So,
three things happen:
1)
I finally knock off the bottle of Costières de Nîmes I acquired a
couple of weeks ago. This was the one I bought on Olly Smith's
recommendation - he called it 'Plump, sleek red with deep summery
fruit,' also, 'Spot on for serving lightly chilled with a barbecue',
a claim I couldn't double-check on account of not having a barbecue
in the first place. Worth hunting down in Sainsbury's? Well, I got
some spicy, chocolatey sensations, quite a belt at the back of the
neck from the 14% alcohol, but nothing sleek, and not what I could
honestly call fruit: more nuts and caramel, like drinking a Toblerone
bar. Lesson learnt? That I don't experience the world the same way as
Olly Smith. Just as well (I piously observe) we're not all the same,
how dull it would be if we all had identical tastes, perhaps if I
followed Olly Smith more assiduously I would learn where his
favouritisms tend to lead him and adjust my expectations accordingly,
and so on.
2) Then I
make the fatal mistake of buying a copy of Decanter,
something I think I've only done once before in my life. What's the
problem with Decanter?
Only that it intensifies the crisis of language which started with
Olly Smith - mainly when I get to page 10 and find Andrew Jefford
really letting himself go about Merlots. For instance: 'The 2009
brims with richness (cream, vellum, faded roses) and thick-textured,
late-Romantic, Rosenkavalier-like decadence'; or, 'just beginning to
tiptoe towards the Havana-leaf complexities the variety is justly
celebrated for'; or even 'broad-chested' (of a wine, this is); and 'a
similar vapoury classicism'. I am now squinting with rage. What,
actually, does all this convey? To put it another way, why do wine
writers give themselves over to this kind of deranged poeticism?
Fauré's Requiem
was once described as 'Death and Château d'Yquem'; the motoring
journalist LJK Setright, who always wore his learning effortfully,
wrote a poem to a Ferrari ('The red-eyed ramrod thrust of the
warhorse', and more, in that vein); William Mann famously talked
about the 'Chains
of pandiationic clusters' in the Beatles' songs;
but
these are well-mapped and easily avoided embarassments. Most of the
time, we
can only stand so many panting metaphors (see what I mean?) before we
lose the will to live. Why then do wine writers - not just Andrew
Jefford - start sounding like Lawrence Durrell the moment they get
close to a fancy bottle? Whose interests do they serve?
3)
Helplessly browned off, I discover a little item on the BBC website,
hinting at a possible new dispensation. Scientists have been working
on ways to fingerprint the characteristics of wines objectively and
consistently; or, as the Beeb puts it, 'Demand
is growing for a more objective test - to help consumers bypass
woolly terminology, protect artisan producers' intellectual property,
and help auction houses detect fraud.' Clearly, the real news in this
concerns the fraud aspect - Rudy Kurniawan being the most recent,
biggest and boldest fraudster of them all - but this in turn throws a
light on the gullibility of high-end wine buyers, which in
turn
throws light on the potentially misleading irrelevance of all that
rococo wine writing, all that woolly terminology. Even if the
characteristics of every single wine in the world could be summed up
in a unique chemical barcode, it wouldn't - of course - halt the
stampede for the thesaurus whenever the cork came out, and the
consequent yielding to ten-dollar words. There's something about the
cultural potency of wine (love, good fellowship, riot, heartbreak,
social aggrandisement, escape, death, versifying, hilarity, yearning,
tasty meals, song, vendetta, humiliation, action painting, all down
to it) that encourages people to toss reasonable scepticism out of
the window. But.
Suppose, just suppose, once everyone had finished preening and
phrase-making about, I don't know, a Pichon-Longueville, there was a
great string of numbers, like the identifying numbers on a car
chassis - well, how rational, how calming,
would that be? If I were a proper wine writer, I'd say it was like
moving from a Dickensian parlour crammed with dodgy antiques, into
Mies van der Rohe's Farnsworth House, but I'm not, so I won't.
CJ
A Dutchman commenting on someone else's blog about the value, or otherwise, of verbose tasting notes remarked that when he blind-tasted aged Barolos he was able to correctly identify what he was tasting based not on the fact that it was reminiscent of tar and roses - because it wasn't, not really - but on the fact that it tasted like other aged Barolos of his experience. I can't comment on how Barolo is meant to taste (shame), but I agree with him, and you. Writing at length about bacon fat and black pepper isn't wild helpful when you're wondering which bottle of supermarket Syrah to spend your tenner on.
ReplyDeleteExactly - your last sentence (in particular) sums it up perfectly!
ReplyDeleteThe struggle for clarity goes on....