Throwaway comments about a wine being ‘good’ are made all the time, by experienced and inexperienced wine drinkers alike. But would it be more meaningful to instead state whether a wine is to one’s liking, rather than make a proclamation as to its quality? Would a drinker ever be justified in saying, “who cares if you like it, this is a good wine, regardless”?
Exploring the role and importance of subjectivity and objectivity is important. In the international wine trade, descriptions are used to make the wine appeal to the potential purchaser. The role of critics, wine writers, retailers and sommeliers all play a part, and it is through their roles that reputations for wines are made. Much of the vocabulary used in the wine trade has become standardized and to some consumers, there will be a common acceptance of what the adjectives used to describe a wine’s characteristics mean. Similes used to describe a wine’s aromas and flavours – for instance ‘redolent of a forest floor’ or ‘reminiscent of wild strawberries’ – will help the consumer in their decision-making process, even without trying the wine. But if the quality of a wine is decided by considering the factors involved in its production, then its quality becomes objective. What makes the debate of interest to the wine trade is the fact that of all our senses, taste is considered to be the most subjective. To break the statement down into two possibilities - subjectivity or objectivity – ensures that wherever possible all discussion falls on one side or the other.
If wine is considered an aesthetic object, parallels can be drawn between styles of wine and other objects of aesthetic pleasure, such as music and art. It is possible to favour different genres of classical music or jazz over others, regardless of their quality, based on the pleasure they bring to the listener. Through exposure to different styles of music, or art, one can broaden one’s appreciation of styles through an understanding of their composite parts and learn to love what at first seemed inaccessible. For this reason, some people attend music or art appreciation classes, enabling them to understand the value and merit of different styles of music or art. In much the same way, if one has an understanding of the contribution that ageing a wine in oak has, with the additional flavours it confers and its effect on the wine’s tannins, one will understand and value the merits this process gives to the wine. An analytical taster, who breaks down the component parts in a wine, will have more to say than an inexperienced taster. The distinction on the difference is best described as one’s inability to make judgments on matters without knowing what it is we are judging; matters outside one’s experience.
Opinion of a wine’s quality could be based on bias, perhaps relating to the wine’s country or region of origin, or on its being of a high value. Commonly in the wine industry, opinion is swayed by reviews made by someone of a perceived superior knowledge. An extreme example of one person’s influence on wine styles and supposed quality is Robert Parker, former editor of Wine Advocate and creator of the one-hundred-point scoring system, later adopted as the industry standard. Parker’s views had the ability to make or break wine producers; winemakers manipulated their techniques in order to achieve styles that would achieve Parker scores in excess of ninety points, and the so-called ‘Parkerization’ of wine was coined as a phrase, resulting in wines being made in a uniform style to achieve high scores and therefore high prices in the market. Even at the most basic level, large wine retail outlets will make the claim that ’94 per cent of buyers would buy again’. How can this be meaningful to the consumer?
Objectively, it is possible for a wine to be ‘good’ based on features such as its clarity, aromas, balance, body, complexity, and length, even if it is not to the drinker’s personal taste. Objective features refer to a wine’s quality beyond preference: features made possible by the grape growing and vinification practices involved in its production, and possibly its maturation process. A good wine needs to be free of faults. As it is easier to pinpoint defects in a wine than to recognise attributes, it makes a good starting point in its assessment.
Phenolics and organoleptic qualities influence one’s appreciation of a wine. However, the assessment process can vary between individuals as everyone has different tasting capacities. Individual reactions to acidity and sweetness vary, and diminished taste sensitivity (hypogeusia) is recognised as a condition. Sense of smell varies significantly between people, too. A survey conducted on the effects of anosmia (loss of smell) post-Covid infection revealed that it lessens the enjoyment of food and drink. Not only do sensory perception levels vary, but there are also examples of certain foods dividing opinion. In the case of coriander, it is believed that genetics determine our reaction to the herb’s smell and taste. Conditions also affect enjoyment, and wine can taste different depending on whether it is drunk with or without food. Certain components in wine – tannins, acids, and sugar – should be matched correctly with foods to ensure the wine is enjoyed to its fullest. To enjoy wine at its best it is therefore important to ensure pairings are made correctly. A simple understanding of how to bring out the best in wine ensures the consumer is making an accurate assessment of its quality, without external factors providing undue influence.
Viticulture and oenology practices are based on centuries of scientific research, conducted to ensure that the wine is representative of the flavours produced by the grapes, has sugars and acidity in balance, has a good length, intensity, and complexity. Wine must have the appropriate level of alcohol by volume content for the style of wine, and appropriate body. Finally, the winemaking processes must ensure that the wine’s chemical properties are stable, and the wine is without faults. When all components of the wine are in balance, when it demonstrates typicity of wines from its place of origin and when it provides a satisfying finish, the wine can be said to be ‘good’. Having cognisance of the fact that both subjectivity and objectivity feature in making a declaration about how enjoyable a wine is, I am of the opinion that objectively a wine can be good. This is because a wine can be good, objectively, without being enjoyable, subjectively.
Comments