Does Expensive Equal Better?

Over at the NY Times wine blog, The Pour, Eric Asimov is riffing on a new book about "the pomposity of wine critics" and the fact that they don't really know what they're talking about. In the book, "The Wine Trials," the author conducts a blind tasting of 520 wines by 500 tasters, both experts and everday drinkers. Among the shocking revelations is that a bottle of two buck chuck was favored over a $40 bottle of California Cab, and that a $10 bottle of sparkling Brut was preferred over Dom Perignon.

Of course, the concept is interesting, and I'll be the first to admit that I always feel a little bad about ordering the cheapest bottle at a restaurant, and that feeling is driven by a fear that I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. This is one of the many points Asimov hits on in his entry, but perhaps the best moment comes when he's discussing the study's use of "everyday drinkers." He brings up a hilarious (and probably true) point that given the choice between "Porky's" and the critically acclaimed "Persona," by Ingmar Bergman, most average viewers would go for "Porky's." Does this make it a better movie, or just a more likable one to the unknowledgable? Probably the latter. Anyway, have a look at the Pour to decide for yourself, if nothing else, it's an entertaining read.

http://thepour.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/11/you-can-please-all-the-peopleor-you-can-make-great-wine/#more-209