Claret before Burgundy -- agree? important?
- Thread starter Peter Creasey
- Start date
While I agree with this, I generally find that if I'm having a beef or lamb course that matches Bordeaux, I really want my other courses to be lighter, fresher food that demands white wine or bubbly. Maybe I could Bordeaux/lamb followed by cheese/burgundy if I started with an appetizer an/or a salad and then served a fresh vegetable with the lamb. OTOH, I have no problem serving burgundy twice with something like fresh pasta with wild mushrooms followed by duck and a vegetable.
kirk wallace
kirk wallace
Thank you, Jeff. Your question made me go back and check. It is not in Physiology of Taste, but Marcel Rouff's fictional character Dodin-Bouffant, who is very Brillat Savarin-like (to say the least) who teachs the Prince a lesson over the famous pot au feu (built around a foie gras cooked in Chambertin). Unfortunately, while I keep my Physiology of Taste close at hand, I can't find my copy of The Passionate Epicure, but as I recall (FWIW these days), the order of the wines is very much detailed.
Jeff Grossman
Jeff Grossman
kirk wallace
kirk wallace
It is a fun book; and kudos, Jeff, to your google skills. So, in the 19th Century, definitely Bordeaux before Burgundy. In the 21st, I vote with Claude. I do not like to mix them in the same meal.
Claude Kolm
Claude Kolm
I can't really think of menus that hold together where you can't fill out with all wines from one or the other. Can you suggest some?
Keith Levenberg
Keith Levenberg
When I am doing a serious multi-course dinner I prefer to mix regions. When I have a lot of the same I just wind up comparing them to each other, they blur together, and some don't get the attention they deserve. But if there's a progression with one example from a bunch of regions I appreciate each one better for what it is.
Scott Kraft
Scott Kraft
A bit of a sideways tilt to the conversation. Why do five-plus-course meals nearly always follow a progression that is one long crescendo of richness, culminating in full-on fatty desserts? I personally prefer that long meals build up and ramp down. It makes for a much more enjoyable experience.
Florida Jim
Florida Jim
Yep.
But truly, unless the courses are one bite each, I'd just prefer a course or two made simply. The last time I ate a multi-course dinner, I came away feeling uncomfortable and couldn't sleep well.
And actually, I like fitting into my pants.
Best, Jim
U
Unknown
Guest
skip both and drink chateau magdelaine
Jeff Grossman
Jeff Grossman
Taking you seriously: Because each dish must have more oomph than the last -- more spice, more flavor, more fat -- in order to keep making an impression on one's getting-progressively-duller-and-duller palate.
Peter Creasey
Peter Creasey
Scott, Well said!
Properly conceived and composed multi-course dinners need constraint and balance.
Like you, I prefer the last two courses to be a simplistic cheese-oriented dish then a simple dessert minus all the frills...which, by the way, will best showcase the final wine(s).
. . . . . . Pete
Scott Kraft
Scott Kraft
Yeah - see I really disagree with this idea, which presumably drives most Michelin types (and would-be ones) to devise this kind of experience. I've found that it's entirely possible to hit a top-note on richness and follow with dishes of remarkable flavor and intensity that slowly take you down. And leave you feeling great. Which is after all the point, right? Far better and much more satisfied.
And I agree with Jim. However, I think it's not just about quantity. (Although the habit is to also make the richest dish the largest by far - another trait I find a bit bizarre.) As Jeff points out, the fat, seasoning, spicing all increase also. Often times to a point where it's an all-out assault on one's senses. Like many a spoofed wine, really. Brute power over finesse. Food chemistry over nature's beauty.
Scott Kraft
Scott Kraft
Bastard trots out the only argument to kill everything I've just said. Fuckin' SFJoe.
We did a food geek dinner not long ago (some known wine geeks were in attendance) in which we planned waves rather than a long crescendo. It worked well. Plus, it solved one of my long-irritating peeves about foie gras, which is always, always, always served at the wrong time, just where it can obliterate the courses before it and linger too long over the courses after it. We followed the pt de foie gras with a Long Trail Winter White sorbet, and then started a new ascent in hour 4.
For what it's worth, the long tasting menus we had in Euskadi opposed the unfortunate trend towards ever-increasing volume, both at the traditional and modernistic places. There might be pork belly, and there might be foie gras, but they won't necessarily appear where or how one thinks, and they're rarely the peak topping a long ascent of the flab mountain.
For what it's worth, the long tasting menus we had in Euskadi opposed the unfortunate trend towards ever-increasing volume, both at the traditional and modernistic places. There might be pork belly, and there might be foie gras, but they won't necessarily appear where or how one thinks, and they're rarely the peak topping a long ascent of the flab mountain.
Jeff Grossman
Jeff Grossman
Guanciale. Please.
Levi Dalton
Levi Dalton
Masa would often finish with a persimmon, or a slice of melon.
There was a real beauty to that.
There was a real beauty to that.
Howard Cooper
Howard Cooper
I tend not to like serving Bordeaux and Burgundy at the same meal for the reasons expressed in this thread. After a good Burgundy, most Bordeauxs will seem simple. After a good Bordeaux, many Burgundies will seem light. So, I tend not to drink them at the same meal.
If I have to do so, I would drink the Bordeauxs first. IMHO, Bordeauxs just don't taste very good after Burgundies.
But, the counterargument is drink the Burgundy first so that it will show at its best and then who cares about the Bordeaux (a variation on the give the Bordeaux away as party favors expressed above).
If I have to do so, I would drink the Bordeauxs first. IMHO, Bordeauxs just don't taste very good after Burgundies.
But, the counterargument is drink the Burgundy first so that it will show at its best and then who cares about the Bordeaux (a variation on the give the Bordeaux away as party favors expressed above).