Jump to content

Craig Camp

eGullet Society staff emeritus
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,274

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Craig Camp

    Vietti Current and New Releases

    in Wine

    Posted

    The following wines were tasted on Vietti winemaker Luca Currado's recent visits to Liner and Elsen Wine Merchants and Alba Osteria, both in Portland Oregon.

    * Barbera d’Aba, Tre Vigne, 2004 - Brilliantly fresh and clean with deeply concentrated black raspberry fruit. Very lively and mouthwatering with a wonderfully zesty bittersweet finish. ($22)

    * Barbera d’Alba, Scaronne 2004 - If there is a more complex barbera out there than Scaronne I’d be hard pressed to name it. A big wine, but not simply chunky big like Spinetta. Dramatic and intense while still maintaining that punchy barbera verve. Densely colored and expansive from start to the never-ending finish. Wait a few years for this one to grow up. ($43)

    * Barbera d’Asti, La Crena, 2001 - Deep, earthy and brooding with almost a nebbiolo like firmness. A big (not heavy) wine that has no business with a pasta, but would be more at home with a big aged prime steak. Great complexity, with layers of earth and porcini over rich wild black cherry fruit.

    * Nebbiolo Perbacco, 2004 - Bargain hunters pay attention. Here is real nebbiolo character for under 20 bucks. Fresh, bright fruit flavors soon give way to classic leather and dried rose characteristics that can only belong to nebbiolo. Forward by nebbiolo standards and more than drinkable now, I’d still age this another year or so to really squeeze all the complexity you can out of it. A great starting place if you’re new to Barolo and an everyday treat for hard core Barolo nuts. ($20)

    * Barolo, Castiglione, 2000 - Brilliant , classic dark garnet color. Warm and floral on the nose with only sweet touches of tobacco and tar. Round and forward (by Barolo standards remember!) and already drinkable if matched with rich foods. One of the more focused wines you’ll taste from the warm 2000 vintage. The Castiglione selection is still only aged in the large traditional barrels, but exhibits some of the same rounded tannins many modern-style producers hope for. If you have not tasted a Barolo before this is an excellent introduction and a good buy. ($40)

    * Barolo, Rocche, 1998 - A classical beauty with a brilliant translucent garnet color and aromas that won’t let your nose leave the glass. Lean and mean and fantastic - perfectly combining the unique intertwined dance of bitterness, bite, grace, delicacy, power and sweetness that makes for great Barolo. I would wait a few more years as someday this will blow you away. ($90)

    * Barolo, Rocche, 1999 - If you have any chance to buy this wine do so because this is great Barolo. Take all the best parts of the 1998 and turn up the volume and you get this wonderful wine. Far more concentrated than the 98 it still retains the same balance and elegant structure. Nowhere near ready to drink, it’s still closed and brooding. Wait at least five more years and you’ll have a truly fine bottle of Barolo. ( $90)

    * Barolo 2003 new single vineyard releases: Rocche, Brunate, and Lazzarito (all $116) - One sip of these baby blockbusters sends your palate into sensory overload. Huge and round, as you would expect from the burning hot 2003 vintage, Vietti has still put together a group of wines that retain balance - albeit a very rich, powerful balance. It is important to note that while these wines see barriques, they only age in small barrels for six months and spend the majority of their time in traditional large Slovenian oak casks before bottling. Certainly not yet ready to drink unless you happen to be serving well-aged wild boar tonight, with moderate aging - say about 8 years or so - these should be some excellent wines. In fact they’ll be just right for drinking while your still waiting for your 2001’s and 1999’s to grow up. The tannins in all of these wines are very substantial right now, but are really quite round, soft and integrated for Baroli this young. As you would expect, the Rocche is the most graceful and fresh of this trio, showing good structure and the wonderful bright floral character that this vineyard always seems to show. The Brunate is a huge mouthful of Barolo that expands and overwhelms the palate with its depth and richness. As usual, in spite of its girth, the Brunate is charming with an almost forward appeal. The Lazzarito will almost take the enamel off your teeth with its biting, powerful tannins and deep bittersweet fruit laden with tobacco and tar. Incredibly intense and powerful, this is a wine you should not go near for years to come as it has plenty of aging to do. I’d say eight years is the minimum for this high-strung monster. If you want drama this is your wine. My vote out of these three would go to the Rocche, but it’s too early to make that call. Tasting them together is a great look at the different characteristics of these vineyards.

    for the entire article click here for my blog post

    Kissing the Frogs

    in The Daily Gullet

    Posted

    A few more bargains from my notes:

    Bourgueil, Domaine le la Chanteleuserie, Cuvée Beauvais, 2004

    Brilliant ruby, with seductive fresh picked cherry aromas highlighted by fresh mint. A totally charming wine that slides effortlessly across the palate kicking your saliva glands into high gear in the process. Drink this pretty wine up young and slightly cool on a warm summer evening.

    Cairanne, Cotes du Rhone Villages, Domaine Cros de Romet, Alain Boisson, 2004

    Brilliant ruby, with an explosion of fruit on the nose. Not that kind of fake, contrived extraction you see so often these days, but a clean, brilliant ripe fruit with an underlying zest of acidity. Just plain delicious. Drink over the next couple of years.

    Chinon, La Croix Boissée, Bernard Baudry, 2000

    Light ruby with a touch of garnet. The spicy, herbal, minty nose broadens into refined bitter cherry and cranberry fruit. The lean flavors expand to involve every niche of your palate starting with a lively minty-ness that leads to bittersweet cherry. The long finish makes your mouth water with fresh acidity and spiced dark fruit flavors. A great food wine defined. Even better the next day.

    Château La Rogue, Pic Saint Loup, Coteaux du Languedoc, 2003

    Pic Saint Loup is probably a tough sell. It’s a shame for in the under $20 category red Lanquedoc wines still offer some of the best value you can find. Full rich fruit flavors mix on the palate and nose with tar and black licorice to make for a really interesting drink and a bargain at $16. A great wine for summer cook outs.

    Lirac, Château de Ségriès, Henri de Lanzac, 2004

    I thought this was a wonderful wine and a bargain. The kind of wine you can drink in gulps with grilled sausages that still delivers something to spice the meal and interest the mind. Well balanced with bright fresh fruit that offers good complexity and a good backbone, this is exactly the kind of wine that serious wine aficionados buy by the case for everyday meals and barbecue parties. Very nice stuff at a very nice price.

    Kissing the Frogs

    in The Daily Gullet

    Posted

    Why is it that one can't simply extol the many virtues of say French wine without denigrating wines from say the US or Australia or South America?

    [snip]

    Rather than--French wine is soo good and new world wine is crap!

    To be honest, I believe it is this attitude that turns consumers off and is a large part of the problem the French face in marketing and selling their wines today.

    In principle I agree with you, but amongst my peer group (the 20 and 30-somethings) in this country at the very least, there is a growing view that unless you're paying serious bucks, it's the French wines that are crap. Somehow, this is slowly but surely being taken as gospel, and reports of 2005 Bordeaux futures don't help much. Many people aren't even aware that France has some great inexpensive wines which will handily compete with the New World for price, and equal or better it for quality. The "snob value" of French wines is never questioned, it's the quality and price of everyday drinking stuff that needs to be hammered home.

    I very much enjoyed the above article.

    Si

    I think this is very much an issue for French wines and I often hear the comment that "I'd love to know more about French wines, but they're just too expensive." I saw one young blogger comment that he would probably start drinking French wines in his forties when he could afford them. The French obviously have to work on their marketing.

    Kissing the Frogs

    in The Daily Gullet

    Posted

    Craig -- I'm glad you wrote this.  Despite my innate enthusiasm for for the Home Team and this American wines, I've long been disappointed at how mid-priced Yank wines stand up to their French counterparts.  A Few years ago, it was even better, as I recall, with good Cru Bourgeois Bordeaux and village level Cotes du Rhone often available in the $10 range.

    A question: since I've spent time in Languedoc (and read often of the plight of their winegrowers), it's becoe an inexpensive and sentimental favorite. Unfortunately, the quality varies greatly.  In addition to the obvious advice -- the list of importers you provided, looking for AOC wines, avoiding Red Bicyclette  :wink: -- is there anything else I should look for when hunting bargains in the South of France?

    What often makes so many of these wines so fascinating to drink it that they come from old vines. Old vines just have the potential to make wines wine more nuance and complexity. If you find producers that combine old vines with a passion to make something special you'll find interesting wine to drink. These are the things the best importers look for too.

    Kissing the Frogs

    in The Daily Gullet

    Posted · Edited by Craig Camp (log)

    At this time examples of distinctive new world wines in the under $20 category are few and far between. This does not mean they do not exist, just that there are not very many of them and they are crowded into the same few slots. For example Australia is driven by shiraz and nearly every producer has one. Same goes for the USA with cabernet and merlot. There is just much more diversity in Europe and that makes for more interesting choices.

    A big issue in new world wine making is the economics involved, most under $20 wines from the USA, Australia and South America that are generally available in the market are produced by a small group of corporate wineries using many different labels on basically the same wines produced in industrial quantities. I am always struck by the wine sections of American grocery stores as they offer dozens and dozens of chardonnay, shiraz or cabernet labels that offer only different labels, not different wines. The same goes for chain restaurants like Fridays that list four chardonnays by the glass that are indistinguishable from each other.

    The small family wine estates that produce excellent, reasonably priced wines that reflect the character of their vineyards so common in France or Italy finds it hard to exist in the American three tier system. A small French producer has the entire European Union as their market, while a small American producer has to do back flips to sell in the next state. This is a tremendous economic advantage for the European producer and is helping fuel the explosion of top quality, small producers from lesser known regions whose wines sell at very competitive prices. When it comes to the Australians, I think they're smart enough to keep their best buys at home and send their mass industrial production to the Americans and British.

    At least the small French producer has champions out there like Joe Dressner, Peter Weygandt, Kermit Lynch and and others who are will to go out there and do the work (and paperwork) it takes to get these wines to the consumer. Who is going to do that for a small new world producer making a few thousand cases of interesting grenache or gamay?

    There are heroes out there in Australia, South America, South Africa and the USA who are doing their best to make outstanding wines from distinctive vineyards at reasonable prices, but the market does little to encourage others to join them. Until this system changes, it is unlikely that there will be an explosion great wines in the $20 category from new world producers.

    Kissing the Frogs

    in The Daily Gullet

    Posted · Edited by Craig Camp (log)

    Below are some great examples of French wine bargains from my recent tasting notes:

    Muscadet, Climat, Château de la Fessardièe, Alex Sauvion, 2004

    It’s almost getting boring to write about excellent Muscadet, but it may well be the most exciting white wine region around these days. Not that there are so many great producers, but now there are literally dozens of top notch wines being imported by small importers dedicated to quality and these wines are without a doubt the best values in white wine available in the market today.

    This wine is no exception with a refined balance between its firm, mineral-laden fruity-ness and its bright acidity. Just lovely and only about $12 a bottle. Delicious now, but this fine wine will improve for the next several years.

    Coteaux du Languedoc, Grange Phillippe, 2003

    There are so many great French bargains these days it’s hard to keep up. Such wines are a major embarrassment to the American wine industry. How can they sell wines at this price that taste so good with the Euro is so much stronger than the dollar.

    Here is a big, deep fruity wine with real flavor and complexity for $11 a bottle. Give me a break, why can’t we do this in the USA? A blend of 70% syrah, 20% grenache and 10% mourvedre, if anybody made a wine of such quality in the USA it would cost $40 a bottle.

    Bourgueil, Trinch!, Catherine & Pierre Breton, 2004

    A candidate for great house wine of the year, I dare you to find a domestic wine that tastes this good for under $13. Almost explosively fruity and clean with an acidity that dares your saliva glands to keep up this wine is food friendly perfection. A great combination of juicy ripe fruit and balance. Yes, you can be deeply fruity without being overweight. Buy cases.

    Cour Cheverny, Le Petit Chambord, Domaine Francois Cazin, 2002

    Pungently mineral and firm and almost demanding food, this is a really lovely wine. Lean and mean, but with just enough fruit, every sip demand yet another. Not surprisingly, this is a Louis/Dressner selection, who else would bring in such an obscure Loire appellation. We can be glad they did as this wine is a steal at around $12. Buy, buy, buy! Made from 100% Romorantin, a rare varietal to say the least.

    Picpoul de Pinet, Coteaux du Languedoc, Saint Peyre, 2005

    Here is a zesty, refreshing delight that will match your best seafood and provide the perfect clean, acid driven foil for deep fried fish. Absolutly mouthwatering and fresh. IT COST’S $8.75!!!

    Muscadet Sèvre et Maine sur lie, Domaine de l'Ecu, Expression de Granite, Domaine Guy Boussard, 2001

    Current winner of the longest name wine award this year, you’ll think the name is short when you taste this wonderful wine. Still a baby, it will develop and expand for many years. A lighting bolt of a wine that in all its leanness still explodes on the palate. Concentrated mineral essence with a delicate balance. A beauty that costs all of 16 bucks. Amazing.

    2004 Beaujolais, L’Ancien, Vielles Vignes, Terres Dorees from Jean-Paul Brun.

    Just writing about this wine makes me salivate. It’s not big. It’s not powerful. It’s not pointy. It is simply delicious. No juicy-fruity Duboeuf here, but a wine with a strangely powerful delicacy. The bouquet entices not attacks and on the palate it dances, challenging your palate to follow its lead - if you have the time and inclination. Considering the under $15 price tag, a wine that can lead your senses in so many directions is a staggering bargain.

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    I thought it was a bit Rhone like with black pepper notes.

    However, there have been boatloads of poor, high acid thin wines from Italy over the years--this is not an easy grape to grow and make wine from. A good chianti can be very nice but they are so few and far between

    I hate the term "food wine" but good Sangiovese cries out for food!!!

    Good Chianti "few and far between"? I think not, the quality level of Chianti has skyrocketed over the last decade. Sure if you want to include all the crap in "fiasci" and the low end Ruffino type stuff there is a lot of junk, but you can apply that logic to Bordeaux and Napa too. Do you really want to define a region by its industrial mass production - its "boatloads"?.

    Fine sangiovese is nervous, high-strung and refined. I don't think it should be Rhone-like. It is a varietal known for both high acidity and low color and a dark over-ripe wine is just not varietal in character.

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    Getting the right clone is critical. (you have to admit Italy has been a mess in terms of prodigious plantings of awful clones of this grape).

    It may well be that outside of a handful of areas and producers who make some of the world's most magnificent wines, sangiovese may benefit from at least moderate oak and even blending.

    It iwll be fun to watch (and taste)!!!

    While old plantings in Tuscany may have been a mess, new ones are not. The family of sangiovese clones, thanks to the Chianti 2000 project and Banfi's research, is among the most defined on the planet. New plantings have been based on better clonal selection for years.

    Certainly sangiovese, like cabernet sauvignon, can benefit from blending (with the notable exception of the magnificent Montevertine Le Pergole Torte) unlike mono-varietals like pinot noir and nebbiolo. However, unlike the more robust cabernet, the delicate nature and naturally light color of sangiovese make it a poor candidate for new oak barrique, which quickly overwhelm its character.

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    I am suprised (mildly) that you can't get some kind of reciprocal

    deal going with Leonetti and your winery.

    Professional courtesy etc etc.

    I hesitate to impose. I don't ask for a winery discount outside of my immediate region . . . but will gladly accept one when offered.

    impose Mary, impose! :laugh:

    Oregon 2006

    in Wine

    Posted

    I well remember being told how great the 2003 vintage was when I barrel tasted through many, many Willamette Valley cellars (and I worked that harvest, and knew about the heat and sugars and everything coming ripe at once). I, myself wrote positively about the vintage, even while still trying to describe its anomolies. I would ask about high alcohols and I would be told, yes they are high, but look at the overall balance, everything is big and luscious! In fact, I was a little taken aback recently when visiting a winemaker during harvest to hear him knock the 2003 vintage . . . the same one he so proudly poured me from his barrels in 2004.

    I think part of the problem is at harvest too many winemakers are excited by ripeness of fruit in itself without enough thought to acidity and pH. Fortunately this is changing fast and vintages like 2003 are an education for all of us. Now when we taste the 2004's, we realize how out of balance the 2003's were. These lessons will help make better wines in the future. For example, crop loads were kept higher in 2006 than 2003 and this is making the wines more balanced as most vineyards reduced crop too much in the hot 2003 vintage and the resulting wines were often over the top because of this.

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    Why would anyone pay such prices for oaky sangiovese? There is a glut of high quality over-oaked sangiovese in Tuscany that you can find for half the price.

    Why pay, say $50 for a bottle of oregon Pinot that is elegant lightly oaked earthy etc when you can find a similar wine--from Burgundy yet!!!!--that is thirty or forty bucks???

    The New World Sangiovese is more about fruit and ripeness. T

    As I see it, oaked and overoaked are two very different terms.

    Because places like Oregon and New Zealand have established themselves as unique and successful growing regions for pinot noir. Many fine wines of definable styles are made. The best soil types and clones are known and in use. There is no such region outside of Italy when it comes to sangiovese, which is still experimental in the new world.

    Tuscany is the home of the international style of winemaking in Italy and there are many wines just as ripe and fruity as new world wines.

    Oak and over-oaked are indeed two different terms, that's why I use them.

    Oregon 2006

    in Wine

    Posted

    When you talk with winemakers year in and year out there is certainly the sense that they think (or try to position) every vintage as great!

    Cole - I don't think that's exactly true. I think we see each vintage as different and unique with its own combination of qualities and faults. For example, you would be hard pressed to find a grower here in Oregon that would classify 2003 as either great nor their favorite vintage. However, most producers made excellent, if atypical wines. Certainly not wines they are looking to replicate, but wines that within the context of that vintage are well-made and enjoyable to drink. I find most serious producers accurately describe the character of each vintage and few that would claim every vintage as great.

    ...but then again maybe 2003 was a great vintage, after all, it got a lot of big scores in The Wine Spectator :hmmm:

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    Wow.  I love sangiovese, and I was very interested in trying Leonetti's Walla Walla version.  But $55 for a single bottle of Washington sangiovese?  Not only that, but the recent mailer I received wants me to take 2.5 cases of wine for a total ticket of $2175, in order to get 3 bottles of sangiovese.

    Ooh-la.  Has anyone seen a California 100% sangiovese that costs more than this?

    I am suprised (mildly) that you can't get some kind of reciprocal

    deal going with Leonetti and your winery.

    Professional courtesy etc etc.

    Agree with J Bonne. The Sangiovese is quite good.

    A brief check on Wine Search Pro shows the 2004 available at

    Wine cask in Santa barbara for $62 and at Taylor and Norton in Sonoma $69.00. (they have the 2003 for the same price)

    Leonetti wines have a lot of fans and they have no problem selling out at these prices.

    They can be found on the retail market with a little perseverance.

    Why would anyone pay such prices for oaky sangiovese? There is a glut of high quality over-oaked sangiovese in Tuscany that you can find for half the price.

    Sangiovese in the US

    in Wine

    Posted

    can't speak to the price-value bit, Rose, but i can say that Leonetti's sangio has never disappointed, which is a rare thing for me to say.  it's probably the least expensive entry into the Leonetti portfolio, and remains one of the wines of theirs i enjoy the most.

    i know their mailing list has frustrated you in the past, but see if you can find a bottle on the open market.  in Walla Walla, at least, you can occasionally hunt one down for market price, no need to buy the full 2.5 cases. better yet, strike a deal to go in on it with a few folks.

    It dissapoints me.

    Oregon 2006

    in Wine

    Posted

    Craig may be reticent to speak for more than Anne Amie wines, so I'll chime in on behalf of the 2005 Oregon Pinor noir vintage as a whole: it seems to be pretty awesome! (Let's not forget, either, that there is an entire other, warm climate, wine region in Southern Oregon that grows everything from Albarino to Zinfandel, and my comments here apply only to the Willamette Valley).

    I've barrel- and now bottle-tasted 2005 Pinots from a variety of better-known Oregon producers and they uniformly have an element that has been somewhat lacking in many recent vintages: elegance. Both 2004 and 2005 produced very small Pinot crops, but with better overall balance certainly than 2003, and I'd argue even the much vaunted 2002 vintage. For my taste, 2005 are the best Pinots here since 1999.

    To generalize: they have good concentration (more than '04), and more of the signature Willamette Valley structure (as in, acidity), without the high alcohol or harsh tannins of many earlier vintages. The fruit flavors are bright and forward, tend to be red focused (though that does vary somewhat by sub appellation) with supple textures and less lavish alcohol. They lack the jammy qualities of the '03s (and many 0'2s) and may disappoint those who like the high-scoring plumpness of those vintages. 2005 was by no means an easy vintage to deal with, but knowledge and experience seem to have produced some amazing wines.

    Of course, I believe it is better to follow the producer than the vintage. Good producers will almost always make good wines in bad vintages—great wines in great vintages. So if huge extraction is your favor, find producers who make that style and even in '04 and '05 you'll get bigger wines. But for some of that iron-fist-in-a-velvet-glove quality that the Willamette Valley is capable of producing when the stars align, I'd put my money on the '05s (but get them while you can--supply will be short.)

    As for 2006, winemakers I've talked to say the fruit resembles 2003, but with better balance and flavors. Heat summation was nearly as high as 2003 in many places, the fruit all came in at once leaving many wineries scrambling for tank space, and yields were much higher than the last two vintages (despite a lot  of dropped fruit earlier in the year). The early money says look for high alcohols, low natural acidity (that can be ameliorated), but really good flavors and ripe tannins.

    Of course, this all very early stuff . . . not much has gone to barrel yet, so we'll have to wait awhile to get a better read!

    -Cole Danehower

    I could not agree more.

    (Hi Cole! Welcome to eGullet.)

    If it's not Kraft it's not Parmesan

    in Food Traditions & Culture

    Posted

    After an absence I checked back and caught up on all the responses to the thread, so perhaps this post will run a bit long but in response to what a few have said -

    do not think this thread is at all about "snobbism". I think it relates to the issue of quality. In that I am reminded of the saying found in nearly all faiths.....

    "If it is 'like' an egg, it is not as good as an egg". If you call it Parmesan or Parmigiano and it doesn't carry the seal of that Consortia di Parmigiano it ain't real Parmesan and it ain't as good!!! _DanielRogov

      Part of this thread initially was and is about snobism.  About condescending attitudes of what is and isn't good.  That it isn't parmigianno reggiano doesn't mean it isn't as good or better (totally subjective) only that it is different.  In my fridge at all times I have parmigianno regianno and peccorino romano, and usually grana padono and assiago as well.  Do I appreciate them? Yes.  Are they always what I want? No. Sometimes I like good old Kraft Parmesan (and I don't keep mine in the fridge.)  It may not be as complex, as subtle, or melt as well but that does not mean that it isn't good.  Do you or others have to like it? No, by all means.  Many others though who do not like it condemn it and make disparaging remarks about those who do enjoy it. 

      60 years! For sixty years, well before real parm became widely commercially available, this was the ONLY alternative for many years for the vast majority of the population of the United States. -AnneCross

      Being that I'm 54 that puts me in the early years, starting when it was probably little over a decade old, and yes at a time Parmigiano Reggiano was not readily available.  Is it cheese? yes.  Is it Parmesan? Yes.  Is it Parmigiano-Reggiano? No, and it doesn't pretend to be either.  Kraft Parmesan has also probably led more of us to be open to going on to the fine Italian cheeses. 

      For me to try to make cabernet sauvignon here in the northern Willamette Valley would not do justice to that vine. There may be many consumers that love it, but it would not be an honest thing to do. That's how I feel about Kraft Parmesan, it's just not an honest product so it should not be used as it only degrades a dish.-Craig Camp

        How dare you make Pinot Noir in Oregon when we have grown it here first in California and also to make a wine that earlier stemmed from France? Blasphemy I say! ---  Honest?  Get real.  Kraft Parmesan is honest.  Is it Italian? No.  Does it pretend to be? No.  Who are you too to say it 'degrades' a dish?  Kraft Parmesan is no more a fraud to cheese than your Pinot is to California or French Pinot (and I do enjoy the Oregon Pinot's.)  I do not take offense at your being passionate about your wine or about products from Italy, in fact I embrace your enthusiasm.  I am however put off when you hoist yourself so high as to condemn my choices.

    The point is its very EASY to cook well if you cook good stuff. - Craig Camp

      Good stuff can be made with Kraft Parmesan and with other products that you feel are inferior.  Beef brisket is an inferior cut of beef, does that mean a Texan can't make it melt in your mouth and leave you craving more? No.  Maybe too the 'good stuff' or better stuff isn't the flavor I want for the dish.  Does that make my choice inferior? No.

    That's the answer isn't it? There's the real stuff and the imposters. Why should the imposters have the right to use the place-name of the real stuff. At some point there needs to be some respect for authentic producers and at the very least they should have their place-names protected and preserved.- Craig Camp 

      This I think is sheer lunacy.  It isn't an imposter, it is what it is.  It extends not only here to Parmesan but to other areas such as wine as well.  They aren't attempting to rip-off the places name. They are simply identifying a type of product.  I'm not saying Kraft is identical, it isn't.  Could an America produce a parmesan cheese on a par with that from Italy? Quite possibly, I don't know.  Would that make it an imposter? No. Only if it claimed to be from Italy would it be an imposter.  The first Port I had was an American Port.  Did I learn that port originates from and is primarily attributed to Portugal? Yes.  Was I duped? No. In fact, liking it made me find out more and gravitated me towards Portugueese Port.  If you want to talk imposters talk of forgers, otherwise (imho) it is overblown.  Face it, those with any degree of knowledge or intelligence will know the difference and for those who don't, their opinions on the matter are truly inconsequential.

    To be against a product like Kraft Parmesan is not sanctimonious, it's just caring about food.  - Craig Camp

    You care about your food and I'll care about mine.  It isn't about caring, it is about taste.  There is no right or wrong, simply an individuals like or dislike.

    I may have misinterpreted the topic of this post but I didn't think the point was a debate about making anyone's cooking better, just an appreciation for an admittedly inferior product.

    To compare putting Syrah into a Pinot Noir and calling it Pinot and Kraft's product and Parmesan is hardly equal. The topic of this post suggests that Kraft is not "Parmesan", which is a given. This type of debate irkes me, because it infers that cheap products are somehow "unworthy". They are out there because they are sold, and used by many, despite differing tastes. A steak is still a steak, whether it's ordered at Sizzler or Peter Luger.

    I thought the point of the post was admitting a taste for an some what gauche product, and letting it be at that. No one suggested it was "good cooking".-Meridith380

    You are right about the topic being, in part, about liking a product that may not be thought of as politically correct amongst food snobs.  I expected and desired to hear the negative remarks as well because I think there needs to be more overall acceptance that many things can be good.  How good is all up to individual tastes.  I think it is right to educate people about the better things (or things we perceive as being better) as well.  I for one, strongly take offense though at being told or hearing anyone be told that they are wrong and I feel that happens a lot here and out in the everyday world as well.  -----  It is also true that some funky foods are just plain good or taste good.  Kraft Parmesan is one of them.  I like Kraft Paresan on chilli as well.  No way in hell that I'd ever use a high grade Parmigianno there, that would be useless.  Also there is the fact that it is a good old comfort food.

    I'll own up to loving Miracle Whip--next to salt, it's the best thing to put on a fresh ripe tomato--and if you go over to the "Dinner!" thread and go back about 30 pages or so, you will see that I can turn Kraft Macaroni and Cheese Dinner into a thing of beauty. -MarketStEl

    Try substituting tomoatoes for lime with shots of good tequila.  The combination is really nice. 

      Most of us here in the states who are over 30 have grown up by being initiated into the world of Italian style cheeses through good old Kraft Parmesan or something similar.  As we've grown older (and hopefully wiser) we've been exposed to more and I for one have enjoyed the new experiences.  In other areas I've been a part of  the group that has so enthusiastically promoted the new while condemning the old but I've outgrown that type of attiude.  I find the condemnation and vehemence much like the overbearing attitude of some of the born agains or other radical (imho) religeous groups.  If an Italian from Italy had a problem with me calling it Parmesan I could change my terminology around that person.  Same as with Port around one from Portugal or Champagne around a Frenchman (reluctantly) but to have that thrust upon me by someone else raises my dander and brings out the stubborn Swede in me. 

      All of us here on EG, whether we agree or disagree on a topic, I think we all share the desire to both learn from others and share with others and in the process we all grow better.  I don't think (in fact I'm certain) we acheive that goal when we put down what others like.  One can't validate their own view at the cost of putting down and discrediting someone elses.  Only when we acknowledge the others viewpoint (whether we agree or not) can we then try to share something new which we feel (or know in our hearts) is better.  This is actually just a simple sales situation (as most everything in life is.)  If you have a better product you don't need to beat down the composition, just bring out the positives of yours.  When you beat down the competition (in this case Kraft) if anything, to those who like the competition you send the message your product isn't good enough to stand on its own.

    I disagree.

×
×
  • Create New...