While some of what Ms Feiring says is interesting, her arrogant and conceited style left me cold. She has no room for other opinions. Interestingly, when wine was made the "proper and authetic" way, sales in the U.S. were low. Now they have exploded. Maybe people are buying what they like rather than listening to opinionated and bitter people like Alice.

In this book Alice Feiring sets out to push her singular, closed minded idea of what the wine world should look like. She travels the old wine countries complaining of the ever increasing practices of over oaking, over processing and the loss of soul in the wine industry. While I agree with her to an extent, she denounces certain practices in the wine industry that have helped the wine world in a number of ways. Perhaps the most telling of these is that of making wine more palatable to a wider range of people. Feiring repeatedly criticizes Australian wine, a country that, it could be argued, has introduced more people to wine then any other country. Neither myself nor Feiring like Yellow Tail but it still fills an important place for many people new to wine. She clearly does not understand this. Continually through the book I get the feeling Feiring is an isolated, insular New Yorker who has no understanding and certainly no experience of running a vineyard, a winery or the knowledge of how to make a successful wine.

And while she purports to be saving the world form Parkerization, she herself is no better. In the book she has a conversation with Parker were she accuses him of being "misunderstood because [he] write[s] with such an absolute conviction of being correct". When I read quote I laughed at that thought, because this is the perfect way to describe Feiring's own writing. Feiring is only interested in her own ideal wine world.

Despite the title of the book, I still can't work out how she saved the world from Parkerization or anything else for that matter.

The Battle for Wine and Love is an entertaining and educational voyage through the world of wine making and tasting. Ms. Feiring has a keen sense of observation, and her detailed, sharp writing on both wine, her personal life and 'wine personalities' will inform and put a smile on your face. If you are interested in wine, then you will enjoy the book!

Excellent antidote to what I had begun to call the "Merlotization" of the wines of the world. Great insights, good sources, and winemakers. This book should become the guidebook, and Alice the leader, for the terroir-hounds to retake the wine world and once again find wines of individual personality, and panache--freed from toasty new oak, and gooey fruit.

Like many other readers, I hoped to find objective arguments for diversity and non-adulterated wines. After finishing the book, I was concerned that she might have weaken her own stance.

While I agree with the points she hoped to convey, I cannot agree with her logic. Her writing grossly simplified the issues: science is bad, biodynamic is good; big corporation is bad, small producer is good. I have had many of the wines mentioned in the book, and I agree that they are unique and good. However, not all of them are from small producers, and certainly not all of them are made in the absence of technology.

Mr. Robert Parker is without question the most influential wine critic today, and perhaps with his enormous influence should also come the responsibility to preserve the regional diversity of wines. Mr. Parker is a big boy, and he certainly doesn't need me to defend him, but he has become the whipboy for everything that is wrong in the wine world. Consumers, producers as well, should realize that Mr. Parker's view represent one man's palate (or a few in the case of the Wine Advocate), and even he says in his publications that the final judge should be our own palates. My point is that Mr. Parker alone cannot be blamed for everything one does not like in the wine world, and blaming him is simply avoiding the bigger issues; in my opinion, all these issues are just the natural progression of wine becoming an international business. Instead of singling out Mr. Parker, Ms. Feiring could do the wine-drinking public a big favor by encouraging everyone to trust their own palate and explore different wine styles.

Perhaps the single biggest reason I am so negative toward this book is that Ms. Feiring seems to judge the quality of wines by their producers (whether they practice biodynamics) rather than by what's in the bottles. Throughout this book, I get a feeling that she has already made up her mind before she brought the glass to her mouth. While that's perfectly fine in the privacy of her own mind, she needs to be more objective considering the audience this book will reach. I agree that wines should not be manipulated and should reflect their regional diversities, but the reason should be more than "because I say so!"

While I have been harsh and negative about this book, I do want to point out that many of the wines mentioned and likened by the author are truly excellent! For instance, of the Spanish wines I have tried, many were refined and many were rustic, but none was as profound as Lopez de Heredia; give it a try and you will know what I mean.

Ms. Feiring spoke from her heart, and there is nothing wrong with that. I just hope that, in addition to her passion, she could have presented her arguments in a more constructive and objective way.