Jefford on Monday: The truth game
Get our daily fine wine reviews, latest wine ratings, news and travel guides delivered straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
A bottle of wine can be many different things.
A crafted object, perhaps first and foremost. Fine wines are usually a snapshot of place, too, as well as being an interpretation of a varietal (or blended) ideal. They’re also a drinkable weather report: the summary of a season. But to what extent?
In great vintages, of course, you take what nature has given you, and say a private word of thanks when no one’s looking. What, though, do you do when nature has teased and tortured you? Do you allow the excesses and deficiencies of a season to be apparent in the wine, or do you attempt to remedy nature in some way?
Philipponnat’s decision to release a 2003 Clos des Goisses – a Champagne I would buy regularly if I was a hedge-fund manager – set me thinking.
I was in vineyards on the Montagne de Reims in August 2003, and I still remember the perplexity on the faces of all those we met as they confronted the reality of that fierce summer, Champagne raisins included.
Even the freshest grapes had a very different inner constitution to those of a ‘normally’ warm summer, like 2000, 1990 or 1982.
Bollinger released a vintage 2003, but didn’t call it a Grande Année. Instead, it was `2003 by Bollinger’: deliciously mealy wine in an unusually languid style.
Get our daily fine wine reviews, latest wine ratings, news and travel guides delivered straight to your inbox.
One of the things I love about Clos des Goisses is precisely its stylistic oscillations as it tracks the swerves and lunges of each season.
Its 1996 was all bone; its 2000 much fleshier. I’m looking forward to the `03, and what I trust will be a throb of solar force from this steep, south-facing site above the canal at Mareuil.
Both Port and Champagne are moving away from a history of deliberately irregular vintage declarations and starting to give drinkers a peep at most years.
With Vintage Port, this has been via Quinta releases in lesser vintages; in Champagne, it often comes with an increasing emphasis on vineyard origin.
The fine-wine market is, I suspect, ready to embrace vintage differentiation in a way that it hasn’t been in the past. (This is, after all, one of the things which distinguishes it from inexpensive wine brands – where consistency is paramount.)
Some drinkers, indeed, seek out ‘lesser years’ as a refuge from modish ripeness. The underlying assumption, though, must be that the wine will be a truthful account of the vintage.
Don’t strive to correct nature; select from it instead, so as to deliver the most limpid and resonant account of the year that you can. Otherwise … what’s the point?
Written by Andrew Jefford
Andrew Jefford has written for Decanter magazine since 1988. His monthly magazine column is widely followed, and he also writes occasional features and profiles both for the magazine and for Decanter.com. He has won many awards for his work, including eight Louis Roederer Awards and eight Glenfiddich Awards. He was Regional Chair for Regional France and Languedoc-Rossillon at the inaugural Decanter World Wine Awards in 2004, and has judged in every edition of the competition since, becoming a Co-Chair in 2018. After a year as a senior research fellow at Adelaide University between 2009 and 2010, Jefford moved with his family to the Languedoc, close to Pic St-Loup. He also acts as academic advisor to The Wine Scholar Guild.
Roederer awards 2016: International Wine Columnist of the Year
