By her own admission, wine writer Natalie MacLean has a habit of drawing attention to herself, and not all of it is good.
That’s not a harsh judgment on the Canadian commentator and journalist. In the case of her new memoir, you can tell a book by its cover, the title and text reading, Wine Witch on Fire: Rising from the Ashes of Divorce, Defamation, and Drinking too Much. On the back cover, she credits herself with winning four James Beard Foundation Journalism Awards, a very notable accomplishment, but that comes after the boast that she was “named the World’s Best Drinks Journalist.”
It’s that balance, or perhaps imbalance, of attainment and attitude that draws her peers to attack or defend her, sometimes the same writers doing both. And MacLean is not tone deaf to the fact she does this.
Lots of people are told their mates want out of the marriage, and there probably isn’t a wine and spirits writer who has not drunk too much on occasion(s). What makes Wine Witch especially interesting within the wine-writing world is its third and central event – an attack on her journalistic honesty on Dec. 15, 2012, by the staff of the online publication, Palate Press.
Essentially, the focus of the signed editorial states:
"The core of Ms. MacLean’s work is the publication of wine reviews and food and wine pairings. In addition to her own reviews, which are often a sentence or less, Ms. MacLean includes professional wine reviews by writers from other publications. The reviews sometimes include the writer’s name, but never the publication or a link. Rather, they are all accredited to “Vintages Wine Catalogue,” a Liquor Control Board of Ontario publication which runs fully accredited reviews, including author, date, and publication, to drive wine sales, much like any retailer on line or on shelf-talkers. There is a simple phrase for this practice in which Ms. MacLean has engaged – copyright infringement."
The publication was religious in tracking down many non-credited reviewers, including an outraged Jancis Robinson, and there was little doubt that MacLain had done what they charged she had done, although her defense was she didn’t realize – for a variety of reasons – that doing so was a breach of journalism ethics and most likely legal ethics.
But there are three things that lead the reader, including this one, to be sympathetic with MacLain, however attention-grabbing her reputation has been:
One, is Palate Press apparently never reached out to MacLain to get her side of the story before publication, a grievous error if you are attacking someone’s ethical standards and livelihood. Most newspapers would fire or severely reprimand a reporter for so doing.
Second, MacLain went beyond explaining her ignorance by apologizing quickly and changing her practices, although, admittedly not to the complete satisfaction of her accusers.
Third, in the months that followed, the online attacks on MacLain became intolerably vicious. Having made their point, they wouldn’t let it rest. To some, blood is a more powerful aphrodisiac than wine.
Personally, I so hate online commentary that a few years ago I took a vow of celibacy never to screw around again with social media, a vow that I’ve kept. Totally unaware of this controversy, I began writing for Palate Press a year and a half later in late summer 2013. I assume the continuing arguments/attacks were taking place in other forums by that time.
But should you read the book?
It is an interesting memoir, although MacLean is too dramatic for my tastes. For example, using her “Wine Witch” persona, she idly fantasizes herself as historic witches who were burned at the stake, which I found a bit over the top.
And she strongly plays on the misogyny theme, even though several of her critics were women. There is no doubt that perhaps all men have a misogynist gene, even those of us who try hard not to be one. But every time a woman’s ethics are attacked, misogyny isn’t always to blame.
It is interesting that most of her Canadian colleagues didn’t rush to her side, but it seems that many of them (some quoted in her book) never liked her as a person or as a competitor to begin with.
So yes, read the book. I did…but then I was sent a review copy. Two, in fact. Overall, I’m somewhat sympathetic to MacLean. True, she has had all the perks of being a wine celebrity. But also true, a divorce, a serious drinking problem and an attack on professional credibility, even if it is somewhat justified, isn’t the best way to settle into midlife.
68