It is 2014 and Wine by Cush is definitely resurrected. It was not dead but was returned from being under lock and key of passworded blogs that get filed just in case. The trouble that followed was how hard it is for one to write stuff and post while on the move most of the time. Months passed until I tried one day and what do you know Windows Mobile WordPress App does allow multiple log ins. That was a victory for wine writing right there! A non-diluted app unlike Android and think iOS (was so long ago) enabled me to dump content in here as I pleased. I regret my most recent posts express the lack of appreciation by professional writers or artists in general with editors or censors in general. They are not the enemy but get on your nerves hence if somebody shoots one of them, it may be much less of a loss than generally believed. That is a joke and I am glad we are all on good terms. I shall have editors and am sure in exchange for not paying my editor or editors they will run a tight and rigid blog that will be hard to breath in for any non-paying and rebellious writer. The result may be good. Content that has value but lacks deliberate typos and insistence on insulting the reader. That is the state of this blog. Editor or not, it will keep publishing and publishing in 2014 or as long as Windows Mobile shall live on. I will be very busy but between here and my My Week in Wine blog I shall do my damage and will be praised as done contributing to the industry! This is a tough year. I have to blog write on wine which requires physical events. That means I have to be places which is not my favorite thing to do. Writing is the less troublesome part. I have a full proof system to avoid a few things not appreciated hence making the prediction “You will make many enemies this year” not come true. I don’t have bad things to say or I mix them up real good with other stuff and good luck getting me on them. I deny I did it and you get it. I shall mark good not bad. Too many bads out there and San Francisco Chronicle writers will whitewash them or be on the run for pointing them out. Independent writers need not worry about anything but good. I read 13% into a generic wine book and feel like vomiting already. I cannot read any more. This happens everytime and the trouble is I know these contents so well I want to cry and say SO WHAT? I know all this shit and why do I have to hear it again and again. Wine writing seems to be stuck in a foundation loop majority can never rise above. Same stupid questions and same stupid answers and they call it wine writing. I cannot do that. I have a huge load of writing ahead and after hearing the command to blah blah write first blah blah kick everyones ass blah blah then wine business again I felt like I am in graduate school. Comprehensive and fair writing to cover enough of an industry to actually matter is a lot of activity and writing. One cannot get anything valuable out of incidental writing done to record events and experiences in time and space unless rarely or if a huge quantity is made available. I am called to do that. So be it. I am confused and lost and can care less. That is 2014 for now. I rip anything wine related apart limb by limb and detail the events in writing making the folks at top of wine education field very happy while a new format of writing will shield me from accusation that I have said bad things about somebody or somebody’s wine! Uncle Cush does not do that. We tried to return to wine business and sort of worked out. Wine industry cares little for another employee even us. They have business standards. Wine power folk are not that easy. I have been gone for a while when they had to hold fort against doushbags that roam and rob and destroy as industry folk. They demand I match their workload likewise before we are all on good terms and everyone say them, them and oh there is that asshole Cush again and he is one of them for sure. I shall write again. Everyone better be nice to me or my editor may be in danger. You just behave out there so nothing bad happens. 1 January 2013 11:34 am San Leandro, California
Today is Sunday. I did my laundry and the weather has turned warm. I did have enough time left to take care of a few things. I did have a talk with the person running the group for the Advanced exam and won’t be going there any more. One has to have the aspiration to be a master sommelier to study wine. That is one way of looking at the whole thing. I do agree it is very easy to train people who are learning from scratch and very hard to train someone like me who has had a great deal of training but think studying to become a master sommelier is a poor approach for several reasons. Most importantly, difficult studies require the person to dig deep into the topic and specific boundaries of knowledge are not realistic. One can study wine for the sake of studying wine but have some direction in mind versus following step after step to pass an exam. I used to follow the latter system and did very well in college until I took a Human Relations course at College of San Mateo. I was taught a new way of studying in college. In place of playing the grade game, one can seek to acquire knowledge while keeping the academics in mind also. That is how my grade averages went from top honors in junior college to flat B in university. The desire to acquire knowledge makes one abandon many of the necessary steps that lead to the highest scores. This approach does not eliminate the need to follow the steps to the academic goals but keeps the original goal in forefront of activities. I think that is what studying for an Advanced exam is about. Personally, I think anyone who opts to become a master sommelier or master of wine is likely to rank on the lowest when it comes to a desire for knowledge. Both credentials were designed to acknowledge a level of achievement and not be a way of becoming a type of person. The advanced sommelier or wine diploma are both what one needs to be on one of the highest levels of the field. The goal ought to be to become an advanced sommelier which requires the highest knowledge and provides the opportunity to gain from the field and develop knowledge. The exact same thing can be true of wine diploma. Is the master credential a practical goal to shoot for rather than the equivalents without the attention? I like to use an example from someone else about how many enter academics with the goal of becoming a PhD or Doctor of Medicine. Many do achieve these goals and we know from real life knowledge is one of the least determining factors in reaching such goals once aimed from the start. Politics, academic games, and many other unrelated factors are what determines the final success and not knowledge. We also know from experience the majority of those who are medical doctors are better avoided and the majority of those who attain a PhD are good for a stable teaching job and little other contribution. The question remains again is there a difference between the person who has from the start sought to become a master of wine or master sommelier and one who seeks to acquire knowledge within academic guidance? I think the answer is the former plays any game to reach that final goal while the latter will continue to acquire and develop knowledge before and after the formal announcements. I think it is inherent in the structure of all these advanced programs and credentials that the highest levels were reserved only if those at the top of the field deemed a person is one of their standing and not by way of some examination. I think the implied thing is one type of person will produce while another will do whatever to achieve a formal standing. My own question is should I be seeking to become a master of wine or master sommelier before participating in studies in such directions make sense for me and others? My answer is no. The idea of a university (not American which is German model) is the meeting of the minds allows one to develop ideas and knowledge. Any advanced study follows the same format and a qualified participant can develop a mind from such interactions and studies while tailoring everything to succeed at some examination is a political objective and not the true goal of a serious study. It is worth mentioning there is no knowledge without the qualified individuals dedicating the time to development of such knowledge and very little may be developed by those who sacrifice knowledge for the sake of some formal gain. I think my point becomes only those who are qualified to participate in the field and hopefully contribute something should be allowed to enter such studies and not those who seek some official credential. Such participants will deal with the realities of the field of wine and the structure of the community will lead them toward formal examinations also. Those who seek to enter a community with the ultimate goal of earning a highest examination credential have motives beyond the realities of the field in mind. That makes me think a better way to study wine for the sake of knowledge and the realities of the field is by studying it at an advanced level through structures not aiming for fashionable or profitable credentials. I can probably learn French, German and other wines much better through bodies which specialize in such studies (for the sake of the knowledge and skill) rather than some final credential. The knowledge acquired will probably put me on par with the best of the candidates for such exams but again how many of those who achieve the exams will actually contribute to the field versus carrying some badge of honor? I also believe another thing that studying for an exam and acquiring knowledge do not go together. One ought to study the topic and master (???) the knowledge before one seeks to develop for an exam. I think the former step is ignored by the way of accepting the presence of the multitudes of those aspiring for the highest credential at any cost! If the credential is to retain any value in the long run, it ought to denote substantial inherent value. How can those who are not seriously dedicated to the subject and its study foremost maintain or increase the value of such credential if all that matters is the passing of an exam? I think it is best to separate the two completely. The study of wine should be a completely separate topic and many who seek such study and succeed will be able to return to the field and contribute. Some of these will choose to prepare for some examination. This examination has served as both the ends and the means causing much confusion. Those who seek a paper with status will hardly be willing to undergo the heavy burden of such study with no political victory at the end in the form of a piece of paper with some worldly value. Frankly, that is what makes or breaks the fields. The quality and quantity of qualified individuals depend on too many factors and ought to be carefully controlled or the field will decline with no end in sight.