead to make
wines at 14.5%
alcohol, and to brand them for sale in ‘the moron market’.

I've read (and made) some generalisations in my time but...

Martin

Australian Wines are all ego. NZ wines have personality.


"Martin Field" wrote in message
...
David Williams reports on a UK Wine and Philosophy conference in
Harpers-wine.com -
http://www.harpers-wine.com/newsitem...ewsID=1667&i=1 - he quotes
philosopher Roger Scruton, who among other things says

‘Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been dragged from
hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.’ Australians have generally not,
therefore,
‘built into their wine “le gout de terroir”’, choosing instead to make
wines at 14.5%
alcohol, and to brand them for sale in ‘the moron market’.

I've read (and made) some generalisations in my time but...

Martin

"Martin Field" wrote in message
...
David Williams reports on a UK Wine and Philosophy conference in
Harpers-wine.com -
http://www.harpers-wine.com/newsitem...ewsID=1667&i=1 - he quotes
philosopher Roger Scruton, who among other things says

'Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been dragged from
hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.' Australians have generally not,
therefore,
'built into their wine "le gout de terroir"', choosing instead to make
wines at 14.5%
alcohol, and to brand them for sale in 'the moron market'.

I've read (and made) some generalisations in my time but...

Martin

Not all Australian makers, (though some do), make wines that are over
extractive and over oaked. Some years ago with a group of friends we drank
the '62 Grange, a '45 Leoville Barton, and a '62 Tabilk Special Bin
Cabernet. The latter was by far the wine of the night, and still remains one
of the best wines I have ever drunk. The desert wine drunk that night, a '62
Penfolds bin 414 Show Sauternes was also of outstanding quality.

Ron Lel

Ian Hoare wrote:
Salut/Hi Martin Field,

le/on Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:37:07 +1100, tu disais/you said:-


David Williams reports on a UK Wine and Philosophy
conference in Harpers-wine.com -
http://www.harpers-wine.com/newsitem...ewsID=1667&i=1 -
he quotes philosopher Roger Scruton, who among other things
says


I am always more than a little suspicious of philosophers. But when it comes
to philosophers discussing wine - words fail me.


‘Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been
dragged from hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.’


I rather like the thought of a landscape being a farmer. But of course he's
talking crap, as the Australians who make wine are often descendants (more
or less recent) of people from wine growing cultures.


Australians have generally not, therefore, ‘built into their wine “le gout de terroir�’, choosing
instead to make wines at 14.5% alcohol, and to brand them for sale in ‘the moron market’.


There's a tiny element of truth here, in that (as I've said before) vines
that are using the soil in which they grow _purely_ as a physical support,
with water and nutrients being supplied by the grower, will inevitably be
less affected by that part of their environment (the soil) than - say -
Yarra Yering, where Dr Carrodus _doesn't_ irrigate. But to describe wines
like those made at Ch Tahbilk, St Hallett, d'Arry etc in those terms show
ignorance and arrogance in simply staggering proportions (par for the course
for many philosophers, I fear).


I've read (and made) some generalisations in my time but...


Grin!! I wonder...



Well said Ian.

As everyone knows, philosophy is a euphamism for people with arts
degrees who like to talk crap at great length. Not strictly true, as of
course philosophy covers almost the complete spectrum of the arts and
sciences (both in subject and its practicioners), but for the most part
it is true.

It is the old story, outrageous statements gain attention and sell
papers. Without having looked into it further this guy seems to have
missed the mark, and it would appear the tone he has written in he has
some major bee in his bonnet about something.


Mat.

wrote:

Sounds about right to me.

Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce

University of Walamaloo Philosophy Department





You managed to make a post without mentioning Italy.

Bravo Michael.

snip

Well said Ian.

As everyone knows, philosophy is a euphamism for people with arts degrees
who like to talk crap at great length. Not strictly true, as of course
philosophy covers almost the complete spectrum of the arts and sciences
(both in subject and its practicioners), but for the most part it is true.

It is the old story, outrageous statements gain attention and sell papers.
Without having looked into it further this guy seems to have missed the
mark, and it would appear the tone he has written in he has some major bee
in his bonnet about something.


Mat.


A good incendiary comment provokes discussion. Playing devil's advocate or
otherwise is just as useful in both bringing and clarifying new ideas as it
is in dispelling bad ideas. By Roger Scruton's remark's you have discussed
this item further and enlightened both each other and the casual observers
of the group. Whereas if Mr. Scruton had said "The profound thing about
Aussies reds is that they are both Australian and Red" then not one word
would have been said about it and we would have all been none the wiser.

Aaron

Salut/Hi Aaron Dickinson,

le/on Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:18:04 +1300, tu disais/you said:-

Well said Ian.

As everyone knows, philosophy is a euphamism for people with arts degrees
who like to talk crap at great length.

It is the old story, outrageous statements gain attention and sell papers.

A good incendiary comment provokes discussion. Playing devil's advocate or
otherwise is just as useful in both bringing and clarifying new ideas as it
is in dispelling bad ideas.

And helps to sell newspapers.

You woulkdn't happen to have studied philisophy by any chance Aaron, would
you? (Evil s******).

By Roger Scruton's remark's you have discussed this item further

Not really. We've casually dismissed him as idiotic. As for clarifying and
enlightening, we have had many discussions here on the NG about the relative
merits and faults of 'New world' and 'old world' wines making styles,
without needing to be spurred into it by ignorant sounding remarks, whether
deliberate or not.

Sorry to disagree, Aaron - welcome to the madhouse, by the way, as I don't
think I've seen your name here before. I have to declare a very strong
prejudice against "media punditry". Actually I ought to declare a very
strong prejudice against the media in general. While I know perfectly well
that there ARE honest 'papers/tv stations/mags/etc I have found them in a
minute minority. Even in the case of non venial media, they seem to have to
over simplify, sensationalise and trivialise everything they touch. I've
almost never seen a report where bias, self interest and axe grinding
haven't coloured or even totally distorted the truth.

Whew.... that feels better, I've not had a good anti-media rant for months.

By the way, what part of NZ do you come from? We had a fabulous visit there
in '01.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 13:09:09 +0100, Ian Hoare
wrote:

‘Australia is a big problem. It is a landscape that has been
dragged from hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years.’

I rather like the thought of a landscape being a farmer. But of course he's
talking crap, as the Australians who make wine are often descendants (more
or less recent) of people from wine growing cultures.

Surely "hunter-gatherer" and "farmer" are being used as adjectives to
describe the landscape.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

"Ron Lel" skrev i melding
...

....... The desert wine drunk that night, a '62
Penfolds bin 414 Show Sauternes was also of outstanding quality.

In which desert is this vineyard?
:-) Anders

Ian Hoare wrote:

Whew.... that feels better, I've not had a good anti-media rant
for months.

Feel free to proceed at any pace, Ian! ;-)

M.

"Ian Hoare" wrote in message
...
Salut/Hi Aaron Dickinson,

le/on Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:18:04 +1300, tu disais/you said:-

Well said Ian.

As everyone knows, philosophy is a euphamism for people with arts
degrees
who like to talk crap at great length.

It is the old story, outrageous statements gain attention and sell
papers.

A good incendiary comment provokes discussion. Playing devil's advocate
or
otherwise is just as useful in both bringing and clarifying new ideas as
it
is in dispelling bad ideas.

And helps to sell newspapers.

You woulkdn't happen to have studied philisophy by any chance Aaron, would
you? (Evil s******).

Nope. I studied Chemistry, went into IT and still write music in my
(little) spare time. However, I've never dismissed any of the arts though I
would suggest Roger Scruton's comments are more related to social
anthropology and social psychology than philosophy.

I don't think Mr. Scruton's comments are "outrageous statements". Looking
at it through empirical eyes one can immediately see that Australia is a
different country to, for example, France and in more ways than just the
wine. So, if the cultural and social landscape is different, there must
have been something that created those differences. Now then, if we look at
what the Scruton boy is saying - he suggests what could have created that is
this swift transition from hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years - and,
therefore, _could_ (and it's one big "could") be what edged the design of
the wines to what they are today. Did that hunter gather thing happen so
swiftly in France? No? So, you might conclude that is the reason for the
difference. Now, I'm not saying I agree with this as it seems like a rather
obvious case of post hoc ergo propter hoc, but you have the opportunity to
consider the idea and then dismissing. I didn't see you do that - to me you
went straight to "media punditry", didn't pass GO nor collect 200 pounds
(damn these antipodean keyboards - no pound sign)

Then again, who gives a toss about Roger "who?" Scruton?



By Roger Scruton's remark's you have discussed this item further

Not really. We've casually dismissed him as idiotic. As for clarifying and
enlightening, we have had many discussions here on the NG about the
relative
merits and faults of 'New world' and 'old world' wines making styles,
without needing to be spurred into it by ignorant sounding remarks,
whether
deliberate or not.

"Ignorant sounding" - Roger Scruton's comments don't sound ignorant to me -
just wrong. Wrong people aren't ignorant - Newton was wrong often, but he
certainly wasn't ignorant. Anyway, Mr. Scruton wasn't discussing the
"merits and faults of 'New world' and 'old world' wines making styles"
either - he was attempting to explain how they reached the wine-making point
they are now. They aren't the same discussion. So therefore you haven't
had "many discussions" on this newsgroup about it. Well, actually that's
not true, you might have had a million minus one discussions about how the
wine-making styles for certain countries reached the point they are now, but
that's not what you are saying!


Sorry to disagree, Aaron - welcome to the madhouse, by the way, as I don't
think I've seen your name here before. I have to declare a very strong
prejudice against "media punditry". Actually I ought to declare a very
strong prejudice against the media in general. While I know perfectly well
that there ARE honest 'papers/tv stations/mags/etc I have found them in a
minute minority. Even in the case of non venial media, they seem to have
to
over simplify, sensationalise and trivialise everything they touch. I've
almost never seen a report where bias, self interest and axe grinding
haven't coloured or even totally distorted the truth.

I believe Aaronovitch in the Guardian spent some time last year detailing
which writers to read for a given subject area in each Britland newspaper on
the basis of their ability to write factually and with clarity in their area
of expertise. Good article - can't find it though sorry.


Whew.... that feels better, I've not had a good anti-media rant for
months.

By the way, what part of NZ do you come from? We had a fabulous visit
there
in '01.

Lucky man! I think 2001 must've been the last year of good weather! It is
diabolical here today up in Auckland - We've had true British weather and it
has been overcast for a number of days now. Whilst Auckland has nasty
spells, in general, they tend to last a few hours and then b*gger off.
Lately Mr. Finn's "Four Seasons in one Day" would have to be re-written and
called "One long sh!tty month". Where did you go anyway? The wifelet and I
are off to Napier again in Feb for Harvest Hawkes Bay - can't wait. Mmm...
Craggy Range Merlot...

Aaron

PS - La Souvigne looks fab - I do miss that side of the planet.


--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

"Ian Hoare" wrote in message
...
Salut/Hi Aaron Dickinson,

le/on Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:18:04 +1300, tu disais/you said:-

Well said Ian.

As everyone knows, philosophy is a euphamism for people with arts
degrees
who like to talk crap at great length.

It is the old story, outrageous statements gain attention and sell
papers.

A good incendiary comment provokes discussion. Playing devil's advocate
or
otherwise is just as useful in both bringing and clarifying new ideas as
it
is in dispelling bad ideas.

And helps to sell newspapers.

You woulkdn't happen to have studied philisophy by any chance Aaron, would
you? (Evil s******).

Nope. I studied Chemistry, went into IT and still write music in my
(little) spare time. However, I've never dismissed any of the arts though I
would suggest Roger Scruton's comments are more related to social
anthropology and social psychology than philosophy.

I don't think Mr. Scruton's comments are "outrageous statements". Looking
at it through empirical eyes one can immediately see that Australia is a
different country to, for example, France and in more ways than just the
wine. So, if the cultural and social landscape is different, there must
have been something that created those differences. Now then, if we look at
what the Scruton boy is saying - he suggests what could have created that is
this swift transition from hunter-gatherer to farmer in 200 years - and,
therefore, _could_ (and it's one big "could") be what edged the design of
the wines to what they are today. Did that hunter gather thing happen so
swiftly in France? No? So, you might conclude that is the reason for the
difference. Now, I'm not saying I agree with this as it seems like a rather
obvious case of post hoc ergo propter hoc, but you have the opportunity to
consider the idea and then dismissing. I didn't see you do that - to me you
went straight to "media punditry", didn't pass GO nor collect 200 pounds
(damn these antipodean keyboards - no pound sign)

Then again, who gives a toss about Roger "who?" Scruton?



By Roger Scruton's remark's you have discussed this item further

Not really. We've casually dismissed him as idiotic. As for clarifying and
enlightening, we have had many discussions here on the NG about the
relative
merits and faults of 'New world' and 'old world' wines making styles,
without needing to be spurred into it by ignorant sounding remarks,
whether
deliberate or not.

"Ignorant sounding" - Roger Scruton's comments don't sound ignorant to me -
just wrong. Wrong people aren't ignorant - Newton was wrong often, but he
certainly wasn't ignorant. Anyway, Mr. Scruton wasn't discussing the
"merits and faults of 'New world' and 'old world' wines making styles"
either - he was attempting to explain how they reached the wine-making point
they are now. They aren't the same discussion. So therefore you haven't
had "many discussions" on this newsgroup about it. Well, actually that's
not true, you might have had a million minus one discussions about how the
wine-making styles for certain countries reached the point they are now, but
that's not what you are saying!


Sorry to disagree, Aaron - welcome to the madhouse, by the way, as I don't
think I've seen your name here before. I have to declare a very strong
prejudice against "media punditry". Actually I ought to declare a very
strong prejudice against the media in general. While I know perfectly well
that there ARE honest 'papers/tv stations/mags/etc I have found them in a
minute minority. Even in the case of non venial media, they seem to have
to
over simplify, sensationalise and trivialise everything they touch. I've
almost never seen a report where bias, self interest and axe grinding
haven't coloured or even totally distorted the truth.

I believe Aaronovitch in the Guardian spent some time last year detailing
which writers to read for a given subject area in each Britland newspaper on
the basis of their ability to write factually and with clarity in their area
of expertise. Good article - can't find it though sorry.


Whew.... that feels better, I've not had a good anti-media rant for
months.

By the way, what part of NZ do you come from? We had a fabulous visit
there
in '01.

Lucky man! I think 2001 must've been the last year of good weather! It is
diabolical here today up in Auckland - We've had true British weather and it
has been overcast for a number of days now. Whilst Auckland has nasty
spells, in general, they tend to last a few hours and then b*gger off.
Lately Mr. Finn's "Four Seasons in one Day" would have to be re-written and
called "One long sh!tty month". Where did you go anyway? The wifelet and I
are off to Napier again in Feb for Harvest Hawkes Bay - can't wait. Mmm...
Craggy Range Merlot...

Aaron

PS - La Souvigne looks fab - I do miss that side of the planet.


--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website