Should Robert Parker stop tasting (top) Bordeaux?

I was, in a sense, lucky to read a copy of Robert Parker’s just-released Wine Advocate a couple of weeks ago. It said what everyone was expecting: the 2009 vintage is amazing, that it is more consistent on the Left Bank than on the Right, etc etc. But it also said something else.

Several paragraphs down, it acknowledged that the top wines (First Growths and Super Seconds – the likes of Lafite, Latour, Las-Cases, Pichon-Baron, Cos, etc.) had become luxury products. Parker did not have a hint of criticism in his tone – it read like fact – he merely began the next phrase saying ‘but good value wines can still be found’ (emphasis is mine), or something along those lines.

Originally, Parker, not least his bulletin board (which has now gone subscriber-only – presumably allowing him and his followers to defame people with a minimal risk of those attacked being able to read what is being said about them, let alone defend themselves), were usually very critical of those who bought wine as collection items as opposed to those who bought wine to drink it.

It seems now that Parker has not chosen to take sides on the issue but has come to terms with the fact that some of the top wines he reviews will not be bought as wine, but as luxury accessories. And whether they are bought to be drunk, showed-off or speculated-on, they remain accessories that most of us cannot afford.

Which surely calls into question Parker’s remit. Modelled on the consumer advocacy of Ralph Nader, Parker strove to bring an end to the cronyism in the wine world and to speak on behalf of the consumer without prejudice. Which is fair enough, but Ralph Nader did not crusade on behalf of the bosses of General Motors and their objects of desire, he went into battle on behalf of your average, middle-American.

So why is Parker reviewing wines that only your CEO can afford (and giving them very high scores)? It is plainly obvious that if Parker decided to stop reviewing all of the top 150 wines in Bordeaux, this would have a huge effect on their potential pricing – possibly bringing them down to more affordable levels. It is the one thing Parker is able to do for the (average, drinking) consumer. Why are we, those dispossessed of these great wines, not asking him to step down and help us? And why doesn’t he?

I have previously said that Robert Parker has a symbiotic relationship with Bordeaux. It works like this: wines are tasted, Parker releases scores, châteaux release prices. Now, were Parker to remove himself from this equation, the process would probably remain the same although with a multitude of critics standing in for Parker (though one suspects many markets would demand a single, authoritative voice, and replace Parker with someone else). But where would Parker be?

Well, he’d be reviewing the thousands of wines from Cru Bourgeois level down. While this might well be the greatest thing to happen to the average consumer (and the French Foire aux Vins wine sales), it will do Parker’s standing on the world stage no good.

Because, unfortunately, greatness is conferred on the critic (not the other way around) by his or her surroundings. AA Gill eats in top restaurants on a frequency we can only dream about – but he is well-known only because he does so (and occasionally slams a few).

I would love to have Robert Parker go through all the wines on my local supermarket shelf, or that of my small wine merchant (perhaps I should start a facebook group to petition him to do so), but unfortunately he’s away reviewing the wines only the big boss of the supermarket can afford. While I can understand that, I don’t agree with it.