I wrote a blog a couple of weeks ago on wine labels, decrying the tendency towards ridiculous labels on wine bottles. Now, I want to follow up on what should be on the label on the back of the wine!
Traditionally, there is a bunch of bumpf about where the wine is made, commitment to quality, etc. But how about a novelty – actually tell people what the wine is going to taste like? Kind of like truth in advertising!
So, for example, you have a Cabernet Sauvignon or blend made in the Bordeaux style. Instead of saying something like “complex, sophisticated wine that goes great with food and will develop over many years”, why not say “this wine will taste little like the fruit it was made of; instead, you will find woody aromas and flavours, followed by astringent tannins that will be unpleasant now and probably never resolve.”
A more Californian style wine made from the same grapes would say “expect to smell vanilla covered black currants, followed by ripe currant fruit with only a touch of wood.”
The same could be done with Merlot – old world and new world. For the former, it would read “If you like coffee or chocolate rather than fruit, this is the wine for you; a touch bitter, with no obvious fruit”. Compare that to “look for an explosion of dark plummy fruit with just a touch of vanilla and mint.”
Starting to get the picture? The same thing could apply to the Syrah vs Shiraz argument. “Pepper, lean but ripe black cherries, licorice and earth” would be the former, whereas “if you like blackberry jam, this is the wine for you!”
And let’s not forget white wines! How about Chardonnay – oaked vs un-oaked. The former would be “Vanilla, butterscotch and almonds delicately covering citrus fruit that coats the mouth.” Whereas the latter would be “No wood here! Just super ripe citrus!”
Am I being a bit sarcastic? Perhaps. But I think you get the idea.
Many people buying wine don’t have the experience – or interest – to know much about it. They go by what they read.
So why not give them the facts?