WBW#45 Wine Blogging Wednesday with the WORLD

2002 Weingut Birgit Eichinger Riesling Strasser Gaisberg

http://www.weingut-eichinger.at/01news_new.html

Although I think that Riesling probably is the queen of all white grapes, I prefer dryer versions such as this to German non-dessert wine Rieslings containing significant residual sugar. Birgit Eichinger is a rising star in an Austrian winemaking world dominated mostly by male winemakers. This Austrian dry Riesling is somewhat restrained and yes, perhaps even feminine. Pale straw in color despite nearly 6 years of age, the nose is floral with perhaps a bit of oilyness to it. There are flavors of quince paste, oranges, a touch of grass and ginger aside a fairly good dose of minerality and acidity. Still quite fresh and refreshing, it perhaps just lacks a best of zest to get it into the excellent category. A very good buy at $10 on a closeout, although I did have at least one of my 12 bottles polluted with TCA.

Friggin' Spoofulated

Okay, so I am a wino and should join AA. I drink a glass or four every night. So sue me. And I use Cellartracker to keep my wine room up to date. 1200 bottles is not easy to keep organized in my pea brain, you know. So I drank 2003 Waterbrook Melange tonight and was underwhelmed by it. But some knuckledragger writing tasting notes just before me decided to use the word "spoofulated" to describe the wine. Now remember, I read a lot of wine reviews, both professional and amateur, and I have to admit, the word was a new one on me and for some reason it just pissed me off.

So I Googled it. Wonderful how we create new words (verbs in this case) in the English language. It turns out some anus created the word out of nothing at some nondescript point to describe over manipulated wine. First of all, the Melange was not good, but over manipulation was not its problem. But more fundamentally, why does someone have to create a word to describe something they can just describe? Yes, we hear new words all the time and some stick and there is a certain inside joke to be had when the word you create (google?) makes it to the lexicon. But spoofulated? How does spoofulated begin to describe over manipulated wine? I mean, taken out of context, "spoofulated" could be the word my two year old made up for what is in his diaper right now. If you are going to make up a word to describe something easily describable (overmanipulated perhaps?), at least make it have some intelligent tie back to what it is you are trying to describe. Otherwise, you might as well just pick some words my kid babbles and assign them random meanings. J.K Rowling or Tolkien can make up words. It would be a really, really, really long trilogy (or quadrogy?) if he had to describe a hobbit every single time one appears in the story instead of just calling it a hobbit. Wine reviewers not so good on the made up words.

So I do not know why this ticked me off so. Perhaps I am just jealous because I never heard of the word before today or did not make it up myself. But rather I think I am upset about a made up word showing up on community tasting sites without context. These sites truly will live or die by the quality of tasting note they provide to augment the professional gurus (or idiots if you prefer). Alder over at Vinography has already fielded a long discussion on why he thinks community tasting sites like Cellartracker (which of course serves a much greater purpose as a cellar tracking aid) are bound to fail. Idiot use of fake words like "spoofing" or "spoofed" or "spoofulated" or whatever are only likely to hasten that demise. If someone says "ginormous" to me again, or if I see it on another hamburger house commercial I am sure going to throw up, or at least never buy a hamburger from that place again. But at least a fifth grader can understand "ginormous"...gigantic and enormous rolled into one. I get it. But friggin' spoofulated??? Where does that take its roots from? Latin for idiot? If you are going to take the time to review a wine, at least take the time to speak English...for the greater good.

And the HorseStank Goes On and On

So it is about time that someone at the Wine Speculator other than Jimmy Laube talked about the fatal brettanomyces flaw showing up in more and more wine these days, especially wine older than 5 years old. That's right, Jimmy Molesworth, one of their European tasters, complained politely about brett and in fact stated correctly that it is and has always been a flaw in wine. Off course he called George Brett, he of the something like 8 batting titles and maybe 100 career homers, a power hitter, but who expects a Brit to know squat about American baseball.

But the thing is, he managed to both knock the winemakers and apologize for them in the same article. Shameful. Jimmy M. obviously was trying not to piss off the winemakers who give him free bottles of their wine so while he properly raised the issue, he backed off, equating older brett filled wines with memories of old girlfriends or some BS like that. Basically, he said the brett was okay because it has always been there and he remembers the wine with the stanky brett there. Interestingly, he also talks about of couple of wines that were too close to the barnyard for his tastes.

Come on Moley, take a friggin' stand. No wishy washy its okay because it has always been that way, the vintners are trying to avoid it these days, blah, blah, blah crap. For me, brett is a fatal flaw nearly 100% of the time. I don't know if I am particularly sensitive to it, but with even small amounts I begin to gag. I have often abandoned brett-filled wines at my own loss. This, my friends, is unacceptable. Brett is a flaw and it smells like wet horse hide, or horseshite or wet cardboard or crappy dirt or some other indescribable thing, but it is anything but pleasant, unless of course your nose is hopelessly plugged and you have no sense of smell or taste. You will know it when you smell it or taste it, although you may not identify it as Brettanomyces without someone telling you that is what it is.

It is incumbent on wineries and winemakers, just like the fight against TCA, to remove it from their wine and admit it is completely unacceptable. None of this claptrap about it being part of the terrior of the wine, or improving taste (a lie the French are particulary vested in advancing). Consumers, just like you have voted against TCA with your pocketbook, you must vote against Brett with your pocketbooks. I have recently written off Mouton Rothschild wines because a whole case of '99 d'Armailhac I own is full of the shite. I am very close to doing so with several Aussie wineries. It seems the worst offenders these days are vintners in the south of France, Australia and Bordeaux. I have also had a few American vintners do me wrong. It is clear that aside from poorly maintained barrels and wood, the rush by oenologists and vintners to harvest ever-ripening grapes makes them dramatically more susceptible to Brett spoilage. Why? Riper grapes contain less acid, a natural preservative. Further, these wines often contain low levels of residual sugar, a fermentable for Brett. And these days, minimalist intervention means less SO2 and other preservatives are used, increasing the risk of a rogue organism like Brett taking hold as the wine ages.

But do not accept a flaw just because wineries have a vested interest in telling you you should. Use you palate, your nose and your mind and vehemently reject wines with Brett in them. Only by losing business will these guys really do the right think and rejoin the bottle to eliminate from their cellars and wines.