In reading Tasting
French Terroir, I felt as if the author never addressed the question of
whether there was objectively and measurably a taste imparted to wine by the
minerals and other substances in the soil where the grapes were grown. The
writers whose texts he analysed believed in such a taste, and that’s the only
thing that concerns him. However, I was curious so I looked it up a little bit.
No one disputes that wines from different vineyards have
varied flavor. However, experts discuss at great length which wines reflect
strong characteristics arising from local differences in soil, cultivation, and
climate, and which wines display more less of this so-called taste of terroir/goût de terroir.
Any such discussion
ultimately depends on a key question: In actuality are humans actually
able to discriminate soil flavors in wine? To quote the much-respected food
chemistry writer Harold McGee:
“It’s hard to have a conversation
about wine these days without hearing the French word terroir. Derived from a
Latin root meaning ‘earth,’ terroir describes the relationship between a wine
and the specific place that it comes from. For example, many will say the
characteristic minerality of wines from Chablis comes from the limestone beds
beneath the vineyards (although, when pressed, they generally admit that
they’ve never actually tasted limestone). The idea that one can taste the earth
in a wine is appealing, a welcome link to nature and place in a delocalized
world; it has also become a rallying cry in an increasingly sharp debate over
the direction of modern winemaking. The trouble is, it’s not true.”
Ultimately, McGee agrees in a way with the central idea of Tasting French Terroir: he states that
not just the minerals in the soil (or as he calls them, “rocks”) provide
locally made wines their distinctive characteristics, but that the entire
process of growth and winemaking combine to provide them. McGee says:
“If rocks were the key to the
flavor of ‘somewhereness,’ then it would be simple to counterfeit terroir with
a few mineral saltshakers. But the essence of wine is more elusive than that,
and far richer. ... ‘Somewhereness’ is given its meaning by ‘someoneness’: in our
time, by the terroirists who are working hard to discover and capture in a
bottle the difference that place can make.” (from Harold McGee, “TalkDirt to Me,” New York Times, May 6,
2007.
Food writer Robert Hass wrote about the question in 2008:
“…terroir in its current use has taken on a new importance. The expanding employment of vineyard designations on New World wine labels is a sign of our current efforts to give specific ‘somewhereness’ to both varietally labeled wines and blends. We are using terroir in a positive sense as a tool to emphasize a wine's taste characteristics determined by soils and climate as opposed to those specific to a given grape varietal or those which come from cellar manipulations. Cellar manipulations, and the sameness that these can produce in wines from different areas (and even different grapes), are coming more and more under fire from a growing number of consumers and press as a misstep in the search for more ‘natural’ wines.” (from “Terroir, Then and Now” by Robert Hass)
The idea of goût de terroir is more broadly applied
to many other foodstuffs, and the question of which local characteristics
contribute to local flavor distinctions can also be asked more broadly. “Artisanal
crops for which terroir is studied include wine, coffee, tobacco, chocolate,
chili peppers, hops, agave (for making tequila and mezcal), tomatoes, heritage
wheat, maple syrup, tea, and marijuana.” The ideal of special local flavors
extends even to chickens grown in specific places, like poulet de Bresse from
France; oysters from varying seacoasts, cheeses, mushrooms, and so forth. (Quote
from Wikipedia.)
Discussions of goût de terroir relate to the general
interest in eating locally grown foods. Products valued for their
regionally-unique flavors are often shipped great distances and valued well
beyond their region of origin. The reasons for eating locally go well beyond
the question of discriminating such tastes.
My more conventional book review of Tasting
French Terroir will deal with the questions that Parker did study rather
than with this one which he did not discuss. I’m writing the review for Repast, the
journal of the Ann Arbor Culinary Historians.
Very nice article on food.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing with us.