Flawed poll ?
Although fun to discuss, my feeling that a “real” canon of wine leads to a dead end. You see, it can’t just be a producer, it has to be a specific year, and in some cases, plot. For a canon of literature, one doesn’t just name a writer, you name a specific work by the writer, as you did in your first post. So…we would need to agree on a year, producer, and in some cases, further refinement.
Then we get to Keith’s point about wines changing, books don’t.
Then we have to address the issue of availability. The best Burgundy of my life was the 1865 Clos Vougeot; 1865 was apparently (I am told) a stupendous vintage for that century–perhaps the best. How do we access the wine? Classic works of literature are found at the click of a mouse. For wine, the canon would need to continually change because wines change and also are unavailable.
Then we have to find agreement. I believe more scholars would agree on a canon of literature than wine people would agree on a canon of wine–vintage, producer, etc.
One of the closes things to your concept is Parker’s book, “The World’s Greatest Wine Estates.” I’m not in agreement of many of his selections in that book although I enjoy it and am glad I bought it. Michel Bettane has a similar book which I have and might serve as a resource.
In the end, though, dead end road but fun to discuss in any event.
Bettane’s book rocks. I love it. The coffee table version is great too and has breathtaking pictures.
Eric, while I agree with the first portion of your sentence below, I couldn’t disagree more with the conclusion. If what one is drinking is a 3 or 5 year old Madeira, then yes, grapes like Sercial and Verdelho are probably brisker and less cloying than a Boal or Malvazia. But for true, pre-1900 vintage Madeira, in my experience both in smaller groups and even in larger tastings, the sweeter wines always rise to the fore. In fact, one could argue (at least in terms of current availability) that the most iconic Madeira still around is the 1795 Oscar Accaioly Terrantez.
Well, I guess we’ll just have to disagree; but that is part of appeal of these boards. Many of the Madeira fanatics I know love the drier styles. 
Where can you find the Accaioly Terrantez? It’s one wine I’ve tried to taste for awhile. I managed to get some of the Quinta Do Serrado 1827 Bual last year, but it was a struggle. It and the 1850 D’Oliveria Verdelho are some of the finest Madeiras I’ve had which sometimes come up for sale. The 1850 is still available on the Island for 600 euros.
Since Frank seems to be into grave robbing these days, I decided to look at my earliest threads. This is the second one I started. According to the search function (yes, there is a search function and it works on Thursday mornings Eastern Time), I have started 1,391 threads. I need to get a real life.
But I really like this concept of The Wine Canon. By now, I have tried one of almost everything in my original list (No Petrus and no DRC), but I think there were errors in my original analysis and a few wines need to be added, so here is my revised list. Original in black. Changes in red.
Australia: Penfolds Grange I want to add Wendouree, which I was unaware of at the time, but it is so hard to come by in the US that adding it might be unfair. I have also since had Henschke’s Hill of Grace and on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, I like it better than Grange. However, my analytic error is that both are so good that they are probably not representative. To really understand Aussie wine, I think you need to have a 20 year old Shiraz from a very good producer. This comment applies to many of the other choices below, but I will only make it once.
Bordeaux: Lafite Rothschild, Petrus and d’Yquem - although I can make a special case for 1945 Mouton 2001 Suduiraut. Easier to source at a reasonable price so it is reachable for more people and it is OUTSTANDING.
Burgundy: Any Le Montrachet and any DRC, but probably best La Tache I’ll let the Burgheads comment on this one as to red, but I’m sticking with Le Montrachet, which I have had about 5 times in the past 10 years from about 5 different producers and it is REALLY great.
Northern Rhone: Jaboulet La Chapelle This was my “value” suggestion but I think it is too inconsistent. Chave? Guigal LaLa?
Champagne: Dom Perignon This is probably the correct canon choice, but I could easily swap it out for Comtes or my favorite, Pol Roger Churchill.
Port: Quinta do Noval Nacional Once in your life you must have this. I have had it twice and I have two more waiting.
Barolo: Conterno Monfortino well aged. Discussed this with Galloni at about the time of the original thread at Zachy’s and he said it was a tough choice between Monfortino and Giacosa Red Label. I have had well-aged Monfortino (one of the greatest wines I have ever had) but never a red label Giacosa.
Spain: Vega Sicilia Unico and an Amontillado (in deference to Poe) Poe makes it a classic that everyone should taste.
US: Montalena Estate; Ridge Montebello Classics. No change. This was my best category in the original thread. No Screagle. No Harlan. Not Canon-like.
Alsace: Any Z-H SGN Add Trimbach CFE. I have one bottle of Trimbach CSH that I am saving until it is 20 years old and hoping it will not be maderized, so I might change my mind.
Madeira: Any well-aged D’Oliveras Boal. Slam dunk. Opened the 1922 twice. My mother’s birth year. Waiting for excuses to open the 1908s. Had the 1875 Barbeito twice but they say that the D’Oliveras is better.
Germany: I can’t pick a producer, but everyone should have a TBA. WRONG. The correct choice for the wine canon is JJ Prüm Wehlener Sonnenuhr Kabinett. MAYBE Spätlese
I left out many regions in my original list that deserve to be part of the Canon. Southern Rhone (Rayas? Pegau? Beaucastel?). Tuscany (Flaccianello?).
Jay - you did indeed leave off a few. This is very French-centric but I would say something from the South Rhone has to be on there.
From Spain, you have to have a classic Rioja like CVNE, Muga, Lopez de Heredia, or Riscal.
Italy has to have more than just Barolo - Chianti Classico is at least as well-known and iconic and Ricasoli is one of the second or third oldest continuing wineries in the world. Or maybe Biondi Santi.
You need a Hungarian Tokaji-aszu, those were historically more revered than any of the others on the list.
And the USA is OK but even when Vega Sicilia had their 100th anniversary and invited wineries from around the world that were at least 100 years old, they included Harlan. So you need something that epitomizes Napa, but there’s no reason to include Monte Bello when Ridge is best known for championing the “American” grape, Zinfandel. I would put Lytton on there.
I might also add something from Greece or the Balkans, as they have indigenous grapes that have been around for centuries.
Thanks for posting this here Jay. Overall I like the concept - wine analysis is so inherently subjective that having a baseline for regions/varieties gives us good starting points for discussion. Agreement, hah, unlikely!
But I think we need two lists, which is already starting to develop here. The “money is no object” list and the “approachable by humans” list. Impossible wines (eg that 1845 Burg) should be left off, or maybe added to a third “fantasy island” list. We can debate the ABH cut-off, but I’d throw out $250.
Btw, I’d add another category - California Pinot. I’d propose Littorai Cerise (long track record for the region, consistent excellence) though as a younger category this could be much debated.
I think this place exists (and successfully enough) because we don’t follow the orthodoxy of any formal ‘canon’
And I have had many on that list. That and $2.75 gets me on the R train…
Cheerio!
I think you miss the point. I do not think that a person can intelligently discus the wonders of California Cabernet if they have not also exposed themselves to left bank Bordeaux, and Cabernet from other areas as well. I’m not saying that you have to like it or prefer it, I am just saying that you have to experience it.
I should, to make the point, add Greece. Retsina. It is a vile concoction that should never see the light of day, but everyone should experience it once. AND if you say to me that you should drink it on a Greek Island in the summer up in the hills overlooking the harbor with a beautiful girl on your arm, my response is, “Been there, done that, and it was still horrible.”
I’ve thought about this before and it’s an interesting thread. I think of it as a combo of the (1) reference wines of the region–the wines that you’d want someone to taste to really understand what ___ is supposed to taste like; (2) wines with longstanding reputation, iconic name/fame; and (3) wines of great quality. I like the suggestions that have been made. Some add’l regions/suggestions:
Austria: Hirtzberger Singerriedel, Prager Bodenstein, FX Pichler Kellerberg
Red Burg: DRC La Tache (Vosne), Vogue/Roumier Musigny (Chambolle); Rousseau Chambertin (Gevrey); Dujac Clos de la Roche (MSD); Chevillon Les St. Georges (NSG); Faiveley Clos de Cortons (Corton); d’Angerville Ducs (Volnay)
White Burg: Leflaive Chevalier, Ramonet Montrachet, Coche/Roulot Perrieres (obviously all the Burgs are very pricey. an alternative would be something like Leflaive Pucelles, Ramonet Ruchottes, Bouchard Perrieres)
Germany: JJ Prum Wehlener Sonnenuhr Spatlese (Mosel), Donhoff Hermannshohle Spatlese (Nahe), Keller Abtserde (Dry)
Chablis: Raveneau Clos, Dauvissat Preuses
Beaujolais: Lapierre, Foillard Morgon ‘Cote de Py’
Rioja: Lopez de Heredia Bosconia GR (or Tondonia)
N. Rhone: Chave Hermitage, Jamet CR, and Allemand Reynard
S. Rhone: Rayas
Tuscany: Soldera, Biondi Santi, Felsina CC Rancia
Of course, you’re right, what was I ever thinking. Good thing a pedestrian ludlite like myself stays clear of the ‘better’ forums…
Lol
You missed the obvious choice for right bank Bordeaux, and one that is significantly less expensive than Pétrus. Your canon should include Canon. ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
VCC, same criteria but a much better and a far more consistent wine. Seriously yapping at the heels of Petrus
Yes, VCC is better, but it’s not…
…never mind.
Still appreciated David.
![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}
Starting with 2005, VCC has been doing some serious yapping. Better than Petrus in 2005 and 2006. Equal in 2009, preferred Petrus in 2010, but the VCC was the star in 2014. That was the last time I have tasted them both, but if you set any stock in the reviews of 2015 and 2016, they seem at least pretty neck and neck, and you can buy 8 to ten bottles of VCC for one of Petrus.
Disclaimer I have bought a lot of VCC in the last year.
I think the whole idea of a vinous canon is preposterous. Why on earth can it be so critically important whether or not one has tasted 20 or so particular wines? What an expert, connoisseur (or whatever) needs is context and perspective in wine - to understand different quality levels and styles, and appreciate how they can all be enjoyed in an appropriate way. They need breadth of experience.
Incidentally, I suspect the same is true of literature too.