While reading this article in the NY Times 'Sensational' or Just 'Bad'? On 2010 Pavie, Two Critics Disagree, I couldn't help but think about this blog post I read. These results shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has ever attended or conducted a blind tasting and asked people to describe what they were tasting. There is seldom any consensus and people often use different descriptors for the same wine.
So, are experts irrelevant? To some extent they are. About the best you can hope for is that they can offer a suggestion as to a pairing with a certain style of wine. They do taste a lot of wines and have some experience at matching flavours in wine and food. But, there are simply too many variables that go into tasting wine, food, beer etc. Aromas in the room, lighting, previous days' meals, a person's health and personal preference all contribute to the ability to discern flavour compounds. Our palates also change over time and as we get older we tend to enjoy bitter tastes more than when we were young. Does this make us more sophisticated? I don't think so; it just changes our preferences. So, while an expert might know that a buttery Chardonnay from California is a better match with Guinea fowl in a mushroom sauce and Chablis with raw oysters or lightly grilled scallops, deciding which specific producer is better for you is outside of their expertise, in my opinion.
We are also very influenced by what others, or what we think others, think about something. The Asch conformity experiments demonstrated how susceptible we all are to the opinions of others and the importance we place on conforming. The more we associate with a particular group the more likely we are to suppress our senses and our ethics and go along with the group. Many times experts are just giving a description that they have come to think the group expects; this is true for those of us seeking advice as we tend to accept the advice that our peers have already shown agreement with. This is why I hate competitions where judgement is left to others to determine a victor, such as gymnastics, figure skating and culinary battles. The only winners are the judges who get the best seats and are paid, rather than paying, to be there.
The world of wine tasting is, in my opinion, the most self indulgent pursuit in the world. To read descriptions of wine is to believe that you are going to be transported to some magical land of Oz. The fact is, like food, a wine will be better remembered when all of the components of a wonderful moment are in sync. It is a sympatico of tastes, textures, company, setting and occasion that makes for memorable times. Have you ever tasted a wine one day and thought "this is the best wine ever" and then experienced that wine in a different environment days later and wondered why it wasn't as good? I know I have.
Wine making is a very tricky craft that requires constant adjustments and readjustments. Barrel tasting is more important for the wine makers than it should be for wine consumers and I would never consider reviews of specific wines prior to bottling as so much can take place before then to influence the flavours. Overall, the 2010 barrel tastings have been quite positive and the consensus is that it was a fine vintage, but in the end the proof of the wine is in the tasting - from the bottle that is.
The problem with relying totally on experts - in any realm - is you are living the expert's life; you are relying on their life experiences and what they think is important. Sooner or later you have to make a decision for yourself. You can certainly give more consideration to the opinions of someone you admire or respect but, in the end it is your wine, food, etc. The best experts are the ones who tend not to tell you what to do but, rather, give you as much information as you need to make your own decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment