The LAST WORD on the Oenophile’s Quandary??

It is high praise for a question-poser indeed when a totally independent third party is provoked to write over 1600 words in response to all facets of the question — all of it interesting and civil.

Such is the case today. Mr. Ryan O’Connell, a winemaker in France, has taken my exploration of the Oenophile’s Quandary and explored it even further:

If optimal stopping applies to the oenophile’s quandary, it’s because the oenophile must settle on a date to consume each bottle. In that sense, each bottle has a stopping problem where the oenophile must decide to wait for a better occasion to drink the wine. So really, you’re not choosing wines. You’re choosing dates. And the quality of the wine has very little to do with the enjoyment. It’s more the context in which you consume the wine. In this sense, the quality of improvement over time is less relevant and the oenophile’s quandary is reduced to an expression of optimal stopping. Is quality of improvement over time a necessary condition? No. You can lose quality of improvment over time and you’ll still have a basic stopping problem because some days will be better than others for drinking that special bottle.

YOU TOOK THE BAIT RYAN AHA HA HA seriously I love it when folks do this.

ALSO: A commenter points us in the direction of the actual paper in which Dr. Dixit used Elaine (from Seinfeld)’s critical contraceptive-sponge shortage to determine the numbers alluded to in my previous post. Here it is! (PDF)

Revisiting the Oenophile’s Quandary

In last week’s comic #654, my characters discuss a philosophical question known as the Oenophile’s Quandary — when to enjoy something that is being saved for a special occasion, and which in fact even improves with time. Of course, I made up the Oenophile’s Quandary, as I do every plausible-sounding fact that somehow worms its way into Wondermark (including this fact stating that fact), but a few kind readers followed up with me with additional information on the topic.

In a tweet, @flyingpawn pointed me to an economist’s answer to essentially this exact question:

Dear Economist,
I have inherited six bottles of excellent wine, which I plan to consume, over time, on special occasions. But how do I know when to open a bottle when I don’t know what occasions lie ahead? I don’t want to use up all the bottles within a few months on mediocre occasions, but neither do I still want to be hoarding them until I die.

I am pleased to announce that the question is answered definitively in the article, with numbers, the answer attributed to economist Avinash Dixit. There are some base assumptions made in the calculation, so it may not apply to every unique situation, but at least someone’s taken a stab at it and for most people it’s just nice to have someone else tell them an answer that sounds pretty authoritative.

In trying to track down the actual calculations done by Dr. Dixit, or any substantiation at all of the answer, I learned that the Oenophile’s Quandary may not be a question of philosophy but rather of mathematics — in particular, the theory of “optimal stopping” as applied in statistics or economics. An article in American Scientist puts it this way:

A decision maker observes a process evolving in time that involves some randomness. Based only on what is known, he or she must make a decision on how to maximize reward or minimize cost. In some cases, little is known about what’s coming. In other cases, information is abundant. In either scenario, no one predicts the future with full certainty. Fortunately, the powers of probability sometimes improve the odds of making a good choice.

Economists put equations to these questions, assuming that each variable has some hard quantifiable element to it. For Oenophile’s Quandary questions to rest in the realm of philosophy, then, they must deal with purely subjective issues. May the quality of aging wine be measured objectively?

A tweet from @OldMiner pointed me to this article about the aging of wine:

MYTH: Old wine tastes better than new wine.
REALITY: Although all wines change with age, very few wines noticeably improve beyond a few months and wine maturity does have its limits.
MY CONTENTIONS: Part of the problem is that some wine increases in monetary value as it gets older. The public fails to grasp that the value only rises because of the wine’s increasing rarity, not its increasing quality.

So where does this leave us? Wine may still be good (as in the question at the top of this post) without necessarily improving with age. Is the quality of improvement over time a necessary condition of the Oenophile’s Quandary? Is the question of enjoyment one that can be answered with economics, or should it be left to philosophy? What occasions have caused you to crack open a special bottle of whatever? Leave a comment and let us know!

A BUSY WEEKEND on BOTH COASTS

This weekend I’ll be in Bethesda, MD for the annual Small Press Expo! I gotta say, I love SPX. It’s run by volunteers, features work by a truly amazing lineup of independent and creative artists and entrepreneurs, and last year I missed my flight home and got to spend a long, delightful day looking up weird old newspaper articles in the Library of Congress.

I’ll be in the TopatoCo Nation along the right-hand wall, joined by luminaries and friends such as Kate Beaton, Scott C, Anthony Clark, and many more people whose work you should also already be familiar with. Hope to see you there!

If you’re not going to be at SPX because you’re stuck in dumb ol’ Los Angeles under an extradition treaty, on Saturday the 11th check out the ShadowMachine Art Show in Hollywood! ShadowMachine is the animation company that produces the TV show Robot Chicken, among others, and this art show is all Robot Chicken artists and animators showing off their own personal work. My wife Nikki, a Robot Chicken puppet fabricator, will have several pieces in the show, including sculptures she’s made of characters from the comics Goats, Hark! A Vagrant, Diesel Sweeties and xkcd.

The pony figurine at the art show may well be the last one in the world still available for sale (they were a limited-edition run that sold out very quickly, earlier this year) so come check out the show!

The Intergalactic Nemesis: a live-action graphic novel

If I were in Austin this weekend, I’d check out the live premiere of The Intergalactic Nemesis, which might be described as a mashup of theater, radio drama, silent film and animation. This video will give you an idea:

The stage version of The Intergalactic Nemesis projects the comic book artwork panel-by-panel while three actors perform the voices, one foley artist creates the sound effects, and one keyboardist plays the score, all live.

This looks like a really neat thing to sit in a theater and enjoy! I’m a big fan of taking the trouble to seek out unique experiences like this. I saw something similar once here in L.A.: a touring, contemporary silent film called Brand Upon the Brain!, which had been shot as a pastiche of 1920s silent films and which was shown in the theater with a live orchestra, sound-effects crew, and narrator (in my show, Daniel Handler). It was a terminally weird movie — about sucking people’s brains out, and so on; sort of bizarre-for-the-sake-of-bizarre which is a very hard thing to make enjoyable for a paying audience — but the spectacle and the craft of the music and the sound-effects and the whole bit was enthralling in itself. I didn’t even like the movie and I didn’t regret seeing it.

So I definitely recommend checking out The Intergalactic Nemesis if you’re in Austin this weekend! The show comes highly recommended by some of my Austinite friends who’ve seen these folks perform before. Performances are this Friday and Saturday, Sept. 3 & 4, at the Long Center. Tickets are here!

If you can’t make it to the live show, the full-length radio drama is also available as free downloadable MP3s!