1997 Breton Bourgueil Les Perrires 12.0%

O

Oswaldo Costa

Oswaldo Costa
First whiff is brett ("of course," says Marcia, "it's a Bretton, haha"). Once that, and a touch of reduction, go their merry ways, there's lovely leather over a core of rich plum/cherry fruit. At first sip, the word juicy flashes behind my eyes. I block it, since it borders on meaningless, but it insists. Then comes a burst of tingling, vivacious acidity, that overwhelms the sweetness within the initially foodless mouth, but zings through some Coulommiers like a hot knife through buttah. With comestibles, everything settles into perfect equilibrium. I might have hoped for more gravitas from a 13Y old; it is relatively straightforward, like a super duper quaffer. With good bones, it seems to be enjoying its youth. The texture is lovely, the weight utterly irreproachable. A paean, even, to the needlesness of exceeding 12.0%.
 
juicy is not meaningless, it's like sappy but without the sap.

sounds like a really good vintage of perrieres; its sibling one year older, which I adored on release, did not thrill me in august, but here it seems the straightforwardness is attributable to youth rather than to having been too polished in the first place.
 
originally posted by .sasha:
juicy is not meaningless, it's like sappy but without the sap.
Click to expand...

I was afraid it might signal something different to each person, making it almost useless, but your take is pretty much as I understand it.
 
I was pretty tickled yesterday to stumble upon a 2002 Franc de Pied. They came in at 10.6%. Will report back.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I think it was Matthieu Baudry who said the francs tend to have lower alcohol than the grafted versions.
Click to expand...

Not just franc.

Though I'm sure it matters what grafted rootstock you use.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I understood that (all?) grafted versions are more vigorous and therefore will, ceteris paribus, produce more sugar.
Click to expand...
That is the observation, but I suspect you'd find a fairly small range of rootstock in common use. Doubtless selected for many other properties.
 
Also, I object to worrying overmuch about what a word means to someone else. It's your note. Use your words. If it's an expressive note it will be appreciated, whether or not we've voted on definitions for each adjective.
 
originally posted by Thor:
Also, I object to worrying overmuch about what a word means to someone else. It's your note. Use your words. If it's an expressive note it will be appreciated, whether or not we've voted on definitions for each adjective.
Click to expand...

you may like the democratic sensibility of the voting idea, but you'd just end up with another variant on the points-guy theory of meaning . it would be just like swapping a points-guru for a pointy grand jury: the numbers would still be bullshit.

which is to say that, for a speaker or writer, what their words mean to someone else is the only thing worth worrying about. any other consideration is a bon bon; or else wanking.

fb.
 
you may like the democratic sensibility of the voting idea
Click to expand...
I think it would be hard to read my post and come to that conclusion.

which is to say that, for a speaker or writer, what their words mean to someone else is the only thing worth worrying about. any other consideration is a bon bon; or else wanking.
Click to expand...
Posting uncompensated notes to public fora, blogs, or whatever is wanking. It may also be writing, but the achievable value of the two is easily divisible.

The one exception is if your primary purpose in writing the note to try to convince someone else into a specific action (buy this/don't buy this/drink this now/don't drink this now). Then sure, worry about how effectively you're making your case, though I'd also point out that most notes I read -- having selected which I will and won't read -- don't consist of "this is a good wine, you should buy it, you should drink it now, you should drink it with grilled antelope." And that's what the pointy people do with their numbers, scales, Stooges, and prongs. It's not my impression that most people who contribute notes here have that as a primary motivation. But maybe I'm the only one who doesn't read them that way.
 
drank the 96 and 85 yesterday with turkey done a couple different ways. both showed very well. really delicious wines. i suck at tasting notes so thats the best i can do right now. i had the 97 last week and didn't like it all. possiblely a bad or off bottle.
 
originally posted by Bill Lundstrom:
drank the 96 and 85 yesterday with turkey done a couple different ways. both showed very well. really delicious wines. i suck at tatsing notes so thats the best i can do right now. i had the 97 last week and didn't like it all. possiblely a bad or off bottle.
Click to expand...

I really liked the '85 but haven't picked up a '96 or '97 yet. Need to clear more space.
 
originally posted by Thor:

Posting uncompensated notes to public fora, blogs, or whatever is wanking. It may also be writing, but the achievable value of the two is easily divisible.
Click to expand...

oh. sorry. only, see -- i meant writing qua writing: y'know? i twit the monkey. he tells me i'm fat. the dotster owes me more figeac. that sort of thing. sort of like speaking, except via teh interwebs; and with a splash of orthography to add to the confusion.

i hadn't thought much about your meaning of writing. i apologize. mea culpa -- i always forget just how motivating industrial barbera can be.

what can i say? wank well? -- i can only hope and prey that you get to measure your achievable value by the hectoliter!

fb.
 
I would hate to cause you emotional trauma by explaining how much your opinions about writing have informed my actual writing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top