I enjoyed a delightful interaction via Twitter with @daveneil after posting this picture, and an accompanying brief description, of the beverage:
My tweet read, “Bold, fruity, spicy. Great aftertaste that doesn’t overstay its welcome. Everything I expect in a Tempranillo.”*
Apparently, a reasonably informative and concise review, though I think it could be said of many Tempranillos. This got me thinking (during the exchange)– I know almost nothing about wine in a technical sense. I know what I like, I can identify a fraction of hints, nuances, and/or notes, but I would never presume to tell another what is a good or bad wine. (Unless it really tasted of unwashed ass; expect a statement about that if an experience in that vein occurs.)
My twitter acquaintance seemed to appreciate my words and suggested that I review wines. Flattering as it was, I admitted that my expertise would likely be expressed in crude terminology, “@daveneil Oh I’m hardly technical. My wine reviews would say silly things like “serve to mother-in-law” or “to be savoured alone – naked”.”
But really, isn’t that all a person needs to know about a wine? I’m sure my dear friend (and knower-of-wines) may disagree, but perhaps there is a place for 140 character wine reviews on Twitter…
I know that Maddie would do a superb job at it. Me? Not so much, but I could give it a stab.
*Looks like they’re out of the 1999- I’ve linked to the 2002.