The conceptual hierarchy is, at its core, based on merit and, I would wager, the tastemakers hold Burgundy in the highest esteem on the basis of merit in producing the best wines and that is reflexively projected by Burgundy itself putting first-class the terroir, biodynamic wine-making practices, the cellar techniques, the producer style, etc. they lean into the farmer story, cultivating the farmer-first, wine-first image, which, when combined with the low production and enjoyable wine, creates an incredible sense of âthis must be the bestâ. Bordeauxâs story isnât told that way - itâs more aristocratic (edit: maybe Bourgeoise is better?) - and thereby elides a sense of merit and leads to a question of its continued deservedness of its status.
Iâve been to Bordeaux tasting and itâs palpable how little confidence there is in some peopleâs Bordeaux preference as they feel they have to justify it against Burgundy. As if there isnât an objective justification to point to. This is anecdotal of course and I am not trying to over extrapolate, but it feels telling.
I agree that the terroir concept is absolutely central to the marketplace. At every level above the supermarket wine level you see people rushing to do single vineyard cuvees or similar. And even at the cheapest supermarket branding level you see a vague attempt to emphasize authenticity of place, with labels showing utopian depictions of traditional regional vineyards and the like.
I do find it ironic that people identify Bordeaux with âaristocraticâ when this is not the historical reality at all. Itâs an artifact of some old branding choices now institutionalized on the labels. It was Burgundy and Champagne that were traditionally the wines of the French court, and Burgundy itself was a much wealthier and more aristocratic province than anything to be found in the relatively provincial southwest of France. Bordeaux is instead the ultimate mercantile/commercial wine region, the earliest and most energetic modern international export region for wines (of course in the ancient Mediterranean world such export regions were common, but I mean in the medieval period and after). As I understand it, even the origins of Bordeaux are about merchants connected to the port of Bordeaux seeking to vertically integrate the wine trade so they wouldnât be as dependent on vineyards in the interior shipping down the Dordogne.
Maybe Bourgeoise is a better word than aristocratic? I think semantics are important, so this isnât me nitpicking.
There is an association here - to a shiny, branded, formulaic approach to get generate a purchase - associated with that word, associated with status alone, and not concerned as much with quality. The opposite being someone unconcerned with selling, who is ornery and difficult and likely only concerned with quality and not with commerce. The former is a caricature of Bordeaux and the latter is a caricature of Burgundy (and Champagne has both types )
Excerpt from Jean Robert Pitte book âA Vintage Rivalryâ
âYour Honorâ, an old marquise of the Faubourg Saint-Germain once asked, from her end of the table to the other, âwhich do you prefer, a wine from Bordeaux or from Burgundy?â
âmadameâ, the magistrate who was thus questioned answered in a druidic tone, âthat is a trail in which I so thoroughly enjoy weighing the evidence that I always put off my veridic until the next week.â
Jean Anthelme Brillat Savarin
The Physiology of Taste (Varieties XXI)
Thatâs a terrible idea. The identity of Bordeaux is the blend. Blends are more than grapes. Blending also takes into consideration, clones, vine age, terroir, various degrees of ripeness, vintage character and more. Itâs the merging of all the parts that gives the wine its character.
As for the LâEnclos of Latour, itâs 37 hectares so even thatâs an ever changing blend.
It is amazing how defensive the Bordeaux lovers are showing themselves on this thread. I have no qualms; Bordeaux is one of the great joys of life. Nothing wrong if you have a thing about Burgundy. I have a thing about Bordeaux.
Yes, it is produced by people who are often not farmers.
Yes, the wines are a blend.
Yes, Bordeaux does not have a long history like Burgundy, where monks and nuns were figuring out terroir in the Middle Ages. Thereâs even a king who banned a grape for being âdisloyal.â
Yes, the denizens of Bordeaux understand the concept of marketing and sales.
Yes, Bordeaux is produced in much larger quantities than Burgundy. And everything is pretty much available at opening prices and/or the secondary market,
No, there is no secret handshake in Bordeaux which allows you to buy at a fraction of the current market, and resell.
And yes, the wines of Bordeaux can be superb, and the best certainly on a pure qualitative level are certainly as good as the best of Burgundy. I am excluding seeing deities and hundreds of angels dancing on pinheads types of wine. I have had more of those moments with Bordeaux than Burgundy, but then to be fair, I drink a lot more Bordeaux.
And finally, well made second tier Bordeaux is still within the reach of most off us. They seem much more difficult to find in Burgundy.
I agree with Jeff, would not like to see this done, but will note that I do regularly buy the special cuvee made by Sociando Mallet, the Jean Gautreau. Have had some amazing versions of that wine, though will note it is not decidedly better in each vintage. Jean started making this in 1995, I understand for his own family consumption, then decided to retail it. I just bought some 2000 this weekend, and a 2010 mag a bit ago from K&L.
I donât think itâs a terrible idea at all. But your argument is about âidentityâ which Iâm not thinking about business thoughts and obviously that is your primary thought. Also your argument is about blends but latour and others are removing blends.
It is a bad idea not only for the identity but for the brand, as the idea behind Bordeaux is to promote the Grand Vin, which is the best wine the estate can produce.
Latour is a constantly changing blend. Yes, the vines come from the same historic 47-hectare parcel of vines. But within that 47-hectare parcel, you have several different terroirs, gravel, clay, marl, and sand. Latour changes the blend every year, again, here, it is not just the grape varieties that vary, it is also a blending of all of the parcels in the Enclos.
If you are curious, you can read details about their terroir
I would be very careful about going down the terroir route. I am more in the Burgundy and Champagne side of things and one aspect of terroir which concerns me, especially in the Champagne, does the terroir really deserve an individual expression or would it not be best used in a blend.
A good example of this is Jacquesson, they have considerable holdings in the champagne region yet make only 4 lieux-dit champagnes, saying these are the only ones that are really worth highlighting individual.
Blending takes great mastery and should not be derided.
The most important thing today for me at least in selling wine is the story, you have to get this right. Not futher fragmentation, releasing wines with Lieux-Dits one cannot find on the map.
This is the identity today, sure. But the decision to blend was not arrived in Bordeaux because of a centrally planned decades long study by oenologists as to what method worked best for the soil and the grapes, it was primarily a function of economic, social, logistical, geographic and other factors, the majority of which werenât really related to wine*. Obviously releasing lieu dits would alter the current character of Bordeaux, and thereâs little reason for Lafite to do that, but Lafite is at the top of the Bordeaux hierarchy - it does not desire change. DRC are not about to blend all their grand cru together either to create a grand vin de bourgogne. But from a winemaking perspective, thereâs no reason to think blending is better for Bordeaux than for Burgundy or vice versa.
Iâm not an absolutist in this regard - I wonder if Barthod could create a spectacular 1er cru blend from all her 1er cru Chambolle holdings and one of the great 1er cru bottlings in Burgundy is Lignierâs MSD 1er cru VV, which is a contiguous parcel of old vines that runs across two different 1er crus.
Obviously going to more single vineyards would change the identity of Bordeaux, but it wouldnât necessarily be for the worse, it would just be different. Yes, it wouldnât necessarily what consumers would expect, and that would likely be harder for the Bordelais commercially (which is why theyâre almost certainly not going to do it!), but these are practical, not winemaking considerations.
*Just like in champagne, where blending by the big houses arose due to the capital intensive nature of making champagne which was difficult for small farmers to bear before the age of crop insurance and futures markets.
I think allocation pricing isnât quite so much a âsecret handshake priceâ, but more comparable to IPO pricing where the pricing is intentionally set below where you hope the stock will trade on the date itâs sold to the public - you want people to buy it and push the price higher.
Around the second half of the 2000s the Bordeaux market began to price the wines on release at a level that took into account future appreciation. That made sense from a âday of saleâ perspective for the Chateaux and the negociants, but it also means the wines donât really increase in price anymore. So thereâs not much of a reason to buy the wines en primeur, unless you want extra large formats (or halves). Somewhat kills the desire of people to participate in the market - you want market participants who buy a commodity (and given the way the Bordelais sell their wine, itâs a commodity!) to think it will appreciate. I think this is part of the issue people describe around the 2009 vintage, but I feel it began a bit earlier.
I think this type of pricing makes makes consumers feel very obviously that theyâre at the very top the price curve, and no one likes to feel that way - especially if older vintages with good provenance and better drinking windows are available at the same price. (Given the different in vintage pricing at retail between 2019/2020 and slightly earlier vintages, Iâm somewhat wondering if Burgundy is somewhat headed in that direction as well - will be interesting to see.)
Burgundy is very special, no question, but can you translate this to every region. Burgundy has a massive head start.
Does a Corton Bressandes really deserve to be an individual wine? I prefer corton blends to the single Lieux dits for instance.
When I hear a producer explain to me, they are making a champagne from the top, the middle and the bottom of the hill, it makes me shudder. I have tasted wines in Burgundy where 10m make a massive difference, yet in the champagne I have up until now never really found those nuances.
I enjoy in many cases the geeky nature of tasting champagne from individual climats and lieux dits but in most cases I would not rebuy.
Iâm genuinely curious, especially now that you review both Bordeaux and Burgundy (and likely taste individual barrels before blending in Bordeaux) - do you think one of the Chateau could make an equally spectacular Cab or Merlot single varietal bottling in Bordeaux? I donât really want Lafite to make a âLafite X designation vineyardâ, but I would think they can make a really great one.
Perhaps this is naive but I think of a âblendâ as a mix of two different grapes. Bordeaux naturally leans toward doing blends because they grow some grapes that tend to be a little strict and severe (cabernet) and some that can be excessively soft and plush (merlot). So it makes sense to blend them. Iâm not even sure what a blend means in the all-pinot burgundy context except that youâre mixing pinots from across arbitrarily determined vineyard boundaries. By that measure why isnât a clos de vougeot that uses CdV grapes from different rows up and down the slope a blend? Is it that the various grapes are vinified separately and then mixed?
I guess itâs also true that there are lots of variants of pinot in Burgundy⊠grape genetics may be more of a continuum than the grape names make you think. But still, the idea of Bordeaux being a blend always seemed very natural to me based on the characteristics of the grapes. Am I missing something?
Very different. Bordeaux futures have not made sense since the mid eighties, and were almost guaranteed losers with 2005. There is certainly a lot of leeway between the special insider pricing and market.
