The world is numerous and large, but I have no doubt many would rather see it smaller. I am reminded of this daily, as people once again ask me about the Known Names of Tuscany, or prod me to name my personal favorite amongst the "Great Wines". They want an easy answer, and they aren't looking for a journey.
I guess I object to this approach. I don't want to live in a way that is all mapped out. The Montrachet signpost there, the Margaux chateau there. I've been a sommelier for a decade now. I think a small world is tiresome. Isn't it tiresome for people to think that that is all there is? Because it isn't. Life is not measured by the deviance of one bottling of Carneros Pinot Noir and another. Thank God for that. There is so much more. Why do people settle? The looking is the fun part. Why pass on that?
Sometimes I am accused of liking any which weird wine. Of calling all the Ugly Ducklings as Swans. It's not true. I am as quick with my condemnation as anyone else, perhaps quicker. But I simply like to be surprised. Remember that, Surprise? I'd like to think that there was something more to learn out there besides what is printed in the Grand and Respected Classics of Wine Series.
Did you ever hear that story about the Oxford Don? They have to audition the students over there. See who will be chosen for the class. I presume they usually talk about books and suppositions, all of that sort. The day came that a Don had interviewed one too many, and there was yet another at the door. "Surprise me" was all the Don said, not even looking up from his newspaper. What to do? How should our young hopeful react? A flick, a wisp, and the paper was lit on fire. Certainly there was a reaction. I often hope that that young man was taken on into the class. That he and the professor became fast friends, exchanging witticisms. I often hope that I would have done the same. The world sometimes needs a little surprise.
I used to be an Art History student, back in my college days. I used to think that I would go on to get a Ph.D., that I would take an Art History professorship somewhere. But then I realized Art History, the kind they teach you in school, is a sham. Because it isn't about art at all. It's about the Grand Narrative of Art Historical Influence. It's a story. A connect the dots of influence, working back through time. If someone's art engendered someone else's, if a line could be drawn and a story told, then Cannonization and the Laurel Wreath. If not, the dustbin, forgotten. I didn't see the point. Why not look at what was out there for it's own qualities? I used to live in Boston. I would pass something, something that would catch me by surprise, and I would wonder why no one was there staring at it. Why no one saw how interesting THAT was. Why did all of the Art have to live in a little sham Venetian Mansion? Nonsensical. But without the Declaration of "Art", based on the storyline, there was no interest.
I often see this happen with wine. Without the declaration of "Great Wine" from a Wine Authority, there is no "Great Wine". There is no attention paid. The liquid is often beside the point or the points given.
I am tired also of the gamemanship. The one-ups-man. The showoff. I often think of that scene from The Godfather, walking around the well tended garden, the knowing "How's your drink, Tom?" followed by "I bet Russian Czars never paid that kind of dough". That kind of vibe is pervasive most times "Great Wine" is around these days. It's not about the quality of the drink, it's about the chance to be recognized as capable of spending that kind of money. And the constant reminder that some have done it "better", gone "further" than anyone else before them ("I have drunk La Tache out of Aubert de Villaine's two cupped hands! That's how amazing I am!").
Sometimes I think the current Culture Wars in wine aren't about wine at all. It's about the people. About not liking the people that are drawn to the Crowned Wines. There is an objection to certain wines because of the people who drink them. The crowing, the patness of their notions, their making a big world, a world of many felicities, smaller. As if there was only The One Great Chain of Wine, with bottles handed down from the Acknowledged Vignergod.
Why are some folks so quick to follow others? To not see the variety that is out there, to not even consider it? To be prejudicial? Life is our Dictionary. Why limit it to Volume B: Burgundy, Barolo, Brunello & Bordeaux? Is there no love for Xynomavro? Sure you could spend a lifetime studying Burgundy or Barolo. I understand that. As long as you are actually doing that, you know, studying them. But if you are just gloming onto the Fashion Train, then I have less sympathy.
Really, people, Shakespeare doesn't need the help. Ch. Latour doesn't need the help. If you go around saying Shakespeare or Ch. Latour are worthless, obviously you are a loon. But to go on and on about how great they are, I mean, at this point, who are you helping? This is KNOWN already. Move along. Isn't it of rather more assistance for people to say, hey, you know, Congreve can be good. I'm mean worth looking into, if you haven't already?
And anyway the "small" wines are often the most telling. Not too long ago a NY restauranteur that I respect a lot came in for dinner. He was curious. Which Cerasuolo di Vittoria should he have of those listed? I described the differences. There was some indecision. Why not have two, I offered? Try them out. Here is one by COS that is done with traditional fermentation methods, and here is another by the same producer, from the same year, with the same varietal composition, but aged in clay amphora. Wouldn't it be neat to see the two side by side? To glean the differences? Indeed he agreed it might be, and it was. A "revelation" he termed it afterwards. Make one change and you have a whole new edifice.
When was the last time a "Great Wine" surprised you? I don't mean it was dumb that day, or not showing well, I mean really surprised you? Gave you an unexpected revelation? It doesn't happen too much, and that's because we all know these wines too well. We know the ending before it's told. We've seen this movie before. Guy sees Burgundy, Guy loves Burgundy, Burgundy doesn't love Guy back, Guy reluctantly turns to [George Burns, Rodney Dangerfield, Robert Parker, Allen Meadows, insert guru here] for advice, Burgundy dances with Guy at the Prom after all. Really, where is the surprise?
I remember I used to work at A Fine Dining Destination. Actually, I've worked at a few of them. At Fine Dining Destination #1, lets call it the French Fine Dining Destination for clarity's sake, I once expressed my apprehension to my boss. "I don't know all of these wines," I said "I just haven't tasted through all of these vintages of Bordeaux". Don't worry, he counseled. Just add up what you know of the vintage with what you know of the chateau's style, and 90% of the time you will be right. We are dealing with well-known vintages here, the '61s, the '75s, the '82s, the '85s, the '86s, etc. These are well documented. And we are dealing with well-known chateau. Just do the math. Add it up. And this proved to be entirely possible and correct. It was as simple as that. Add what you know of Ch. Latour to '82, and you have a winner. Of course there were always the blind spots: the brett heavy vintage of Montrose, the tca tainted years at Ducru, the heavier than you would think '94, the lighter than you would imagine '96. But in general, simple mental addition did the trick. Now tell me, quick, I want you to take the Susumaniello grape and add it to what you know of 2006 in Puglia. Quick now. What will I be drinking?
What's that you say? A little more research must be done? Oh, I see.
That was The French Fine Dining Destination. Over at the Japanese Fine Dining Destination I learned a little something else. Which is that folks have an idea of what luxury is, and mistakenly try to have MORE luxury by heaping one luxury on top of another. This is what I called the Caviar on Top of the Louis Vuitton Suitcase syndrome. You see it sometimes. Sure caviar is great. Sure a Louis Vuitton suitcase is great. But please, for my sake and for yours, don't spread caviar on top of your Louis Vuitton suitcase in the hopes of making it even GREATER. This is what people do when they, say, try to drink that Premier Grand Cru Classe Bordeaux with marinated blowfish. Really. Please. (Please!) Don't do this. It is a waste of great old Bordeaux, and a waste of blowfish. Don't do it. And yet people do. In fact, that's usually just exactly what they want to do. Because Great + Great must = GREATER, right? Try as I might people just wouldn't go for the tremendous riesling and white burgundies I would lay before them in all humility. Here was Singerriedel for less than $200, but instead you would rather have Mouton for several times that amount. Really? With your horse mackerel? Really? One guy said the Clos Ste. Hune I served him was "too sweet". Dudes will sometimes come up with any excuse not to like something if they aren't prepared to.
Anyway, all of this is to say, I don't understand why so many people sign on to be extras in somebody else's parade. Let them have the parade. Appreciate the parade for what it is. But then go have the quiet moment that you deserve with something you yourself have found to be enjoyable. The world is big enough to accomodate this.
