Two weeks ago, the Post's Steve Cuozzo filed on a rant on esoteric wine lists, in which he took aim at the confusing "all-natural" selection at Reynard. The article drew criticism from wine professionals and writers across the country, including Reynard wine director Lee Campbell and New York Times writer Eric Asimov.
Now, Cuozzo responds to all those "eco-wine maniacs" that caused a "coast-to-coast hissy fit" over his column. Noting that he "inadvertently aroused the slumbering dragon of politically tainted, anti-mainstream wine wonkery," Cuozzo explains that he finds fault with many of these wines because they just don't taste very good:
A restaurant has the “right” to sell whatever it wants. But Reynard’s list isn’t just “unconventional.” It is in service of a very particular philosophy of winemaking, the fruit of which tastes even worse than it sounds. The Times’ headline asked, “Should a wine list educate or merely flatter you?” The right answer is neither — it should merely taste good. But don’t let that get in the way of loftier ideals of “progress.”Cuozzo still maintains that Reynard would be a more enjoyable restaurant "if there were alternatives to its current wine choices."
· Wine & Cheesed [NYP]
· All Coverage of Steve Cuozzo [~ENY~]