The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

O

Oswaldo Costa

Oswaldo Costa
2005 Cune Via Real Rioja Crianza 13.5%,
Prunes, powdered sugar and light vanilla. Pleasant mouth feel, lively acidity, good acid/sweet balance. Simple but quite nice, downed easily and quickly.

2008 Franois Labet Pinot Noir Vin de Pays de lIle de Beaut 12.0%
Intrigued with the idea of a pinot noir made in Corsica by a Cte dOr producer, I asked myself if I could shell a few Reais in the name of adventure and replied Corse-I-can! Plastic cork, boo. Theres vague pinosity in the sour strawberry aromas, but the taste is enough to make anyone emigrate to the mainland. There's bright acidity, but the fruit is not pleasant, or up to the task of matching the acidity, and it all ends in an unpleasant bitter note. Theres an odd sweetness that Marcia calls excessive and new worldish. The latter's hard to believe at 12% alcohol, but its academic at this point. I tried to remove PN from my expectations, wondering if Id be at least intrigued if it was some obscure Corsican grape, but the No resounded like the cannon at Waterloo.

2008 Piccini Chianti 12.5%
According to the shopkeeper, 30% of the grapes are raisined and added after the first fermentation and a second fermentation is induced. Simiarl to ripasso. She says this generates more alcohol and body without more tannins, since the skins are the same. Hmm, is spoof not spoof when well-established as local practice? Phaps, dunno. What say you? But, here, it is all in vain. Aromas are acceptable, sour cherry, iodine and eucalyptus. Decent acidity, some tannic grip, but unpleasantly bitter finish and a flimsy quantum of fruit that doesnt deliver, not before food, becoming barely sufficient with it, as the wine opens and the critical faculties recede. Not as bad as the Corsican PN, but not to be repeated.
 
Hmm, is spoof not spoof when well-established as local practice? Phaps, dunno. What say you?
Click to expand...
It's the same question I struggled with while learning of a similar (and similarly "traditional") practice in Asti -- noted here, and scroll down to the note on the Terranuda). I don't think I ever came up with a satisfying answer to your question. Is it spoof when you're making (in theory, I mean...not talking about any specific wine) exactly the same wine your ancestors were? What if you're the only one doing something when your neighbors have stopped? What if your ancestors used to do something, stopped, and you've revived the practice? I don't think it matters that it happens to coincide with modern taste perversions. What matters is the purpose. If I remember correctly, that was just about the only thing people -- perhaps other than our Mr. Levenberg -- could agree on back in Jonathan's spoof thread on Therapy.

But I'm not a big advocate of the "spoof" coinage, and am trying to stop using it, so maybe someone who loves the term should answer.
 
Was glad to re-read that post, very much on-topic. Would happily replace my sensationalistic use of the word "spoof" with a less judgmental one, like intervention, so those who don't love the word "spoof" can still weigh in.
 
I just think you're very close to suggesting that choosing to make (say) Amarone is the same as choosing to spoof. And since I don't think you'd agree with that (I certainly don't), spoof probably isn't the best way to describe it.

On the other hand, that barbera producer I was writing about was unlikely -- I don't want to say "wasn't" because I couldn't read his mind -- to be using the technique he was using to do anything other than pump up the power and concentration of a wine that doesn't naturally embrace either. A lot of people who use the term would consider that spoofulation, I suspect.

So what you're looking for is somewhere between those two.
 
It would be interesting to put one's finger on what is it about a technique like ripasso that makes it more "acceptable" (to, say, your average Disorderly) than other (inc. Rollandian) techniques that increase "power." If it's just the blessing of tradition, then techniques that are currently decried would become OK if done long enough by enough people.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
It would be interesting to put one's finger on what is it about a technique like ripasso that makes it more "acceptable" (to, say, your average Disorderly) than other (inc. Rollandian) techniques that increase "power." If it's just the blessing of tradition, then techniques that are currently decried would become OK if done long enough by enough people.
Click to expand...
How about "the use of any technology developed before 1960" ?
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
It would be interesting to put one's finger on what is it about a technique like ripasso that makes it more "acceptable" (to, say, your average Disorderly) than other (inc. Rollandian) techniques that increase "power." If it's just the blessing of tradition, then techniques that are currently decried would become OK if done long enough by enough people.
Click to expand...
How about "the use of any technology developed before 1960" ?
Click to expand...

Whose birth year?
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
It would be interesting to put one's finger on what is it about a technique like ripasso that makes it more "acceptable" (to, say, your average Disorderly) than other (inc. Rollandian) techniques that increase "power." If it's just the blessing of tradition, then techniques that are currently decried would become OK if done long enough by enough people.
Click to expand...

It's probably the case that techniques currently decried will become not only acceptable but de rigueur if they are still in use 50 years from now, not merely because they will have become "traditional" but because they will have done so as a result of changing taste. This is like the debate over usage. The meanings of words change because of the way people use them. But debates over usage is one of the ways change is effected. Over the course of time, "tradition" is a moving target. At any given moment, it's a coherent criterion. Eternal verities are for transcendental philosophers.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
It would be interesting to put one's finger on what is it about a technique like ripasso that makes it more "acceptable" (to, say, your average Disorderly) than other (inc. Rollandian) techniques that increase "power." If it's just the blessing of tradition, then techniques that are currently decried would become OK if done long enough by enough people.
Click to expand...

It's probably the case that techniques currently decried will become not only acceptable but de rigueur if they are still in use 50 years from now, not merely because they will have become "traditional" but because they will have done so as a result of changing taste. This is like the debate over usage. The meanings of words change because of the way people use them. But debates over usage is one of the ways change is effected. Over the course of time, "tradition" is a moving target. At any given moment, it's a coherent criterion. Eternal verities are for transcendental philosophers.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and the similarity with language had crossed my mind. Though I think Jeff makes a pretty strong argument for 1960.
 
1960? Wow, you guys are young. 1960 is radically modern to me. Very suspicious techniques in 1960, believe me. Lots of SO2 and things.
 
Primitive chemical vineyard treatments with long half-lives and limited toxicity testing. Potassium fertilizer.

Demonic.
 
The process is called "governo" I think. As far as I can tell, it's nearly identical to ripasso, they just don't make amarone-style sangiovese. It's just bulking the wine up with must. Victor Hazan mentions it several times in his wines of Italy. And I have the '84 edition, so it can't be that new-school.

At least this is what it sounds like, if I'm understanding it correctly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top