I find myself agreeing a lot lately with many of the opinions Eric Asimov expresses in his New York Times blog "The Pour," which exhibits a writing style more appealingly breezy that what you sometimes read in the pages of the New York Times proper.
A few weeks back, Eric had some smart things to say about the virtues of white wine over the oft-preferred red. More recently, he offered a cogent response to a recent column by The Wine Spectator's James Laube. Laube was making the case for high alcohol in some of the new wines. Asimov countered with his reasons for seeking a less-hot wine. Both made decent points, and it makes for a sane pair or arguments and good reading.
As for myself, I have to say I side with Asimov's contention that big-alcohol wines "are overbearing. Too much flavor. Too jammy. Too sweet-tasting. Too powerful. Too plush. They taste the same and they don’t go with food." I like a wine alone, especially if it's a great one of fascinating complexity. But most times, I want a wine to go with something I'm eating. If it demolishes the meal with its power, I think the winemaker has missed a good half of the wine's reason for existing.
Take a look at the articles. You have to be a subscriber to access the Laube article on the web, but it's in the current WS issue, the one about Green winemakers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment