Dariusz Galasiński: Bring back the delight of wine
By Dariusz Galasinski, 26 September 2024
-
Share:
12
I am particularly fond of reading about the language of wine. When they focus on language, wine professionals keep wanting to empower me as they worry I do not understand when they speak or write. Yes, I do find it patronising, so here is my riposte to the latest episode of the ‘language of wine’ soap opera.
The Wine Enthusiast recently reported on the efforts of a few sommeliers who want to change the ‘language of wine’. If you care to wonder, they will, of course, do no such thing. Yes, one can change the way one speaks, which is not easy at all, but that does not mean it will have any impact on the way I speak, let alone on language or the industry.
But what irritates me in such attempts is two assumptions behind such texts. First, the authors assume that they know how to change the language of wine. As the sommeliers attempt to stand up for me, an insignificant, well-educated, middle-aged and Eastern European wine consumer, they tell me they simply know better. This is quite presumptuous, isn’t it?
The second assumption is that the language of wine is theirs to change. It is for wine writers, critics, sommeliers to decide how to speak about wine. And yet, it is worth repeating over and over again, wine professionals are but a minute minority of those who speak about wine daily. Wine is and will be spoken about in so many situations and contexts that it will make your mind boggle, all in perfect ignorance of the language changing sommeliers. Just as I do not care about those efforts, I have a strong suspicion, a significant majority of people like me do not care, either.
To be honest, I also cannot stand the presumption that I need to be empowered, that I need to be told how to speak or be spoken to. And that I should be thankful to the wine elite for sparing a thought for me. All such texts assume that I am a powerless, dim-witted oik in need of all those wonderful people teaching me how to speak properly.
However, given that the language of wine keeps popping up and my sterling efforts are unlikely to stop the pleas to change it, let me offer a piece of thoroughly unwanted advice. If you, the wine elite, wanted to make me faintly interested, you would start by asking the question of how we, the dilettantes, do speak about wine. You might also try to find about how we would like to be spoken to. I keep being astonished that authors of articles about changing the language of wine say nothing about wine consumers. What do people say? How do they say it? Which people, which contexts, which preferences? All this wondrous reflection and nothing about the regular wine consumer you are so keen to lower your level to! I mean, sorry, to empower.
And I would like the ‘Top Gear’ kind of language of wine. I used to watch the BBC’s ‘Top Gear’ not because of the fancy cars I could never afford. I used to watch it because three middle-aged men were getting all giddy when driving. They told me about their delight, their excitement, the fantasticness of driving a car.
So, how about abandoning the idea of empowering me and, instead, telling me about excitement of wine? Rather than have a tasting note such as ‘Blackberry, sour cherry, black currant, vanilla and cloves’, which is an entire actual tasting note from a major European online wine shop, how about writing: ‘Bloody hell, I loved this wine’.
Here is my language plea to wine communicators: bring back the delight and the wonder, bring back the person drinking the wine.
- Dariusz Galasiński is a linguist and professor at the University of Wroclaw in Poland. He has been writing on experiences of mental illness and suicide. He also drinks wine and does research into how it is spoken about both by amateurs and professionals.
-
Share:
Related articles
Opinion & Analysis
Dariusz Galasiński: Assessment criteria, please!
15 August 2024
Wine scores are everywhere. When you read or when you shop, you will find a score. But have you wondered what the score actually means? What is scored? Why is...
Greg Sherwood | 27 September 2024
“Just personally, if I speak to a friend about a wine, I would expect them to tell me whether they liked the wine.”
That’s a fair enough comment. However, for many top, experienced wine writers and reviewers, the true skill is not only conveying what the wine tastes like, but they should be able to score the wine within the context of its overal style and quality…. REGARDLESS… of whether the reviewer themself actually thought it was amazing or not (within their personal drinking preferences.)
Writers are told to strive for objectivity in reviewing and scoring. Getting too overtly emotional about a specific wine errs on the side of perhaps too much subjectivity. There are certain wine styles I don’t drink that often if I can help it, but also others that I absolutely love. I’d like to think I am, like many able reviewers, capable of rating a wine an accurate score despite our own “personal preferences”.
A good writer will be able to illustrate their pleasure and enjoyment of a wine throught their language, not just their final score. As Bob Parker always said, when writing a truly glowing note but then scoring a wine 87 or 88… “read my note… not my score.” He was certainly a good writer and able to convey the excitement of a specific wine style despite its ultimate quality.
Dariusz Galasinski | 27 September 2024
I am rather sceptical about the ability to be objective in wine tasting. What would it actually mean? That a taster can accurately measure the wine’s acidity or residual sugar? That’s commonsensical nonsense, even if they tested their sensitity to certain substances. Add to that the current context – glassware, noise, mood, let alone coming out of a cold and objectivity flies out of the window. The difference between you and me is the sheer volume of the wine you have tasted and I have not. Which, incidentally, comes down to experience.
Can a good writer convey their pleasure? There are certainly those who can. But, for fear of some oversimplification, I think they tend to write in a more figurative language, which I used to dislike intensely and have learned to appreicate it more and more. In any case, the thousands and thousands of fruit-salad tasting notes, which dominate the winesphere, are anything but.
Finally, the point about scores is well made but there are online shops that offer only scores. Whatever we might think about it, it offers some insight not so much into what customers want but into what the industry thinks they do. Reality, especially for an academic like me, is likely to be way more complex. Despite that for the industry scores rule OK, there are business models based on them, while experience, or delight, is shoved into a corner.
Greg Sherwood | 28 September 2024
Just like the wine trade needs to segment the market when talking about “Wine Consumers”… I do feel you need to make more effort to “segment your critics”… as they are not all equal, as you know. Third party endorsements verus Neal Martin versus a generalist wine writer versus a wine judge etc. They are all speaking from vastly different points of context.
Dariusz Galasinski | 28 September 2024
The point is well taken, though you have moved the goalposts. Of course tastings are different and people in tastings speak differently. But that’ s why I prefer to stick to text. And my point is that wine writing does not catch up with such tasting/celebration talk.
So, sticking to text: there are clear and easily identifiable writing practices in wine. And if there is one which is quite obvious is that wine is written as an object of study, rather than a drink which is made to be drunk and enjoyed.
And despite that there are a number of people who buy wine never to enjoy it, for investment, for example, they are on the margins (though probably not on the financial margins) of the vastness of the wine drinking crowd. I suspect way, way more of us buy wine to drink and seek delight in drinking. And that’s what my text is all about.
Dariusz Galasinski | 26 September 2024
Thank you, all. The idea of the text is not to suggest that wine writers must focus only on experience. Rather, I suggest there is ALSO experience. The text is in opposition to the idea that wine is only for analysis.
Reading much tasting notes, you would be surprised to learn that wine is primarily for drinking, for enjoying. Sometimes regardless of the points or ‘objective’ quality.
Just personally, if I speak to a friend about a wine, I would expect them to tell me whether they liked the wine. So, I am suggesting that wine writers get closer to how we, wine lovers, talk about wine.
Davy Strange | 26 September 2024
Excellent piece, old bean! One should write about how one feels drinking wine, not give a list of slightly different fruits. Everybody feels something when they drink wine and, I would wager, if you are writing about how you feel, you’ll use language that is pretty universal.
I made an attempt (after a very long and vaguely pointless introduction) to write more about how The Editor and I felt about the wine we were tasting in my latest Elitistreview article, rather than get too involved in technical analysis (it still crept in, alas). I shall continue try and write more like this in the hope of using the language of experience as a universal.
Daniel Hough | 26 September 2024
Hi Dariusz, I like that you juxtapose the language of cars with the language of wine. Think of the passion contained in “red blooded big block burble”, or “snarling v12” to convey technical information. And then of course there are those who only consider whether the object of passion is blue or red.
Kwispedoor | 26 September 2024
I agree with you, Dariusz. People smell and taste with different faculties (and experiences), so they will smell and taste different things. Where’s the emotion?
Jos | 26 September 2024
I mean… there is another side to this. Wine is not some homogenous blob that is just “bloody delicious”. If someone reviewed a Chardonnay and said “buy this, it’s the best thing since sliced bread” and upon drinking it I find it to be a butter bomb, I would be rather disappointed given that I really do not like that style.
I do agree that making it all about ‘science’ takes the pleasure out of it, but if you go all the way in the other direction you might as well just call whatever is in your class “delicious white wine” and stop there.
Kwispedoor | 26 September 2024
Surely the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle, right Jos? I think most unengaged wine drinkers wouldn’t go much further than the likes of “delicious white wine”. But engaged tasters often get hung up on (very personal) descriptors alone – and often only with regards to aromatics. How about a good description (not only of aromatics, but also the texture, length, weight, etc.), followed by a “vibe” (what effect does the wine have on you)?
Jos | 26 September 2024
Agree on settling somewhere in the middle. Though I will say that people being stuck on aromatics have not been my experience at all. The tastings I’ve been to and when drinking with family seems fairly balanced on how people judge the wine. It is rather anecdotal so maybe that’s just a small sample size.
Wessel Strydom | 29 September 2024
Tim James: please give me your personal top 5 SA Bordeaux blends not exceeding R300 per bottle