As a wine educator, I truly love to teach and am passionate about wine – its complexity, nuances and the connection to the earth it provides. Consequently, I use my blog primarily to inform and educate about wine, as an adjunct to my teaching. While I don’t think that someone needs to know everything there is about wine to enjoy it, I do think that knowledge, even in small doses, enhances one’s enjoyment of this unique beverage.

In adding to one’s knowledge, I feel that it is useful for a wine educator to talk about specific wines in the context of wine education. However, I feel that as an educator and journalist, my review of a specific wine should be impartial. To that end, my descriptions of wines are intended to be non-judgmental and simply provide the reader or student with the opportunity to learn more about the qualities of a given wine and then make his or her decision about whether or not they might wish to taste it themselves. We all have different preferences, which are equally valid, so a clear and accurate description of the wine should be beneficial to the consumer, rather than trying to dictate whether a person should like a given wine just because of the writer’s preference.

Moreover, preferences are just that — preferences. They are not necessarily an indication of quality or a lack thereof.   Further, if my preference for a given wine isn’t the same as the producer’s, I am free to find another wine to drink. Therefore, I don’t think that it is my place to tell a winemaker how to make his or her wine. Given that I am a wine professional, I do think that I have a responsibility to point out poor winemaking – not my preferences for a particular wine style, but rather those elements that can be empirically determined such as unbalanced alcohol (as opposed to criticizing a winemaker for a wine with high alcohol) or an otherwise flawed wine. But, beyond that, I don’t feel that it is my place to arbitrarily prescribe winemaking techniques.

Today, there is a proliferation of wine regions and wineries, providing consumers with the luxury to find wines that span a wide range of styles and price ranges. Within a given wine region, there will be many styles. For example, in a recent Decanter article on Brunello di Montalcino, one producer noted that there was room for both a traditional and a modern style of Brunello. Even within the same winery, with the same winemaker, there will be differences among the wines that appeal to one and not another. As a case in point, at a recent visit to Jaffurs winery in Santa Barbara, I had the opportunity to taste through a number of its wines. Among the selection were two single-vineyard Syrahs – Bien Nacido Vineyard and Thompson Vineyard, both from the 2006 vintage. The Thompson Vineyard Syrah was fruit-forward in style with notes of blackberry, chocolate/cocoa, berry and spice. Conversely, the Bien Nacido offering was much less fruit-driven and presented with decidedly secondary aromas and flavors of earth, leather, berry and a hint of spice. Each retailed for $38.00.

For some consumers, the Thompson Vineyard wine will be more to their liking while the Bien Nacido may be preferable to others; different people may like both wines and still others may not like Syrah at all or may only drink Syrahs from France. Did I have a preference? Yes, but does it really matter? Were I to voice an opinion, I would become a critic, but, as an educator, I wish only to offer a useful critique. In this regard, I feel that it is my responsibility to accurately communicate what is in the glass and leave the decision-making up to the consumer. My preference for one or the other isn’t valuable to my students or to the winemaker. Of more value, I can use the two wine descriptions to talk about the influence of the specific terroir (each of the named vineyards) and, more generally, the differences in climate, which may account for the flavor differences in the two wines.

With this in mind, one of the interesting things about wine is that it is both a natural product and a man-made one. From budbreak to harvest, it is essentially up to Mother Nature to determine the outcome of a given harvest. Yet, humans have the ability to manipulate the vineyard such as through amendments to the soil, irrigation in the absence of rain, and both natural and chemical means to control mildew. Then, more directly, once the grapes have been harvested, it is up to the winemaker and his/her team to decide what winemaking techniques to consider. Should they employ stainless steel or oak? How long should the maceration last? In Europe, many of these decisions are more regulated than in the New World (i.e. the Americas, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa), but they do exist to some extent.

Accordingly, as an artisan product, the winemaker must be a grape whisperer – listening to what the grapes are telling him or her to do. Some winemakers are more hands-off than hands-on, but may need to intercede in more difficult years. With experience, knowledge and preferences guiding the winemaker, he or she endeavors to make the best wine they can. Once the wine has been made, it is the reviewer’s job to accurately describe the wine and leave winemaking decisions up to the winemaker. It is easy to be an armchair quarterback, but as I wasn’t in the vineyard or the winery encountering various conditions and challenges, it is not my place to tell the winemaker how s/he should make their wine. And, of course, I certainly wouldn’t want a winemaker telling me how to write.

The last week of April was filled with wonderful wine. I kicked off the week at the Wine Media Guild’s monthly luncheon. This Tale of Two Pichons featured a matched, vertical tasting of Chateau Longueville au Baron de Pichon-Longueville (aka Pichon-Baron) and Chateau Pichon Lonagueville Comtesse de Lalande (aka Pichon-Lalande). These highly acclaimed Bordeaux wines were accompanied by a sumptuous meal at Felidia.

Christian Seely, Manager of all AXA-Millseimes properties (which includes Pichon-Baron) was joined by Gildas d’Ollone, Managing Director of Pichon-Lalande, in enlightening us about these two properties and their resulting wines. Much discussion about the cepages (blend) and weather patterns of each year ensued, with both men noting the importance of ripeness and yields.

The Longueville property was initially one large parcel, but upon the marriage of the Baron’s daughter, it was split into two separate properties as part of her dowery. In 1978, Giladas’ aunt purchased the Pichon-Lalande property, which she sold to Roederer in 2007. Pichon-Baron is presently owned by AXA-Millisime.

As usual, the first part of the event featured a walk-around tasting. Given the day’s theme, the luncheon was particularly crowded and included some luminary members and guests that rarely attend. Consequently, I chose not to take detailed notes during the tasting but rather, to simply enjoy the wines. We began with the 2000 vintage, which was lauded as one of the top vintages in Bordeaux, until 2005 arrived. Overall, I found the 2000’s to be quite amazing and felt that the 2005’s needed additional time to mature. I was also surprised that the 2003’s (the hot vintage) were as good as they were. Generally, it was interesting to taste each wine from the same vintage and see how the two differed. Similarly, it was great to see how the same wine changed from vintage to vintage. In some vintages, I preferred Pichon-Baron, while the Pichon-Lalande was my favorite in others. During the actual lunch, the 1985, 1989 and 1975 (the latter in double magnum) Pichon-Lalandes were served as were the 1989 and 1990 Pichon-Barons. The 1975 Pichon-Lalande was incredibly bright and lively for its age.

After lunch, many of the attendees headed over to the Four Seasons restaurant to attend a preview tasting of the recently declared 2007 vintage for Port. Event participants included properties from the Fladgate Partnership, Symington Family Estates and Quinta do Noval. I briefly tasted through a few of the 2007s, noticing their richness, coupled with chocolate and berries. A selection of older Ports was also available to taste, of which I particularly liked the very concentrated Smith Woodhouse 1977, the mellowness of the Graham 1970 and the luscious bramble fruit of the Dow 1980.

The following evening found me at Grape & Grain wine bar in the East Village, meeting up with a friend from out of town. The by-the-glass list was surprisingly heavy on Spanish wines, but also had a selection of others. We weren’t very hungry, so we simply ordered a white bean dip accompanied by spicy pita chips. My initial glass of wine, a white blend of Macabeo, Xarel-lo and Chardonnay, seemed somewhat oxidized, but as many traditional white Spanish wines have this characteristic, I ignored it. However, when my husband arrived later on, he brought it to the server’s attention who expressed surprise, having not encountered it in that wine before. Consequently, he opened a second bottle, which had the same oxidized note and then a third, which didn’t, before pouring me a new glass of wine. The bar also carries a selection of beers in hommage to the “grain” in its name.

My next major interaction with wine didn’t occur until the end of the week, but it was quite major. Grand Cru Classes hosted the Saturday night dinner for TasteCamp East in its Tuscan-inspired tasting classroom. Participants had been asked to bring a bottle of wine, especially one from their home state/local wine region. Many attendees took this a step further and arrived with a full case. Consequently, with 30+ people in the room, there was a sea of wine. The diversity of wines present was quite astounding with fruit-based wines sharing the table with the likes of Duckhorn. All in all, it was an extremely fun evening and we enjoyed meeting and, in some instances, re-acquainting ourselves with, the bloggers.

We woke up Sunday morning with a fair amount of cleaning up to do.  All told, we ended up opening over 30 bottles of wine, with many unopened bottles taken home and a just few left behind. It truly had been a wine-soaked week.