Following our class discussion on tasting and whether
one can really discern superior wine characteristics when tasting blind, I discovered
the following article posted on the blog of Jancis Robinson (the FT’s wine critic).
The premise of the article is based on the recent announcement
that blind tastings for wines en primeur (before the wine is bottled, providing
merchants/investors the opportunity to invest in the wine) will no longer be permitted
at events hosted by the Union des Grands
Crus in Bordeaux - a group of esteemed viticulturists who present the
vintages of their wineries to merchants and critics.
In the article Joss Fowler (a contributor to the
blog) presents arguments in favour and against blind tastings:
Arguments in favour of blind tastings:
- Blind tastings push you to really examine what is in your glass objectively
- All wine merchants and critics have a soft spot for certain wineries so blind tastings eliminates this bias
- Allows for dark horses to emerge in wine tastings
- Knowing what is in your wine glass is intrinsic to the wine tasting process
- Part of your enjoyment of wine comes from knowing what it is; and the point of wine is to enjoy it!
- In blind tastings your brain ‘over computes’ – trying to process all the information of taste and sight and smell at once which often leads the taster astray
- Objectivity (perhaps the purpose of tasting wines blind) doesn’t exist when it comes to taste; taste is subjective
Fowler lands on both sides of the fence: suggesting that if only one taster's opinion is being sought then the tasting should be done with sight, but if there is a panel of tasters then perhaps one or two tasting blind may add an interesting perspective.
I agree that wine is to be enjoyed and that a large part of this enjoyment comes from knowing what I'm tasting so that my brain can 'narrow down' attributes I expect from the wine (and note if they are present or absent). I'd be curious to hear people's opinions on the topic.
I find the concept of blind tasting really interesting. When we did the tasting in class on Friday I preferred the $15 bottle of wine. I wonder if I would have appreciated the $100 bottle more if I knew that it was the better quality and more expensive wine. What are your thoughts? Do you think pricing, quality and preference are always correlated? Do you think it's possible for a $15 bottle of wine to be a better wine than a $100 bottle of wine?
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to keep in mind what we discussed in class on Monday - there are objective criteria around what makes a wine high quality and that may be independent of what you like. However, once you get over a certain price point (call it $100/bottle), the objective distinctions are much less clear and that's when marketing, tradition and more subjective factors come into play in terms of pricing.
ReplyDeleteHowever, when it comes to blind tasting and preference (as opposed to quality), perhaps the blind tasting can actually be liberating. It's easy to tell yourself if you know the cost of the bottle that the more expensive one is more complex or has more depth of flavor even if you actually like the cheaper one better. Beyond how the blind tastings are used by professionals, I think it is interesting to explore personally how blind tastings impact our experience and preferences and whether there are parallels to be drawn to a less-educated consumer who might be empowered by being able to do a blind tasting and prefer an affordable wine. Thoughts?