So maybe BJ has a point

J

Jonathan Loesberg

Jonathan Loesberg
Last night, at a wine dinner, we opened two 98 Gigondases that I had found hidden away in my cellar. The first, a Cayron, had clearly, to me, seen better days, but in a delicate way was charming. Othere at the dinner table, I think, liked it better than I did. It still clearly had pleasures to offer, though, The second, a Raspail-Ay, was still in a flourishing late middle age and quite delicious indeed. Neither was the wine of the evening (I'd plunk for Bob Semon's 93 Barolo, whose name escaped me; others might have preferred the 03 Pegau). But they give supporting evidence to BJ's claim for a longer life expectancy for Gigondases than I would normally argue for.
 
I still have several bottles of 1998 Cayron (and some 1995s, too) and they still seem to be getting better to my tastes (which are that Grenache-based wines usually are interesting only with substantial age on them). I haven't cellared Raspail-Ay for many years because the wines (at least those available locally -- possibly a special cuvée) were tarted up with new oak.But I have very fond memories of the 1981 drunk with a couple of friends in 1994 -- a fantastic wine.
 
Raspail Ay does use barrique, I understand, so I doubt Claude's issue is with a local cuvée. I don't know how old the barriques are. I've never found them that marked by oak and I'm decidedly averse to new oak, or at least think I am, so I've guessed that the barriques are older rather than younger. But maybe I'm not as averse as I thought I was.

I've been less of a fan of Cayron since maybe 2000. Nothing stylistic, the wine just seems more variable. There have been some nice ones and then some forgettable ones. When did the daughters take over, does anyone know? And does this have anything to do with it?
 
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious, while others were rather lovely. There have been some comments here, iirc, about sub-optimal hygiene at the winery, together with patron's complacency, so a generational change might be just the ticket.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious, while others were rather lovely. There have been some comments here, iirc, about sub-optimal hygiene at the winery, together with patron's complacency, so a generational change might be just the ticket.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was thinking the reverse. The wines made by Gabriel and then Michel Cayron are what I think of as from the good old days. If Michel's three daughters took over just a couple of years ago, then I have no theory of why I have found the wine variable since roughly 00. If they took over then, I've at least got post hoc ergo propter hoc (and we all know how reliable that is).
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious...
Click to expand...

Ian,
I'm not trying to give you a hard time (well, not very much, anyway) but what do you mean by the term "egregious"? Very bad? I'm used to seeing it as an intensifier and not as a stand-alone adjective.

TIA
Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by MLipton:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious...
Click to expand...

Ian,
I'm not trying to give you a hard time (well, not very much, anyway) but what do you mean by the term "egregious"? Very bad? I'm used to seeing it as an intensifier and not as a stand-alone adjective.

TIA
Mark Lipton
Click to expand...

From the on-line Merriam-Webster: "conspicuous; especially: conspicuously bad."

YW

Ian Fitzsimmons
 
originally posted by MLipton:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious...
Click to expand...

Ian,
I'm not trying to give you a hard time (well, not very much, anyway) but what do you mean by the term "egregious"? Very bad? I'm used to seeing it as an intensifier and not as a stand-alone adjective.

TIA
Mark Lipton
Click to expand...

Egregious (from latin E(x) grege that is out of the flock) historically has meant outstanding in a bad way but usage, in this as in many words, has varied in recent years.

And on Gigondas from 98 I remember a completely forgettable bottle of Raspail-Ay 98 consumed maybe 7 years ago that left no impression whatsoever so I am glad to hear it is of interest today.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I went through a case of 01 Cayron, of which some bottles were startlingly egregious, while others were rather lovely. There have been some comments here, iirc, about sub-optimal hygiene at the winery, together with patron's complacency, so a generational change might be just the ticket.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was thinking the reverse. The wines made by Gabriel and then Michel Cayron are what I think of as from the good old days. If Michel's three daughters took over just a couple of years ago, then I have no theory of why I have found the wine variable since roughly 00. If they took over then, I've at least got post hoc ergo propter hoc (and we all know how reliable that is).
Click to expand...

Well, you've forgotten more about S. Rhone's than I'll ever know, but I recall some convivial complaining about the 01 Cayron, in which another participant said they'd spoken to the pater familias about hygiene during the visit and received an 'I know better' sort of fish-eye in return.

But I have what my son likes to call a 'geezer mind,' and can't vouch for the perfect fidelity of this recollection.
 
originally posted by Cole Kendall:

Egregious (from latin E(x) grege that is out of the flock) historically has meant outstanding in a bad way but usage, in this as in many words, has varied in recent years.
Click to expand...

Its original use was as exceptional in a good sense, but in recent decades has taken on the negative connotation. Still, to my ear, saying "That meal was egregious" is less appealing than "That meal was egregiously bad" but perhaps that comes from the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

Mark Lipton
 
The Online Etymology Dictionary reads:

egregious (adj.) 1530s, "distinguished, eminent, excellent," from L. egregius "distinguished, excellent, extraordinary," from the phrase ex grege "rising above the flock," from ex "out of" (see ex-) + grege, ablative of grex "herd, flock" (see gregarious). Disapproving sense, now predominant, arose late 16c., originally ironic and is not in the Latin word, which etymologically means simply "exceptional." Related: Egregiously; egregiousness.

Somewhat longer than decades, ML.
 
originally posted by MLipton:
originally posted by Cole Kendall:

Egregious (from latin E(x) grege that is out of the flock) historically has meant outstanding in a bad way but usage, in this as in many words, has varied in recent years.
Click to expand...

Its original use was as exceptional in a good sense, but in recent decades has taken on the negative connotation. Still, to my ear, saying "That meal was egregious" is less appealing than "That meal was egregiously bad" but perhaps that comes from the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

Mark Lipton
Click to expand...

The OED shows the use of egregious as remarkable in a bad sense as going back to the 16th century, so I don't think the change is only in the past couple of decades. It would be more true to say that the use of it as remarkable in a good sense is now archaic.

As to "egregiously bad," I would take the word there to be an intensifier, as in "outrageously bad." It means not just bad but somehow in your face bad.

I am sympathetic with your original criticism of Ian, though. Calling the wine "egregious" tout court is somewhat vague. Was it egregiously corked? Egregiously concentrated? Egregiously oaked?
 
I don't know anything about the current generation at Cayron, but when I visited in the 1990s, they were still following the old Rhône practice of bottling only on demand, so there can be great bottle variation, depending on importer/source.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

[...]

I am sympathetic with your original criticism of Ian, though. Calling the wine "egregious" tout court is somewhat vague. Was it egregiously corked? Egregiously concentrated? Egregiously oaked?
Click to expand...

You professors always stick together.

I only know 'egregious' as defined in the Merriam quote, so the etymological chat is interesting. More to the point, I'd thought additional detail would be tangential, but am delighted to blab on at length: the Cayron I'm recalling was actively, terribly, in-you-face, spit-it-out-before-it-hurts-you bad. Like some kind of cleanser, among the worst contents of a wine bottle I've put in my mouth.

By the way, shouldn't 'tout court' be italicized?
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
...the Cayron I'm recalling was actively, terribly, in-you-face, spit-it-out-before-it-hurts-you bad. Like some kind of cleanser, among the worst contents of a wine bottle I've put in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Wow!! That is amazingly bad sounding, Ian. Thanks for the detail.

Mark Lipton
 
I found the '98 weird on release and never cellared any. The '99 was lovely and my last bottle or two await me. Still have a '95 I think. When that bottle is on, it's terrific. Some bottles have been flawed. Since 2000 I've not been impressed. Some clunky wines, to my taste anyway.

Raspail Ay I thought had barrique and non-barrique bottlings. I want to say the US importer takes or commissions the former, but I'm not sure. I have only the '01 in the cellar and it's outstanding. Aging well.
 
2001 was supposed to be a great year for Gigondas; Lynch, I think, described the Cayron as his (Cayron's) '61 Lafite, or something similar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top