What is the Nature of Wine?

To be honest, I’m not sure of the etiquette of responding to a comment on a blog by way of a new post altogether, but the remarks, by my friend and colleague Miguel Lecuona, about my “Great Wines” piece earlier in the week, seem to warrant something more serious than the usual rhetorical nod of the head and moving on to the next subject.

This is primarily a result of the confluence of two key factors: The subject being discussed (it’s of huge importance to wine-lovers everywhere) and the trenchant manner in which Miguel addressed it.

To begin, I’d like to offer some clarification to my remarks in the original post. My issue is not with treating certain wines as trophies. In all honesty, if I had the space and the funds, I’d certainly display my most prized bottles. As a wine lover and wine collector, I of course appreciate the pride that comes from showing off the bottles that you most covet. Rather, my issue is with collectors who purchase the wines for the sole purpose of display, without ever intending to open them up, and who hold onto the bottles until they have more in common with vinegar than anything they’d want to swirl and sniff and savor. That, to me, seems to defeat the purpose of the wine having been created in the first place.

Miguel makes an interesting point when he compares “the aspirational collector who displays wines...[with] the collector who displays art, watches, guns, books, big game, or whatever they're into.” And, indeed, there are similarities there--but only to a point. Visual art’s raison d’être is to be displayed; there’s nothing else you can do with it but admire it, study it, etc. It can’t be consumed, and as long as it is treated properly, it will continue to serve its intended purpose forever, or close to it. Watch collectors, too, tend to wear their prized possessions, even if it’s just once in a while. Maybe that vintage Patek Philippe gets taken off its display stand only for weddings or other events of the sort, but generally, it’ll get worn once in a while...or had been worn at some point since it left the factory in Switzerland. Same with the other examples: Books get read, even if it’s a digital version; guns, even the most prized antique ones, were ostensibly shot at some point; and big game serves the same purpose as any other work of visual art on display.

It seems to me, however, that there’s a significant difference when it comes to wine. Yes, displaying it can be a beautiful thing, but to do so without ever having the intention of consuming it seems to miss what its essential purpose is, which is to be consumed. (Even if the producers' main objective in creating it was motivated solely by profit, which, either way, seems inextricably linked to the quality of the product itself, and the pleasure it will ultimately bring when it gets consumed.)

Now, I would never argue with Miguel’s contention that “the reason some fine wines sell for what they do is because [they] offer something more than mere consumption. The 2008 Lafites are now worth 10x more to the Chinese than they are to me. It's a $2000 bottle in Hong Kong! The businessman who can give the gift of Lafite in China honors his guests, and also demonstrates his own power (or his prescience if he bought them at $200).” But we have to ask ourselves why these particular wines fetch such prices and command such respect in the first place. And the answer, I think, is that they generally have a history of performing at a higher level, of providing greater pleasure when consumed and therefore possess and confer more prestige, than their lesser counterparts. So while that hypothetical Chinese businessman may never have tasted, say, a 2008 Lafite, he knows that it will be valued, and confer honor on the recipient of such a generous gift, because of its reputation for excellence and its long, illustrious history. Nothing about it is based on a hypothetical; rather, that chateau’s pedigree is inextricably tied to its history and performance right now. Lafite’s etching an “8” into its bottle is smart business, as is Mouton’s label-art, but neither would mean a whole lot were it not for the juice in the bottle. (Plenty of producers feature original artwork on their labels, but none approach the level of prestige of Mouton’s.) To use Yellow Tail, as Miguel did in his comment, an “8” etched into that bottle would have precious little impact on its desirability. Why? Because it’s not Lafite. Or Latour, or Margaux, or DRC, or any of a dozen other producers whose products have proven their worth, and justified the passion with which people covet them, as a result of what they have historically provided when the corks are popped and the wine consumed.

Over the years, Miguel and I have shared several great wines--I remember one particular Bacchanal of an evening for which the wine list included Margaux 1983, Leoville Las Cases 2000, Leoville Barton 1995, some older Figeac, and more. I even recall trading--like kids with really expensive baseball cards--a bottle of Gaja Sperss 2003 for a Cos d’Estournel 2003. And while that bottle of Cos is still resting in my cellar, I fully plan on opening it one day, when it’s reached the level of maturity that I’m waiting for, with friends and family...just like we did that evening at Miguel’s house. It’s display-worthy, of course, and I do show it to my friends when they come by. But the fact that it’s being displayed is just a temporary step along the road toward its being consumed.

I will, however, agree unequivocally with one observation Miguel made: I absolutely started tearing up when I first walked into the vineyard at Cheval-Blanc. And yes, my Facebook profile photo is of me walking through the vineyard at Chateau d’Yquem. (In fact, Miguel took the photo!) And while I respect Chaddsford, and very much believe in supporting the local wine producers wherever you live, it’s history is unarguably different from that of the great growths of Bordeaux. But using those photos doesn’t imply that I wouldn’t drink their wines if I had them in my collection. On the contrary, popping the corks and the drinking the juice will actually afford the wines the chance to achieve what they were initially crafted to do: To end up in the bottom of a glass and be consumed.

(Finally, to end on a perhaps anti-climactic parenthetical, we could argue the nature of “intent” for an inanimate object for years and not come to a conclusion. When all is considered and tallied up, my real issue is this: Not drinking a bottle of great wine seems an awful waste. It is, of course, the owner’s right to do whatever he or she wants with the bottle--drink it, display it, blend it with ice cream and fruit and make a really expensive smoothie--but to never experience the wine itself seems anathema to the long history of wine and its essential nature as a consumable product.)

Read rest of entry

Australia 2010

There’s been so much wine news lately regarding the 2009 vintage in Bordeaux that we all could be forgiven if we’d forgotten that other parts of the world are dealing with the annual ebb and flow of luck regarding their fruit and juice. This happens everywhere and every year, of course, and certainly every time--as this year--Bordeaux is home to another remarkable vintage. (In the past decade alone, 2000, 2003, 2005, and, now, 2009, have all garnered the kind of press that any other region would kill for in a stretch of time twice as long.)

But to lose sight of the good (albeit less press-covered) fortunes of other parts of the wine world is to not only limit your wine knowledge and experience, but to ultimately hedge your bets against tasting some pretty remarkable juice when it becomes available.

This appears to be the case with the 2010 vintage in Australia--across the country. Decanter.com reported yesterday that “Rain and cool weather have favoured the 2010 vintage in Australia--in contrast to the heat and fire of last year.”

“From Western Australia to the eastern states,” the news item continued, “yields are reported to be lower than 2008 and ‘09, mainly due to a heat wave during flowering in November which affected some varieties including Chardonnay and Grenache.”

News of 2010’s quality comes at a time when more and more consumers are discovering the range and variety of wines coming out of Australia--that they are not all made in the “critter label - fruit bomb” style that so many of the most popular bottlings embody. Rather, Australia is home to a wide range of high-quality and distinct regions whose terroirs and grape varieties can produce wines every bit as detailed and pleasurable as the best of the Old World. The trick, as always, is for consumers to be exposed to them, and to taste them with the same level of excitement and open-mindedness that they bring to, say, Bordeaux, Brunello, or Burgundy.

A year like 2010, as well as its attendant good press, helps that cause tremendously.

Read rest of entry

Yalumba 'The Reserve' Cabernet Shiraz 2002 and 1990

I’ll be writing a complete rundown of the Wine Media Guild’s excellent Australian Cabernet lunch next week, but for now, with the weather cold and damp here in the Northeast, I thought I’d post a tasting note for two spectacular older wines I was lucky enough to sip alongside lunch that day: Yalumba’s Cabernet Shiraz ‘The Reserve’ 2002 and 1990. Both of these wines showed just how well Australian wines have the potential to evolve, even if far too many people still don’t give them the credit they so richly deserve in this regard.

The 2002 had a distinctly roasted nose, with hints of ground espresso and a Rhone-like asphalt note. The palate, all silky textured and still quite grippy, was rich with currant, cherry, sage, pepper, and a bit of licorice. It benefited immensely from the meal, as its youth was well-tamed by a bit of fat.

The 1990, on the other hand, was deeper, the nose a well of chocolate-covered black licorice, a whiff of charred meat, and a Bordeaux-like earthiness that headed in the direction of tobacco. The acid of the palate was still surprisingly fresh 20 years on, and what was just a hint of tobacco on the nose manifested itself on the palate in flavors of cigar, humidor cedar, and a really nice nod in the direction of bay leaf and, again, sage. It was, indeed, a wine at its peak, utterly well-crafted and a joy to drink.

I just wish more people realized the aging potential of Australia's top wines...

Read rest of entry

Wine Technology

No one really likes to talk about it, but technology plays an important role in a good bit of modern winemaking. And, in many cases, it is largely responsible for the significant uptick in quality around the world: Better conditions in wineries, a deeper understanding of what’s happening inside the grapes while they’re still growing in the vineyard, even the selection of yeasts and the environments in which they are allowed to do their magic: All of these, at some level or another, can be attributed to technological advances of some sort.

The question, though, is where does technology cease to be beneficial and start to alter the essential nature of wine to its detriment. After all, the interaction between grape and earth and climate that produces what is ostensibly a unique wine-expression year after year is a delicate thing; when it is too drastically altered, are the results desirable?

I ask this because of an article recently posted on forbes.com called “When Smoke Gets In Your Wine,” about an Australian company that has developed the technology to remove certain major flaws from the wines it processes. The article begins:

“Taking alcohol out of wine seems a bit like taking the fun out of a day at the beach—and certainly very un-Australian. But that is how Memstar, a Melbourne business, is making money. Memstar uses high-tech membranes (hence the first part of its name) to remove unwanted elements in wine, right down to the molecular level. Removing alcohol is the major use of the technology, but with a switch in the process other unwanted elements can be removed, including smoke taint from forest fires. Both problems, rising alcohol levels in wine caused by excess sugar in grapes, and smoke from such fires, have been blamed on a warming climate.”

Technological advance or unnecessary manipulation? The answer is likely to be as personal as your taste in wine. Either way, it’s worth thinking about, because this is a technology that could be here to stay, and will likely affect the wines we drink for a very long time to come.

Read rest of entry

Wine, Digestion, and Climate Change

Good news and bad news today from the world of wine.

First, the good: Wine Spectator recently reported on yet another benefit of red-wine consumption, and in this case it has nothing to do with those much-publicized antioxidants that are supposed to keep you young and healthy forever. The Spectator writes:

“Red wine not only goes well with a nice meal, it helps the stomach convert potentially harmful chemicals into less dangerous molecules before they're circulated in the body, according to a new study slated to be published in an upcoming journal of Toxicology. A team of Portuguese researchers found that specific polyphenols in red wine trigger the release of nitric oxide, a chemical that relaxes the stomach wall, helping to optimize digestion.”

Most wine drinkers have known for a long time that red wine settles the stomach, or, at the very least, somehow seems to lessen the burden on it both during and after a meal. Now, the science seems to back this up with chemical and biological evidence. Click here for the full story.

And now, the bad news: We’ve been warned about it for years, but now, it appears, the predictions might actually start to come true sooner rather than later. Decanter.com reports that, “Climate change could force Australia's Hunter Valley to plant alternative grape varieties to combat rising temperatures, spring frosts and a higher risk of disease, according to a new study.”

The full article is here. Scary stuff, indeed.

Read rest of entry

News from Australia

When Fred Franzia announced the launch of his new Down Under wines, there were grumblings that it could ruffle some feathers. And now, perhaps inevitably, it has resulted in legal action.

Decanter.com reported this weekend that Casella Wines, makers of the wildly popular Yellow Tail, were “suing California’s [and Franzia’s] Bronco Wine Company for trademark infringement.” Decanter continues:

“Casella is alleging that Bronco's use of square brackets around the name of the recently released super-cheap Down Under label infringes the '[yellow tail]' name which is trademarked.”

We’ll follow the story for you and let you know what happens.

In a separate story, 12 of Australia’s most prestigious producers are banding together to fight the perception that the country is home primarily to inexpensive, easy-drinking bottlings.

Decanter.com reported that “the group's chairman…said the group was formed because of increasingly negative comments about Australia only producing 'sunshine in a bottle' wines and not fine wines.”

High-end producers like de Bortoli, d’Arenberg, Henschke, and others are taking part.

Tense times, indeed, in Australia right now. It's enough to make you want to pop open a bottle of wine, no matter what the cost.

Read rest of entry

A New Solution to an Age-Old Problem?

Remember the first time you ordered a pricey bottle of wine in a restaurant and shuddered the moment the sommelier cracked open its screw top like the cap of a beer? It’s a moment that most wine lovers recall well, and probably smile at now that those closures have become not only accepted but fairly ubiquitous.

But, of course, they’re not perfect: While they eliminate the problems caused by natural corks tainted with TCA (2, 4, 6-trichloroanisole, which makes a wine taste musty or damp), they are not any sort of magic bullet. The main problem is their air-impermeability: Because they seal the bottle so well, they don’t allow any exchange of oxygen. This is fine for younger wines, but not so perfect for ones that need time in the bottle to develop and mature.

Which brings us to sintered glass stoppers, the newest entry into the bottle-closure ring. According to a recent post on Decanter.com, "they will be very different…[than] the Vino-Lok glass seals…which have a silicon ring between stopper and bottle top”

“The glass is sintered,” the article continues, “made with a microscopic weave that will allow ingress of oxygen…[mimicking] the porous nature of traditional cork.”

The new technology is even being given a trial run by Penfolds, one of Australia's most respected producers. How well these glass-to-glass closures work is yet to be determined, but one thing is certain: The search goes on for the perfect seal, and will continue until it’s found.

Read rest of entry

Three Dolla Koala?

Seven years after Americans made the acquaintance of Two Buck Chuck, it‘s time to brace for yet another ultra-inexpensive wine, this one grown in the Land Down Under but bottled, labeled, and shipped out across this country from California by none other than Fred Franzia, the man behind the “Chuck” wines.

An article this past weekend in The Modesto Bee goes into more detail (click here for the link), but the ultimate question is this: How do wines like “Two Buck Chuck” or “Three Dolla Koala” impact the industry as a whole? Are they good points of entry for wine beginners, or category killers that unfairly set expectations of price unrealistically low? And, finally, what has been your experience with the quality of wines like these—positive or negative? Let us know what you think by posting a comment below.

Read rest of entry