But what’s
the problem? I don’t want the tasting note to matter so much - because it
doesn’t really interest me to write them anymore, if they are not part of a
reflection. This is what I do – this is what this blog is about. Why should I
compete with what’s already out there in the tasting note category?
But there
is also another reason. I feel deeply humble when putting a judgment on wine. Paradoxically
– the more wines I taste – the less I feel about expressing my judgment. I have
seen how emotional I am around wine and how variables can change the outcome. I
wrote about it here. I have even
seen how wine can outsmart the most skilled tasters and I have too much respect
for the wine craftsmanship and for the producers I have met. But for sure – I
am the paying costumer; I even have lots of experience, so why not express my
opinion? Sometimes I want to – sometimes I don’t.
But I am
probably deviating for the trend, which is moving in the opposite direction. We
have endless opinion formers on wine these days. Sometimes I am astounded how
quickly some people form their judgment and conclusion thirsty they are.
There is a
Danish poet, author and filmmaker called Jørgen Leth, which I deeply admire. Together
with two musicians; Michael Simpson and Frithjof Toksvig they formed a trio
called; “Vi sidder bare her (We are just sitting here)”. So far they have released 3 CD’s. The
genre is Spoken Word (in Danish). Jørgen Leth has an almost hypnotic nasal
voice, which are well known here in Denmark. Jørgens voice is accompanied by an
almost dreamy cinematic soundtrack of subtle floating sounds. On the first CD
there is a track called (translated) “Not a damn thing wiser”. Here is a part
of the lyric, which I particular like:
“I like to be perceived as slightly stupid - I
would rather express a stupid consciousness - a kind of non-intellect
consciousness. So it’s the completely opposite from most people, who basically
are clever and looking to announce their wisdom. This in an attitude I don’t
have at all - not at all”.
On many occasions
I feel like Jørgen Leth - especially when it comes to praise wisdom and
judgement on wine.
So what now? What should I write about? Should we just get on with the tasting note –
something everyone understands and not all of this Mumbo Jumbo?
Let’s get acquainted
with a new Champagne from Cédric Bouchard, which I have bought a while ago, but
not before now I got the chance to taste it. I tasted it with my friend Claus
and we were both intrigued and fascinating from the first glass, but also
agreed that the last glass was by far the best.
2010 Roses
de Jeanne / Cédric Bouchard “Presle”
Grape: 100%
Pinot Noir (10 different clones)
Terroir: Hard
clay soil
Vineyard:
0,2548ha – West exposure
Location: Celles-sur-Ource
Age of
Vines: Planted in 2007
Aging:
Steel
Dosage:
Zero – always the case with Cédric Bouchard
Disgorgement:
April 2014
Glass: Zalto
White Wine
About a
month ago there was an article on Cédric Bouchard in the Danish food & wine
magazine: “Gastro”. The article highlighted the fact that Cédric is not a fan
on oak and the autolysis character of classic aged Champagne, as both take focus
from purity and the terroir character of the wine. Then the journalist reported
some tasting notes, found them very interesting, but ended up concluding that
he especially missed the autolysis notes.
I feel the
complete opposite. I never miss anything, when I tasted Cédric Bouchard. I
don’t mind oak – I can even appreciate the autolysis character, but unlike the
journalist from Gastro I praise the diversity of Champagne and the fact that
Cédric makes wines his way and no other way.
I get and
praise the idea of comfort zones in wine (as you saw with “Daily drinkers”), as
they are something, which takes a lot of time to reach, and we can find
enormous rest within. However when reaching out to a producer like Cédric
Bouchard we have to cross our anxiety zone. There is no alternative. This is a
producer, which doesn’t make any compromises. Like or not. The first Champagne
I tasted from Cédric Bouchard was in 2007. It was the 2005 “Les Ursules”. I was on one hand fascinated
– but also confused and I was definitely outside my comfort zone and close to
my anxiety zone. Today that anxiety has turned into a warm comfort zone and if
I should tell others about my love for WINE in Champagne, he would be one of
the first I would serve them.
So – If I understand
this correctly, the Presle vineyard was supposedly meant to be the base of
Cédric Bouchard Coteaux Champenois project. When I visited Cédric in 2011 I
noticed some oak barrels there, which he told us was an experiment for his
still wines. Initially the still wine(s) were to be sold in very limited
numbers of magnums. But for now – the first vintage have gone bubbly – let’s
see what happens in near future.
I tell you
it’s an intense Champagne this one. Like with Haute-Lamblé, I have to say that
I am amazed that Cédric manages to make this kind of quality with vines of such
young age. It even seems to have a solid soil footprint with enormous bite and intensity. Like all other Cédric Bouchard Champagnes you don’t just sit and pick
a fruit note here and there and outline a normal tasting notes. Because rarely
you don’t find these common notes as lemon, pear and apple for instance. What
you find is a wine composed of all kinds of racy edges – like here with Presle,
which both plays with exotic fruit notes, gamey flavours, black currant and an
enormous savoury spectrum. We had it both with and without food and it plays
better with food as it has a very vibrant acidity and it’s one of the most
structured Champagnes I have tasted from Cédric Bouchard.
I was just
about to compare Presle with the other Champagnes of Cédric Bouchard. But does
it really matter? Presle stands for something singular and unique - like the rest of Cédric's wines. BRAVO!!!.
Posts
