Orange wine and cognitive dissonance

S

Saina Nieminen

Saina Nieminen
Since the Terpin Sialis Irn-Bru -coloured Pinot Grigio that I opened earlier this week was so good, I just opened the Terpin Sialis Bianco 2004. It's a blend of Sauvignon 45%, Chardonnay 45% and Pinot Grigio 10% and at least the first glass suggests that this is another lovely, awesome orange wine. Due to some bottle age and 30 days of skin contact this is perhaps the darkest "orange" wine I've had. It smells of oolong tea and white Musar; it has sweet fruit and quite rich body, and as seems typical for Terpin it isn't terribly high in acidity, but it is still well structured enough.

I've sometimes criticized orange wines for being rather similar no matter where they come from or what grape(s) they have, but I still love some of them! This Terpin struck me as incredibly complex (but isn't complexity one of the most subjective terms used in wine writing though it is often bandied about as if it were objective?), incredibly balanced (ditto above on complexity!) and just incredibly lovable.

But if I denigrate spoofy wines for all being so alike, how can I justify my love for orange wines and for other wines in a more radical "natural" mould which also have a certain sameness to them? Of course I would just like to say - what for me is the most powerful argument of them all - that I just like their aromas, tastes and textures and I just dislike those of spoofy wines because liking a wine is a very emotional rather than rational deed. But I would still like to rationalize why I can enjoy a kind of sameness in orange wines but can't enjoy sameness in spoof. Any suggestions?
 
originally posted by Otto Nieminen:
Orange wine and cognitive dissonanceSince the Terpin Sialis Irn-Bru -coloured Pinot Grigio that I opened earlier this week was so good, I just opened the Terpin Sialis Bianco 2004. It's a blend of Sauvignon 45%, Chardonnay 45% and Pinot Grigio 10% and at least the first glass suggests that this is another lovely, awesome orange wine. Due to some bottle age and 30 days of skin contact this is perhaps the darkest "orange" wine I've had. It smells of oolong tea and white Musar; it has sweet fruit and quite rich body, and as seems typical for Terpin it isn't terribly high in acidity, but it is still well structured enough.

I've sometimes criticized orange wines for being rather similar no matter where they come from or what grape(s) they have, but I still love some of them! This Terpin struck me as incredibly complex (but isn't complexity one of the most subjective terms used in wine writing though it is often bandied about as if it were objective?), incredibly balanced (ditto above on complexity!) and just incredibly lovable.

But if I denigrate spoofy wines for all being so alike, how can I justify my love for orange wines and for other wines in a more radical "natural" mould which also have a certain sameness to them? Of course I would just like to say - what for me is the most powerful argument of them all - that I just like their aromas, tastes and textures and I just dislike those of spoofy wines because liking a wine is a very emotional rather than rational deed. But I would still like to rationalize why I can enjoy a kind of sameness in orange wines but can't enjoy sameness in spoof. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

This very line of reasoning created a rift between Levi and I that took months and and a lunch of noodles to overcome.

Honestly, I still think that the "orange process" occludes the expression of terroir, but I also still love some orange wines. The reason I drink much less now has more to do with price.
 
why would the "orange process" occlude the expression of terroir in white grapes when it works just fine at expressing the places various and manifold red grapes call home? Part snark, part honest question. Feel free to address only the honest part.
 
So what you're saying Michael is that it is inexperience with the genre that leads me to think they're all a bit alike? But you can say that about spoof as well!
 
originally posted by Michael K.:
why would the "orange process" occlude the expression of terroir in white grapes when it works just fine at expressing the places various and manifold red grapes call home? Part snark, part honest question. Feel free to address only the honest part.
Click to expand...

Because if you do extended warm maceration/skin contact, whether for white or red wines, they do converge, just as champagnes typically taste more like each other than a still wine.
 
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by Michael K.:
why would the "orange process" occlude the expression of terroir in white grapes when it works just fine at expressing the places various and manifold red grapes call home? Part snark, part honest question. Feel free to address only the honest part.
Click to expand...

Because if you do extended warm maceration/skin contact, whether for white or red wines, they do converge, just as champagnes typically taste more like each other than a still wine.
Click to expand...
So carbonic is the true expression of terroir?
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by Michael K.:
why would the "orange process" occlude the expression of terroir in white grapes when it works just fine at expressing the places various and manifold red grapes call home? Part snark, part honest question. Feel free to address only the honest part.
Click to expand...

Because if you do extended warm maceration/skin contact, whether for white or red wines, they do converge, just as champagnes typically taste more like each other than a still wine.
Click to expand...
So carbonic is the true expression of terroir?
Click to expand...

yes!
 
originally posted by Otto Nieminen:
So what you're saying Michael is that it is inexperience with the genre that leads me to think they're all a bit alike? But you can say that about spoof as well!
Click to expand...

I don't believe I'm saying that, no. Rather, I was trying to prick at the surprisingly popular - and, imo, somewhat limited - idea that skin-fermenting white grapes leads to a less true expression of terroir. Don't the skins & stems come from the same place as the juice? The whole thing seems much more (incompletely) overdetermined than one specific winemaking style connected to one specific place.

edit: but what the fuck do I know?
 
originally posted by Michael K.:
originally posted by Otto Nieminen:
So what you're saying Michael is that it is inexperience with the genre that leads me to think they're all a bit alike? But you can say that about spoof as well!
Click to expand...

I don't believe I'm saying that, no. Rather, I was trying to prick at the surprisingly popular - and, imo, somewhat limited - idea that skin-fermenting white grapes leads to a less true expression of terroir. Don't the skins & stems come from the same place as the juice? The whole thing seems much more (incompletely) overdetermined than one specific winemaking style connected to one specific place.

edit: but what the fuck do I know?
Click to expand...

Michael,
Tend to agree.
Fermenting on the skins can play havoc with notions of varietal typicity but I don't think the process is any more destructive of sense of place in whites than it is in reds.

BTW, I was pouring our skin-fermented Sauvignon for a taster last night and she asked me if I thought orange wine was a beer drinker's wine.
Never thought of it but . . .
Best, Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top