I recently ran across this article from the globe and mail by Beppi Crosariol.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080723.LDECANTER23/TPStory/Entertainment
I agree that some who call themselves experts can flub a blind tasting. Even on the best days, the best tasters can make mistakes. I would not use that as evidence that "terroir" does not exist. I would suggest that the wines presented from the new world indeed may have had terroir of their own. Perhaps there was a method to Mr. Spurrier's picks for the taste off.
Aside from that, making the correct guess in a parlor game is not what terroir is about. It is about the sense of place one can get from a wine. Terroir in this case is merely a component of the complexity of a fine bottle, complexity which can fool even the best tasters.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080723.LDECANTER23/TPStory/Entertainment
I agree that some who call themselves experts can flub a blind tasting. Even on the best days, the best tasters can make mistakes. I would not use that as evidence that "terroir" does not exist. I would suggest that the wines presented from the new world indeed may have had terroir of their own. Perhaps there was a method to Mr. Spurrier's picks for the taste off.
Aside from that, making the correct guess in a parlor game is not what terroir is about. It is about the sense of place one can get from a wine. Terroir in this case is merely a component of the complexity of a fine bottle, complexity which can fool even the best tasters.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment